|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Less clean up, more racing
3/29/06
On succeeding weekends I have sat through two entire qualifying sessions at NHRA and IHRA national events. In both cases the qualifying sessions just took entirely too long, with too many oil downs and track clean-ups for me to have an enjoyable experience. You just don’t realize how hard an aluminum seat is until you sit on it for six hours or more. So, I’ve been thinking about the situation and I’ve come to the conclusion that a big part of the problem (and the ultimate solution for the problem) is track preparation.
I’m of the opinion that the amount of man hours and money spent on doing track prep has exceeded the benefits the sport derives from it.
Now, before you start screaming at the screen about me being an idiot, let me explain my reasoning here. First, long ago the NHRA (and I think the IHRA) stopped awarding Championship points for speed records in a not-so-subtle attempt to slow down nitro cars. I think this was after the NHRA made a spec for rear gear ratio, but I’m not sure. Going fast at the drags has basically become totally unimportant as far as the sanctioning bodies are concerned.
Secondly, the quest to break the 200-mph and 300-mph barriers for fuel cars was accomplished long ago. Chris Karamesines drove the first car to cover the quarter mile at over 200 mph nearly 50 years ago; the 200-mph doorslammer pass was accomplished by Bill Kuhlmann nearly two decades ago; ditto for Kenny Bernstein’s first 300-mph nitro pass. The four-second barrier for fuel cars and the five-second barrier for door cars have long fallen. According to many, the tracks are too short and the cars too fast, so why are we still spending money and time to prepare tracks that will be sticky enough to deliver new records?
In the last decade and especially in the last couple of years the sanctioning bodies made radical and very expensive rule changes in Pro Stock, Pro Mod, and both nitro classes, attempting to slow them down. The rules didn’t slow them down significantly, but the cost to teams and manufacturers as a result of the changes has been astronomical and, in my opinion, has contributed to the rapidly decreasing number of professional class cars. (If I were a conspiracy guy I might think that was the plan, i.e. fewer cars means a quicker show).
So, my question remains, why are the sanctioning bodies still trying to give the racers a perfect track surface? So that they can set the records for 60-foot times, the 330 or half-track? What spectator cares about that?
I for one am tired of spending an hour at the track watching grown men on their hands and knees looking for or cleaning up a single drop of oil in the middle of the groove. I don’t care if I never see another sweeper, dragger or sprayer working the track until the surface is so sticky it will pull a pair of lace-up shoes off of your feet, and I don’t think anyone wants to pay to see the guys making that happen.
So, here is my solution for the problem of oil-downs, hour long clean-ups and four-hour qualifying sessions. I say the tracks and sanctioning bodies should spend their money making the track surface from starting line to finish line as smooth as humanly possible. No matter how good the track bites, if there are big dips in it, all the effort and money spent making the track hook is, in my opinion, wasted. Then dial down the traction level of the surface. Racers can always compensate for lack of traction using clutch, timing, tires, etc. They can’t compensate for tires coming off of the ground at speed.
As far as track prep and repair, do whatever is necessary to pick up fluid spills and make the track safe. There is, however, a difference between a safe surface and a perfect surface. One fact is obvious: with the tracks as nearly perfect as the crews can make them, drag racing still has far too many tire-smoking, aborted runs and one-lane tracks.
I’ve been thinking about it and I believe that less track prep could benefit the promoters, racers and ultimately the fans. If we want to stop the technology and tire wars, want to see fewer tire-smoking passes and perhaps make the tires we have safer, then make tracks with track surfaces that won’t deliver .850 sixty footers and 2.60/285-mph half-track performances. And make sure the tuners and drivers know it before the race starts. They will adjust.
Want to make fuel racing more affordable and “level the playing field”? Don’t have tracks that will take every bit of horsepower a tuner can make. Horsepower costs money and if there is anything that is clear in today’s drag racing, it is that the guys with the money inevitably end up dominating the racing.
Personally I’m over the idea that there’s a good chance I might see a record speed or ET on any given day from any nitro burning race car. The rule makers at the NHRA who make the rules for all of the nitro cars have made sure that isn’t going to happen. So, what I would like to see now is more cars, better and safer racing, and less time cleaning and prepping racetracks.
Sure, if the tracks are noticeably slicker initially we may well see some crashes as a result until the racers/tuners adjust, but probably no more than we see now on tracks that are prepped to the max.
IHRA president Aaron Polburn told me that the IHRA spends upwards of $20,000 per race in track prep. I’m willing to bet that the NHRA spends that much or more. Again I have to ask, if the sanctioning bodies and the insurance companies want the professional classes slowed down, why spend the money making a track that encourages and helps the cars go faster?
Almost every track owner and promoter I talk to complains about the cost of prepping tracks to suit racers. Track owners catering to racers have become their own worst enemy. And as an aside, one of the groups that complain the loudest to me about tracks are the sportsman bracket racers. If these guys can’t glue the tire to the track for the first 60 feet they’re all over the promoters. To them I say, it’s bracket racing -- if you are spinning the tires then dial some power out, dial down or adjust, but as long as the surface is generally the same for everybody, don’t bitch. The same applies for you heads-up guys.
Most racers ultimately want to win races and they have proven over and over that they will do whatever they need to win. If they have to back the horsepower down, slide the clutch more, use less timing, less blower overdrive, or less nitro to win they’ll bitch, but the real racers will adjust. Do so.
If the nitro classes have to back down their tune-ups it seems reasonable to assume that engine explosions and tire failure might be seriously curtailed.. According to the IHRA tuners I’ve talked to, unless they are trying to make a lot of power their engines aren’t getting to the rpm required to activate the rev limiter. (The fact that most cars, with a few exceptions, ran right at or under 300 mph indicates they were right.) Perhaps we could even do away with the rev-limiter!
|
||||
|
Almost any racer/tuner given a great track can roll the dice, set his combination on kill knowing the track will take it, get lucky and run a great number or win a race. On the other hand, getting a car down a “marginal” track requires the tuners to finesse the tune-up and the drivers to find a way to get the car down the track.
I’m sure I’m going to get some mail from outraged fans and racers for advocating rules that could make drag racing both slower and possibly more dangerous. I say to them that it is already dangerous and it’s getting slowed down without me. I might get letters saying I’m trying to take the sport backwards. Pardon me, but the sanctioning bodies and the insurance companies are already in charge of that.
All I’m advocating is trying something that makes innovation, cunning, and talent a bigger factor in deciding who wins than who has the biggest check book. And if I could see more racecars and fewer tractors on the track that wouldn’t be a bad thing.
