Here are the new rules

10/16/2003

The NHRA Competition Committee has evaluated various options available to bring the performance of A/Fuel Dragster more in line with that of Blown Alcohol Dragster, and has established the following rule changes for the 2004 racing season:

1. Increase the pounds-per-cubic-inch weight break for injected nitro cars from 4.80 or more pounds to 5.00 or more pounds.

2. Create a minimum and maximum engine displacement that includes nearly all engines in competition. Minimum displacement: 410 cubic inches; maximum displacement: 456 cubic inches.

3. Increase the minimum weight for injected nitro cars by 75 pounds to 2,100 pounds.

In reaching its decision, the Committee noted the increased interest in the Top Alcohol Dragster category over the last three years, due primarily to rules stability and an influx of injected nitro cars. The presence of new race teams is viewed as a sign of healthy competition in the category, and NHRA anticipates that this trend will continue in 2004.

In the interest of maintaining rules stability, NHRA has no plans to make further performance-related adjustments, or to consider any such changes until the 2005 season.

 

Why the minimun ci rule? With a small engine you would still have to add wt to get to the 2100 lbs.
What's the deal. Am I missing something here?

 

Well the GODS of NHRA have finally put the death sentence on the blown cars. They will be missed greatly. SAD day today.

 

I agree David. NHRA has turned their back on the Blown Alcohol Dragster racers.

A question for anyone in NHRA; how do you go from the Competition Committee unanimously deciding that the issue of parity in Top Alcohol Dragster must be addressed for the 2004 season, and saying that it is important to maintain fair competition between the two types of combinations, to a rule change like the one we got?

The added weight will do little, if anything, to the performance gap. I would like to think that NHRA had every intention of doing what they so clearly stated they would, maintain fair competition between the two types of combinations. But, something came along between then and now, that changed that.

If you cannot see that, you cannot see the forest from the trees.

 

It seems as if most, if not all, then new rules have been structured around what is already out there...meaning that a lot of the a-fuel racers don't have to change much. I would imagine that a bunch of the cars are already heavy, so the weight "addition" would just make the car closer to min. weight.

The min and max engine displacement will not affect the a/fueler's because as it says right on the description "...a minimum and maximum engine displacement that includes nearly all engines in competition..."

Although they have made new rules, the sure didn't change much, if anything...quite concerning actually about the future of the Blown cars in TAD, in that respect I would have to totally agree with David.

 

Bob, David and Tommy, It is rather apparent that none of you have any idea of where the A/F cars are at with their current combinations and weights, nor do any of you understand the laws of physics. You guys can only assume the rule change won't do anything because weight never did anything before.
Sorry, there is no cure for ignorance of factual data.

 

Nathan, sorry, I forgot you...keep on "imagining" as you say. It's ashame that very few of those who cry about a rule change even have a clue about what they speak. There is always bracket racing for some of you.

[ October 17, 2003, 06:47 PM: Message edited by: Smokey ]

 

Smokey if you are so DAWN smart ass . Please give me a lesson on how it will hurt the A/FUEL in the way they run ET wise . thanks smokey O ENLIGHTEN ONE

 

Smokey,

What do YOU think it will do?

Let's say come February it is obvious the change does little. Then what?

 

Small change = small performance increase or small performance decrease, generally considered a viable economic risk.

Big change = a different car with no intermediate data to indicate what additional changes needed to be made… you might as well tell the A/F teams they have to build a new car to be competitive.


Hmmm… that sounds a little too familiar... Since a hefty percentage of the class is already being told that, I'd think the powers that be would cringe at the prospect of sending that message to the rest of the class... Therefore, the change will be a relatively small change.

That's my opinion of the rule change; someone cringed.


Now, for the facts (did someone mention physics?). Think about this ratio:

Maximum efficiency potential/current performance efficiency A : Maximum efficiency potential/current performance efficiency B

Shorten it to

A:B


Ick... doesn't mean much like that, does it?


Let’s throw some theoretical numbers in it (Go get your tylenol, Kevin )

10/5 : 10/8

We’re rating the max potential of both types of cars at 10. A/F cars are currently at 5, blown cars currently at 8.

That's how far they've gotten with what they have to work with (hardware, technology, data).
10/5 = 2
10/8 = 1.25

So the simple ratio is 2:1.25

Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that it’s not a 1 to 1 ratio.


The numbers are all theoretical… it doesn’t matter what number you plug in for the current numbers because unless the numbers are the same on both sides you’ll never get a 1 : 1 ratio to level the playing field.

For instance, we'll apply all the latest theories and opinions.


What? A/F cars have more potential than Blown? ok:
12/5:10/8 = 2.4:1.25

hmmm.. that's worse, isn't it?

So... maybe blown isn't as far into their potential as we've proposed (slacking, just haven't found the available tweaks, whatever), so:
12/5:10/7 = 2.4:1.42


better, but still a ways from 1:1

Apply the new rule fix (reduce A/F potential, which moves their current performance closer to maximum):
11/6:10/7 = 1.83:1.42

Well... that looks better than what we started with.

The change is a reasonable concession for the A/F teams… but that’s all it is; a concession. It’s just a temporary stop-gap… literally. The A/F configuration has elbow room to work out an adjustment that will enable it to resume a performance increase curve capable of reaching a higher maximum potential than the blown configuration. No matter how you look at it, the A/F still has more room for improvement with it's current specifications than does the blown configuration. -- Yes, the change will cause setbacks in A/F performance. That's all it will do. Look at the math... A/F is 46% away from maximum performance, blown is 30% away.

(Current A/F's 6 is 54% of maximum 11. Current blown's 7 is 70% of maximum 10)


Now, increase the blown potential... which will push blown current performance back - relative to it's potential:
11/6:11/6 = 1.83:1.83 = 1:1

finally... parity.

The math here is highly simplified so it's not technically perfect, but it is accurate enough to illustrate this generality:

The rule change only addresses half of the formula (A side). It does nothing to extend the blown car’s maximum efficiency potential (B side) so that additional concessions will not be necessary in the future.

So, I guess I have to ask... is anyone doing the math, or just greasing the closest squeaky wheel?

 

Any time any car has to add weight , it will slow their acceleration! That's the laws of physics folks! Know will it level the playing field is another matter!

 

What the F_CK is she talking about?

 

I would be curious to know (because I have NO idea) how many of the better funded A/fd teams are running the smaller motor already (meaning no change) and how close to the new weight are they right now (how much will they really have to add?)?
I truely don't know and am just asking.
Now how many of the lesser funded (or Not) A/FD teams are running the larger motor and will have to change everything?
The reason for asking was pointed out to me by someone, "did they sacrifce the smaller teams to make very little change". I am just asking. And for those of you who are knowledgeable please don't bash maybe we can all learn something in here. Kim

 

Now, I'm not about to get into a bashing contest with anyone, I have a lot better things to do with my time than waste it away arguing.

Hey, that's my opinion on the matter...and from what I've read on this board and other boards, a lot of others too. Geez, it sure must take a lot of guts to bash someone when you don't sign your name to it.

And who's crying?? I simply stated my opinion, plain and simple. If you don't like it, whatever. My opinion isn't going to change just because you say I'm wrong and that I don't know what I'm talking about.

 

Sorry if I confused you, Blown Hemi.

Translation:
NHRA pulled up their pants, but they didn't wipe.

Translation of the Translation:
The rule change only tried to fix half of the problem, which is the same as not trying to fix it at all.

All we're gonna get from it is chapped butts.

 

Blonde, you are right they fixed half the problem, but in the middle of the season they alowed the new davenport/aft clutch that should give BAD's a bit more as well. As well, one of the reasons for not fixing more than part of the second half of the problem is that it would cost and from what I can gather, the BAD's made it clear they did not wnat to have to spend any money to fix the problem.

Kim, from talking to Len Imbrogno, one car runs a 411 inch and that is Niver, only very few run more that 460.
As far as what weight they really have to add, who knows, I would think that most of the top teams were close to weight, so they have to add the 75 lbs to be safe at all tracks. Much like I think the top BADs are close to weight.
Where did you get the 5000 hp figure Will. I call bs.
Anyone out there can tell the truth on the hp.

Dean

 

Sorry if I confused you, Blown Hemi.

Translation:
NHRA pulled up their pants, but they didn't wipe.

Translation of the Translation:
The rule change only tried to fix half of the problem, which is the same as not trying to fix it at all.

All we're gonna get from it is chapped butts.

 

Blonde crew chief...excellent post! Its refreshing to see someone that has the ability to reason through a problem mathematically. For all the alcohol racers (blown hemi amd rapid transit) that don't understand what she was saying, the fact that you don't understand a math problem is an example of why you can't beat the A/F cars. This shit is no more than a giant science project. Figure it out and you will go faster.
Blondie, One variable that I would question is the "current performance efficency" rating you placed on the A/F combination. While I agree that it has more to go than the TAD combo, it is higher up the scale than most think. Fuel volume is the secret to going fast. These cars are now at a point where the clearance volume available to cram anymore fuel (volumetric confinment) is very limited without changes that would more than likely compromise their ability to fire the charge and/or drop cylinders. There's more, but why bore the alky boys.
Blondie..try 10/7:10/8 = 1.43:1.25
By the way, cubic inches mean nothing to a fuel car. A small motor can and will produce as much power as a larger one only at a differing RPM level. That's why in the past as the weight factor was changed, guys would just down size their motors and not hurt performance. Well guess what, the NHRA finally got smart and raised the minimum weight so the fast small inch combos (421's) can no longer slide down the weight scale and build smaller motors.
I'd say the NHRA finally did a little homework. These cars make all their power in the first 600 feet and this is exactly where the weight will hurt them.
Blondie...you are by far one of the more intelligent people posting on this board..keep thinking. Now if we could just get some of the alky boys to start thinking.

 

Smokey hire your self out. You could make a million since you are so smart. But a check made out to 'smokey' may not be cashable at any financial institute. Why don't you 'out' yourself. Just another arm chair expert, is my guess. I challenge you to email me with your name or post it here. You don't have the kahunas to do it, I bet.

Dean Murdoch, SpeedZone Magazine