9/1/05

TECHNICAL WONDERING

I would love to ask the same questions I asked the NHRA. Why don't they just simply lower the rear gear ratio to a 4.11? That would quicken them up and slow them down would it not? Also my understanding is that the nitro engines are not running on the spark plugs at 3.8 secs, but are firing off the red hot exhaust valves, so how can retarding the timing help slow them down? Just Wondering myself. Keep up the great work.

Best regards,

Robbie Gaines
Greenville, SC

HEMI IS THE ANSWER

Slowing them down is simple. Ban the Hemi. Make everyone who runs a Chevy body run a Chevy motor. Ford people (Force) run a Ford motor. Mopar people run a B-1 wedge. Toyota run a "Toyota" motor. That would make the sport more interesting instead of Hemi-powered fuel or flopper car with Ford or Chevy markings. What is next spec DRC-3 motors for Pro stock?

My 2 cents worth.

Gary Brooks

ENGINE DISPLACEMENT IS THE ANSWER

If NHRA actually wanted to keep speeds down and improve safety in Top Fool all they need to do is drop engine displacement back to 426 C.I.

ADVERTISEMENT

This is a no-brainer so obviously NHRA doesn't REALLY want to lower speeds and increase safety. In fact, if NHRA dropped the engine displacement in P/S to 426 C.I. that would be better and safer too. These changes could be made with just a reduction in crankshaft stroke.

With a rev limiter in T/F they couldn't turn the engines 10,000 and in P/S the available NHRA-approved engine component materials won't allow the engines to go much over 10,000, which they currently turn.

Problem solved - AND we minimize the season long PEDAL FESTS and improve safety on all fronts. But that, of course, is only if NHRA actually wants to lower speeds and improve safety. Fans can't tell the difference between 300 and 330 mph so it doesn't make any difference what the actual top end speed is as long as it's above 250 mph for thrill seekers.

Randy Hubbard

SUPERCHARGER IS THE ANSWER

As concerns the NHRA's attempts to slow the fuel cars without incuring more cost, why not limit supercharger overdrive? 1} it would be cost affective and, 2} it would be cheap. It would also be very easy to police,and the tune-up wouldn't be difficult to adapt to, or expensive. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Glenn Westphalen
Bothell, WA