[Floyd Staggs]

You're right, I didn't think of the cost to the other racers to change their program. I was just thinking about the overall picture and the length of the race and the reduction of speed.
I guess there is no cover all answer.

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

Floyd, yes, it does matter. For a number of reasons. Especially the point about who is tasked with bearing the burden. Shorten the distance to 1000'? Now we all have to go change our gearing, among other things. That's just NHRA placing the burden on us, again, to prevent them from having to actually address the problem.

Stock and Super Stock aren't really likely to gain much from 320' more shut down. The shutdown area is a concern for us only when we have no brakes at all, situations like Woodro and Gainesville, or Pete at Orlando. It won't make much difference. We don't gain that much speed in that 320'.

But to keep NHRA from spending money and addressing the problem, we'd be tasked with spending our money, and changing our cars.

Where does it stop? When do we stop spending money so they don't have to and they can make more? All of our costs have gone up, the purse has remained the same, and the contingency payout has dropped 50%.

Switching to 1000' will cost us all more, again. And it was supposed to be a temporary fix to begin with. It doesn't seem to be so temporary, does it? They got their temporary fix, but they are not working on a permanent fix. Because it would cost them money.

No, it's time for NHRA to step up and pay their share. They need to address the problem on their end. And they need to make a habit of it.