Next Debate.

[X-TECH MAN]

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

Oh great!
Stick me with the 142 mph CJ's huh?

No not really. The new CJ's would be in AA blown fast class and yours could be in ZZ turbo slow class !

[Jeff Lee]

The only cure in my opinion is to follow OEM technical guidelines for boost pressure and NHRA follows it with mandatory pop-off valves calibrated and sealed by NHRA tech. If the OEM can't or won't provide the boost pressures, then they don't race. Turbo or SC engines should not be placed in a separate class as these are in fact what Detroit produces for todays market. But I also know that there is a range of acceptable boost pressures designed into these engines so they can be built to survive through warranty.
I know when I raced my '87 Shelby Z Daytona in A/FS there was an OEM boost standard for standard turbo-charged 2.2L Daytona's and another boost standard for the hi-po Shelby engine.
SCCA went to the SCCA provided calibrated & sealed pop-off valves back the early 90's when the Chrysler Turbo FWD cars began dominating the circuit. Once the boost levels were kept in bay, the dominance ceased.

[Mark Yacavone]

NHRA tech used to measure the pulley sizes on the 57 Fords and the Studebakers.
Why can't they do that now? Does the size keep changing every week, everytime they get a new Shelby letter?

[X-TECH MAN]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lee

The only cure in my opinion is to follow OEM technical guidelines for boost pressure and NHRA follows it with mandatory pop-off valves calibrated and sealed by NHRA tech. If the OEM can't or won't provide the boost pressures, then they don't race. Turbo or SC engines should not be placed in a separate class as these are in fact what Detroit produces for todays market. But I also know that there is a range of acceptable boost pressures designed into these engines so they can be built to survive through warranty.
I know when I raced my '87 Shelby Z Daytona in A/FS there was an OEM boost standard for standard turbo-charged 2.2L Daytona's and another boost standard for the hi-po Shelby engine.
SCCA went to the SCCA provided calibrated & sealed pop-off valves back the early 90's when the Chrysler Turbo FWD cars began dominating the circuit. Once the boost levels were kept in bay, the dominance ceased.

I dont think any of this boost pressure inspection will ever happen. # 1 the tech crew has been short changed 10 % of thier nothing pay for what they do now. # 2 here in Div 1 I think they have been told to cut out 3 employees from the crew at each race (not sure about the other divisions), Tech will be almost non existant it seems. Its not even a little bit fair to run cars like these supercharge CJ's heads up with the older muscle cars (FI or Carburated) in the same class. They make thier own atmosphere (cylinder pressure) for the intake charge. They may be what detroit produces today but they will put ALL of the rest of you out of business if they continue to run in the same class. $50,000 + stockers and S/S'ers will become worthles expensive bracket cars when someone decides to run one in S/S also. 2 different technolgies involved here.

[goinbroke2]

Yup, this really got derailed.......

The question is not about cj's, the question is about ALL THE REST THAT IS COMING!!!
You think GM or mopar won't have more turbo or supercharged cars soon? You think 2hp per cube from the factory with a smooth idle is never going to happen? How about 100hp per litre (355hp 3.5L ford)??
You can't stick your head in the ground, they are coming. Get off the cj rant, there are lots of threads already.
It looks the way forward is small cubes and boost. What will happen in a few years if electric cars take off? Charge between rounds then run 10 flat? Will there be a hundred threads on the "electric cj" or will people work together to include factory offerings?

So, what do you do about the NEW cars coming, seperate turbo/super class? That's one logical response. Except it adds classes.
What else? Leave them in regular classes but check pully's or max boost? Good, but will everybody be satisfied tech is good enough.
Anything else we could do?

[X-TECH MAN]

[QUOTE=goinbroke2;

So, what do you do about the NEW cars coming, seperate turbo/super class? That's one logical response. Except it adds classes.


It might add a few classes by seperating the turbo and supercharged cars from the NA cars but your going to loose a lot more classes by 2010 with the combining of stick and automatics, and the inclusion of the FWD cars with the RWD cars in thier coresponding wt class. They have already combined the trucks with the cars and the FI cars with the Carburated cars. So I dont see the problem of more classes. It will be LESS classes when all is said and done.

[Mike Carr]

[QUOTE=X-TECH MAN;106187][QUOTE=goinbroke2;

"...and the inclusion of the FWD cars with the RWD cars in thier coresponding wt class..." [/QUOTE]

I think NHRA would be better off to add the FWD cars into the corresponding Index, instead of weight break. Some, if not most, FWD cars would be severly hurt by this. Taking my car/class for example. DF/S, 19 pound class, 15.90 Index. T/SA, 19 pound class, 14.70 Index. The DF/S record is currently 14.72, by Nichole Stephenson, set in good air at Indy in April. Had Nichole been in T/SA, she wouldn't have even been under the Index, and she has the baddest car in our class!

AF/S, 13 pound class, 14.15 Index. K/SA, 13 pound class, 12.95 Index
Record: 13.62 Record: 11.38
BF/S, 16 pound class, 14.95 Index. P/SA, 16 pound class, 13.75 Index
Record: 13.87 Record: 12.17
CF/S, 17.50 pound class, 15.45 Index. Q-R/SA, 17-18 pound class, 14.10-14.35 Index
Record: 14.40 Record: 12.82 and 13.01
DF/S, 19 pound class, 15.90 Index. T/SA, 19 pound class, 14.70 Index
Record: 14.72 Record:13.27
EF/S, 25 pound class, 17.75 Index. W/SA, 24 pound class (no 25 pound RWD class), 16.95 Index.
Record: 16.25 Record: 15.83 (stick); 16.45 minimum (automatic)

Other than Steve Polhill with his stick EF/S, no other FWD class has a record close, let alone under, the RWD Index. And Steve has maybe one of the quickest FWD cars around anywhere, regardless of Class.

Anyone see the problem(s) here?

[X-TECH MAN]

I dont know if it will be according to index or wt. breaks but Im hearing they wont be on thier own in 2010. No more singles for class. The next year or so will be interesting to say the least.

[goinbroke2]

[QUOTE=X-TECH MAN;106187][QUOTE=goinbroke2;

So, what do you do about the NEW cars coming, seperate turbo/super class? That's one logical response. Except it adds classes.


It might add a few classes by seperating the turbo and supercharged cars from the NA cars but your going to loose a lot more classes by 2010 with the combining of stick and automatics, and the inclusion of the FWD cars with the RWD cars in thier coresponding wt class. They have already combined the trucks with the cars and the FI cars with the Carburated cars. So I dont see the problem of more classes. It will be LESS classes when all is said and done.[/QUOTE]

Excellent point. If they reduce other classes than seperate boost/NA classes would make sense and could work. Would it be A/SAB (boost) and A/SA (N/A) ? Yup that could work! Of course a IHRA Stock GT car would be a mouthfull, S/GTAAB or SS/GT/AA/B/LMNOP? LOL!

[bill dedman]

I have no dog in any of these hunts, and won't, but I have some experience as regards supercharging and its effect on performance that might be of some interest.

I ran my car, a daily-driver, sometimes hobby-class drag strip, bracket car ('72 Valiant/360) with a very mild, normally-aspirated combination (475rpm idle) and ran 13.35 @ 102 mph with a 750cfm carb.
I decided that wasn't very exciting, so I made a change...
All I did to improve performance was to replace the 340 exhaust manifolds with headers, install an air gap-style intake manifold and a Vortech V-1, S-Trim (entry level, the smallest blower Vortech makes, I think).

The first time out for this new forced induction combination (yesterday,) the car ran 1,000-foot times of 9.74 @ 106 mph. That, according to the online computers I use, equates to a high 11-second quarter-mile e.t. (should be better, but it was very cold and there was no traction; 1.81-sec. 60-foots) with a quarter-mile speed extrapolated from the 106@ 1,000-feet, to 120, for the quarter-mile.

I am not claiming that these figures are etched in stone, but they were the most accurate 1,000-foot to quarter-mile conversions I could find.

This was with a measly 10 pounds of boost, and no intercooler.

So, basically, my car picked up virtually a second-and-a-half and 18 mph with this smallish blower, added by a shadetree, backyard mechanic (me) with no diagnostic equipment and truthfully, I haven't even set the timing with a light... just listened to it and adjusted the initial timing "by ear."

What I'm saying is, add a blower to an engine and you have access to a whole new world of power...

That's all.

The rules need to address this.