Yellow Bullet Forums banner

1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,539 Posts
Assuming you're talking about the heights of the beams, there are lots of reasons:

- the starting line is measured from the wheels, the finish line from the front of the car
- the start is timed from the _back_ of the front wheels leaving the beam. No "overhang" there...
- wheels may/may not be in complete contact with the ground at speed, but they are guaranteed to be at the starting line
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,075 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I am saying in heads up racing. If two car leave at the same time (make the beam off the back of the front tire) and one is just as fast as the other physical not ET . But one has 36" of overhang (from spindle to front) and the other 45", the 45" car wins. Why not have them lower like the start.

clwill, guess the front tires could hope, jump, bounce over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
380 Posts
I think it is probably because the finish line beams are taking hits from the bong.... especially at Maple Grove.


;)


Marshall
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
I have wondered this as well... the way it is now, it is not recording a true quarter mile or whatever length it is supposed to be... It is actually recording the true distance minus your overhang... If the finishline must be higher to trip the overhang then raise the starting line beams to trip the same point or vice versa...
 

·
T/S 368E
Joined
·
33,436 Posts
.

IIRC, they raised the finish line many years ago, because car's, bikes were bouncing, pulling the nose at the end.
There are 2 very famous situations where a T/F & a bike?? lost because of going over the beam, and the other guy broke his.

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
I am saying in heads up racing. If two car leave at the same time (make the beam off the back of the front tire) and one is just as fast as the other physical not ET . But one has 36" of overhang (from spindle to front) and the other 45", the 45" car wins. Why not have them lower like the start.

clwill, guess the front tires could hope, jump, bounce over.
only problem with this is besides some vehicles bouncing over the beam is cars have different wheelbases, so u got same problem as overhang. this is why promod and topsportsman allow extenders and have the 45 inch rule that make all cars even
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
736 Posts
Assuming you're talking about the heights of the beams, there are lots of reasons:

- the start is timed from the _back_ of the front wheels leaving the beam. No "overhang" there...

So that's why the super comp, super stock cars have those obnoxiously big tires on the front, to get there front ends further out/down track......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,539 Posts
So that's why the super comp, super stock cars have those obnoxiously big tires on the front, to get there front ends further out/down track......
Actually ever since there were issues with the tiny little tires some folks like Garlits and others were running in TF a few years back, there is a minimum wheel diameter of 15". Most dragsters run 17" fronts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,102 Posts
I asked the NHRA electronics guy at a national event about 23 years ago, and his answer was that it was a legacy of the days when the electronics were not fast enough in sampling rate to reliably catch a front tire passing through the beams at high speed. The higher beams made sure that the front tire was in the beam longer. Modern electronics should eliminate the need for this, and they could still keep a 2nd higher beam as a "guard" beam. If the track is so bumpy that they are bouncing front tires at the finish line, that track has more serious problems!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,539 Posts
I assume what people are proposing is to change all the down track sensors from 5" to 2" like the starting line. Moving all those beams lower to match the starting line is silly.

First, it changes the definition of the race, which today is measured from the front wheel leaving the stage beam to the front of the car crossing the finish line, with - and this is important - a maximum allowable distance between those two. Second, it would change all the ETs and records. Third, there is the problem of tires/wheels not in contact with the ground. Fourth, it would get people into a race to lower their front ends so that it tripped it rather than the wheels, which in turn has ground contact issues, ground effects issues, and so on. Fifth, it would require every track in the country to change, to cut new holes in the wall, etc. at a time when money isn't exactly flowing. And sixth, remind me again what's broken today?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
478 Posts
I realize those that are new to drag racing missed a lot of what went on in drag racing.
Some time in the 60s or early 70s I believe the finish line lights were raised.
This was do to dragsters carrying the wheels all the way down the track and many other cars bouncing down the track.
Today T/F cars are on just the rear wheels at the finish line. Top/Fuel Harley does the same.







 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
I assume what people are proposing is to change all the down track sensors from 5" to 2" like the starting line. Moving all those beams lower to match the starting line is silly.

First, it changes the definition of the race, which today is measured from the front wheel leaving the stage beam to the front of the car crossing the finish line, with - and this is important - a maximum allowable distance between those two. Second, it would change all the ETs and records. Third, there is the problem of tires/wheels not in contact with the ground. Fourth, it would get people into a race to lower their front ends so that it tripped it rather than the wheels, which in turn has ground contact issues, ground effects issues, and so on. Fifth, it would require every track in the country to change, to cut new holes in the wall, etc. at a time when money isn't exactly flowing. And sixth, remind me again what's broken today?
Close, but I am suggesting raising the start to 5" not lowering the rest...

First it does not change the definition of the race since the definition is a race over a quarter mile, not a race over a quarter mile minus your overhang...

Second, see first reason... All the records currently can be deemed run not on a true quarter mile... They havent been...

This also eliminates 3-4.... And 5 is cut dramatically since tracks only have to replace the starting beams...

And 6, whats broken is the timing is not a true quarter mile...


The timing should be from the front of the car to the front of the car...


I can also suggest timing like what nascar uses now, but that would really increase the cost to change it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,539 Posts
Close, but I am suggesting raising the start to 5" not lowering the rest...
So the timer wouldn't start until the whole car has passed by?

First it does not change the definition of the race since the definition is a race over a quarter mile, not a race over a quarter mile minus your overhang...

Second, see first reason... All the records currently can be deemed run not on a true quarter mile... They havent been...
You're going to get really far with that argument...

This also eliminates 3-4.... And 5 is cut dramatically since tracks only have to replace the starting beams...
I'll let you be the one to go to EVERY single track owner in the country and ask them to spend money on something that isn't broken in the least. Thousands of people race hundreds of thousands of races a year with the system as it is today, but you want to change it.

And 6, whats broken is the timing is not a true quarter mile...
No what's broken is your car and you don't like that some people have the full overhang and you don't.

The timing should be from the front of the car to the front of the car...

I can also suggest timing like what nascar uses now, but that would really increase the cost to change it
There's a good idea, suggest "hey NASCRAP does it this way, let's do it".

There's a definition of this here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilting_at_windmills
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
So the timer wouldn't start until the whole car has passed by?



You're going to get really far with that argument...



I'll let you be the one to go to EVERY single track owner in the country and ask them to spend money on something that isn't broken in the least. Thousands of people race hundreds of thousands of races a year with the system as it is today, but you want to change it.



No what's broken is your car and you don't like that some people have the full overhang and you don't.



There's a good idea, suggest "hey NASCRAP does it this way, let's do it".

There's a definition of this here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilting_at_windmills

To answer the only constructive thing you even said.... I never gave it a thought about the rest of the car passing the beam... Never said it was error proof or even reasonable... I gave a suggestion...

Your comment about my car... That is just funny... Has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion and is only you attacking someone you dont have the wits to have a discussion with... Oh and here I will make your attacks even easier, I dont even have a car, all I do is video tape and support as many races as I can...

The suggestion about Nascar was towards the fact they have timing wires in the tracks at each interval and a responder in the car to tell the system how long it took to get from point to point... Its interesting to note that there system is as accurate if not more than any on a dragstrip...
 

·
T/S 368E
Joined
·
33,436 Posts
.

Yes, it is not a true 1320' 0", but guess what, it's not broken, leave it alone.
Those of us with a clue know what is going on, and we are fine as is.
Any extra work or expense required of EVERY track in the world is a stupid idea, especially now a days.
Beam breakers are perfectly acceptable to all but a few clueless morons which our other thread has proven many times.
If you are in a heads up series, and have a short overhang, get a beam breaker and all's fair again.

Not having my actual time to the .001 is not an issue to me or others I know.
I'm sure the few extra thousandth's we gained all these years will not effect the future of our sport.

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,680 Posts
First, the top of the track has a "crown" to aid water drainage, the starting line doesn't, Second, can you think about trying to cut a lite witth the beams 5 inches off the ground ?
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top