In light of recent events.

Status
Not open for further replies.
McRat said:
Famoso is notorious for strict tech, test and tune or not.
Click to expand...

You have got to be joking, but coming from you I would expect no less. I've been there more times than you have and I can tell you this is not the way it is. They are no better or worse than most of the tracks I've gone to all around this country. I've been there with cars that have tech in and then run well under what they were tech'ed for. It's the same at most all tracks around the country. Most of the time unless it's a national event tech is about who knows who and how often they see you at the track. Lots of things get let by until something happens then the **** hits the fan for awhile. The NHRA rules do have a flaw in that they assume MPH will come along with ET. The perfect example of people breaking that rule is posted on you tube. Guy roll the light and waits awhile then clicks off a 13.xx @ 147mph to get around the rule. NHRA will catch on and change that sooner or later.

Using Matt's math we can take the NHRA rules and use the speed and max weight for each section and back the numbers into what trucks currently do. It may not be perfect but it's a good place to start. Maybe Matt can take the current rules and give us the weight and speed in 500 lb breaks from 4000 lbs to 8000 lbs that fit the rule he is working with. This has nothing to do with diesel Vs gas, it's about Weight Vs Speed Vs Safety Equipment.
 
In 2004 I was kicked of the track for running under a 12. In 2005 they moved the rollbar req down to 11.5 and that was a good thing in my view. Why? Cause if I tune my Dmax to run any faster than 11.6 it shortens the rods. lol

I have scene a some pretty bad crashes at the track and to be honest the vehicles involved where over modified and should of been looked at closer by the track officials and some prior runs working upto full power. The current NHRA / NHRDA rules do not need any altering if anything perhaps there needs to be a license requirement.

I have been racing Diesel since 2000 I remember pretty much being laughed at by the cars at SIR. Funny how far our trucks have come in eight years. Now most the street cars cower to lining up to a truck with guages.
 
McRat said:
Famoso is notorious for strict tech, test and tune or not.

You can get away with far more at a "diesel" event than at Famoso on a Friday night.

Directed not at you, but your group:

Let's be honest, a couple months ago you folk were bragging about running under the safety index you were tech'd at, and also slamming on the brakes right before the traps.

Now you are all lecturing those of us who DO obey all the safety rules that we are cretins with no regard for safety and are reckless.

Most of this safety discussion has no ties to safety at all. It's about which trucks will be winning this year via politics. That is cool. But you do not have to insult the other racers personally, or make up stuff to get it done.

The biggest problem is, that you stand a serious risk of getting somebody killed to do it. If you force folk to go race on the street, you are killing people. Period. No ambiguity, and I take THAT personal. Too many dead friends to take that lightly.

You want to kill innocent folk, do it your hometown, not nationwide. Thanks.

You can go back to your infomercials.
Click to expand...

All I can say is Unbelievable!!:bang You must have a worm hole in your skull to be capable of jumping that far into space:blahblah1:

But I digress.......................

I am all for investing in some kind of independent study/determination on the actual, or at least theoritical forces involved and recomendations to provide the min. safety requirements at our weights and speeds.
 
Does anyone know exactly why NHRA lowered the roll bar requirement? That may provide some insight.
 
Does anyone know a crash safety analysis lab anywhere, that might be interested in taking this on? The university I graduated from has a crash lab, but it specializes in aircraft crashes. I would be interested in seeing what they say, and would be willing to throw a few dollars at it. I would bet that others would as well??????
 
Dockboy said:
All I can say is Unbelievable!!:bang You must have a worm hole in your skull to be capable of jumping that far into space:blahblah1:

But I digress.......................

I am all for investing in some kind of independent study/determination on the actual, or at least theoritical forces involved and recomendations to provide the min. safety requirements at our weights and speeds.
Click to expand...

I dont think it's a worm hole in his skull. I think it's the bong in his hand :hehe::poke:
 
I was told due to safer car construction from the OEM's but I do not believe they ever looked at the trucks or expected to see trucks running the times they are today. As Opie said 2 years back they thought trucks were a joke at the track now when you line up against a built Corvette they take you dead serious!
 
Guys, seriously, lets try to stay on topic.
 
McRat said:
Actually, it is Steve calling me stupid, not the other way around, but you're welcome to rant anyhow. ;)

It absolutely matters why the crash happened. No crashes is the best safety ever.

Everyone is acting like my post says I want all safety equipment outlawed. Spare me.

Everyone is acting like the safety equipment in that pickup failed and killed the driver and some fans. Nope.

So exactly what is the point?

I will continue to obey NHRA/IHRA rules like always. If the "Diesel Guru" guys want 9 second safety equipment on a 12 sec truck with nothing but tuning in it, I will simply write "gasoline only" on the fuel door and continue to race like always.
Click to expand...


WELL PUT IN ALL OF YOUR POST!!!
 
Last edited:
For a given kinetic energy, flip the equation to find speed. Go from:

Energy = 1/2 mass x velocity^2

to:

Velocity = square root ( Energy x 2 / mass )

So, for our 99,100,000 lb-ft energy number (which equals about 4,176,085 joules):

Velocity (in MPH) = [ square root (99,100,000 x 2 / mass, lbs ) ] / 1.4666

(The 1.4666 is the correction from feet per second to miles per hour)

Here's a graph, holding kinetic energy constant and varying speed, mass. Threw 2800 lbs on there for the Type D for reference.

And keep in mind - that line is the MAXIMUM limit that the NHRA 8.50 ET max cage is good to. If you're above the line, you need MORE than their standard specified full cage.

This is a lot of energy to talk about dispersing, guys - we need to be realistic about it - you've got to address it, and properly, in case an 'ooops' happens, to be safe.

The 99,100,000 number is awfully close to an even billion lb-ft - I've got a sneaking suspicion that's what SFI used as a base number for determining the spec.
 

Attachments

  • Mass-Speed-Energy.JPG
    Mass-Speed-Energy.JPG
    53.2 KB · Views: 46
I say keep to NHRA rules as a minimum and if people want to build a cage out of thicker/better material, us in the diesel community should encourage that.
 
crewgirl said:
Pat, think of this.
Kat is racing. She lines up next to a guy with as much experience as yourself, which would make him nearly God-like according to the things you say. the previous round 2 Fords had run and both of them puked a little antifreeze on the track at about the 1/8th mile mark. One or both of them hit the water spots and lose control.

Think seriously about this now: in a drag race at 100+ mph where 2 drivers get outta shape and one of those drivers is the woman who stands by you, raises your children, and shares your life, don't you wanna know that you didn't spare a single expense to make her as safe as possible?
Click to expand...

Casper is legal to 10.0 the vette is also legal 10.0 both have rollbars and 5 points, so they both meet the safety requirements to the NHRA. Pat also checks out all the vehicles we race prior to either of getting behind the wheel. My daily driver runs 12.6's and will not get a rollbar if it becomes mandatory I will quit racing it.

We know that there is always a chance of something happening when we drag race, but then again something could happen to us going to the grocery store also. There is one family rule that we have, no matter vehicle if we are racing we will not line up against either.

It happened once by accident in TX and they wouldn't let us change the order so Pat purposely sat at the light even though he was drivng the faster truck at the time and let me win as so we wouldn't be anywhere near each other on the track. As most of you know most times we have the kids with us and will not take that chance of that freak accident happening.

As far as track rules go our local tracks on TnT days go will thy kick you out for not having the proper safety equipment. Private days are a different story I have seen cars run 10's with no safety equipment what so ever.
When we where at the Z06fest in Bowling Green they where letting cars run with the windows down, no helmets, having passengers running 11's with no safety equipment. But that is the one nice thing with those TnT or fun days. Reaction times don't count so if I have a feeling the car next to me might do something stupid I can sit at the light for a couple of seconds and let them go as most times I am just looking to set a new personally best.

OK more then my .02
 
I probly have no dog in this race. My truck probly barley runs 12's now but I hope for low 12's sometime. I agree with all sides here. I think it is very wise to invest in some sort of crash testing, but wheels need to be put in motion not just discussed. On another point I can see what Pat is saying. My truck is used from everything from track to grocieries, to driving half way across country for a visit home. I dont see the practicality of a cage in my daily driver tuck for my wife and two kids to bang their heads off of. As said I am by no means a cometitor by todays standards in siesel performance. But I woulod venture to say a common ground needs to be found for the sport to progress. So many more trucks evry weekend get faster and faster and drive right to the track and right home to pick up some supper. I think small things like tire rating, CG's and functionaly inspected factory saftey equipment should be more thouroly inspected. Alot of people dont realize how many daily driver trucks are creeping into the 11.5-12.99 1/4 range. If this saftey thing were to be (no disrespect) blown out of the water on the get go, it could be dissasterous to the little guy like me who put spare change and savings into a truck they use for everything.
 
I would increase the tube size and wall thickness for both rolls bars and full cages. I think we will lose a lot of participation if we up the times required for bars/cages too much. Maybe require better/more support for the full cages. When you get to full cage status it's pretty much designated a race only vehicle anyway so extra cage work isn't a big thing for most. Something like the sub 8.5 NHRA specs for anything faster than 10.0.
 
I really think that there is a serious amount of over looking going on here. A full frame truck with a 6 point roll "bar" is still stronger than a tube frame with a 10 point roll "cage" period.
Also w1ckeds truck is much closer to the 7300 mark or it wouldnt turn those numbers,, cause if his is 8300 then my truck will turn low 9's Im not alot of hp different than him,,

I think that what is really happening here is the chicken little syndrome. Everyone wants to be safe, but look at the whole pic before you start trying to add physics in, cause if you want to argue physics I can do some stuff up for you. There is alot of intangibles here that cant be answered in the same calcualtions that you would use for other vehicles. Lots of intangibles

Kevin
 
Good post Morkable!

Leave the rules alone. You can add anything you want if you don't fill safe. NHRA lowered the bar roll because they felt the NEWER cars/trucks were much safer.
 
whos the tech direstor for nhrda?? whats the official organizations take on all this...the way this is goin yall aint gonna get nothin done bout it.


use nhra rules and be done with it...
 
Forrest Nearing said:
most roll bars are 6 point... main hoop, rear downbars, front door bars. 6 points. the addition of a halo gives you the cage.
Click to expand...

Wrongo, go pick up your 2008 NHRA rulebook, flip to page 76-77 and read section 4:10 and view the picture within the text. While I appreciate your and Greg's desire for symmetry in a roll bar, the door bar is only required on the drivers side. I count 5 points.

My statement about the halo, while a bit ambiguous, was to contrast cage to bar.

Matt, keep up the equations. The truth will ....


"fill" safe? :hehe:
 
Big Thumper said:
For a given kinetic energy, flip the equation to find speed. Go from:

Energy = 1/2 mass x velocity^2

to:

Velocity = square root ( Energy x 2 / mass )

So, for our 99,100,000 lb-ft energy number (which equals about 4,176,085 joules):

Velocity (in MPH) = [ square root (99,100,000 x 2 / mass, lbs ) ] / 1.4666

(The 1.4666 is the correction from feet per second to miles per hour)

Here's a graph, holding kinetic energy constant and varying speed, mass. Threw 2800 lbs on there for the Type D for reference.

And keep in mind - that line is the MAXIMUM limit that the NHRA 8.50 ET max cage is good to. If you're above the line, you need MORE than their standard specified full cage.

This is a lot of energy to talk about dispersing, guys - we need to be realistic about it - you've got to address it, and properly, in case an 'ooops' happens, to be safe.

The 99,100,000 number is awfully close to an even billion lb-ft - I've got a sneaking suspicion that's what SFI used as a base number for determining the spec.
Click to expand...

Matt,

Thank you for that info!!

Taking your graph at face value, basically any of today's trucks making more than ~600 hp or going faster than ~12.5 sec., by SFI standards needs the "STRENGTH" of an 8.50 max. cage. Now I emphasise "strength" because, as many people have brought up, there are inherent qualities of the trucks that make them stronger from the get go than your typical unibody car. This is why some serious and real testing needs to be done that can determine how far above, if at all, the intitial "strength" of your typical full framed 3/4 ton truck is compared to a car.


Who knows, this type of testing could prove that current NHRA requirements are more than adequate with maybe just an increase in tube or wall thickness size because of the weight.:Cheer:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top