60' times

[HandOverFist]

How does one figure 60' times on a car that carries the front wheels past the beam?

I'm not sure exactly if I understand the question but aren't the timers tripped in that case by the rear wheels?

Scott

[HandOverFist]

Yes, but in that case there is no true indicator as to what the car actually did. I was wondering if there might be some formula to convert the bogus number to a relatively accurate one...maybe subtract the wheelbase?

[countrypuppy4865]

Scott, if the car lands as it is getting to the 60ft clocks it can be tripped by the middle of the car or anything lower than that (collector for example).
I don't think there would be any way to accurately measure the time.

[HandOverFist]

I know there are a lot of cars out there that do this regularly...wonder if they just go off the long (wrong) numbers?

[HP HUNTER]

Originally Posted by HandOverFist

How does one figure 60' times on a car that carries the front wheels past the beam?

On Johns 67 Chevelle the best 60 was 1.28, on the rear wheels, the best ever 1320 ET was on the rear wheels with a 1.40.

[HandOverFist]

Originally Posted by HP HUNTER

On Johns 67 Chevelle the best 60 was 1.28, on the rear wheels, the best ever 1320 ET was on the rear wheels with a 1.40.

Are you trying to say he tripped the beams with the back tires in both instances?

[Neil Smedley]

when your front tires leave the beams, it starts the clocks.........does not matter if they roll out or go sky high

[Darrin Christen]

Originally Posted by HandOverFist

I know there are a lot of cars out there that do this regularly...wonder if they just go off the long (wrong) numbers?

They probably just look at the 330' numbers instead of the 60'

[HandOverFist]

Originally Posted by Neil Smedley

when your front tires leave the beams, it starts the clocks.........does not matter if they roll out or go sky high

But it does matter which wheels trip the 60' beam...