Why do we continually use the super classe as track testers?

[CBS]

This is a letter I received today......And I agree...we need to come up with a set of conditions to race.....

Rock,

I don't post here often. But this weekend's events at Atco have pushed me to the edge. I compromised and decided to send you a PM instead. Why do these Division Directors and race track operators continue to use S/ST, S/G, and S/C drivers as test pilots to see if the race track is suitable for racing? Especially during eliminations when your whole weekend is on the line and your judgement is suspect as a result?

I suggest we use the sportsman racers council for something more suitable than serving everyone's personal interests. How about we develop some technical guidelines for the directors to use to measure if it is suitable prior to sending a pair of cars down to find out? Perhaps the division could supply a temp gun to the starter to go measure the track temp down track. If it is under 70, we don't run (Indy - when Phillips/Langdon ran it was 64). Even better - how about one of those torque wrench based traction devices like the pros use? A minimun torque value for safe running could be established. Perhaps you could canvas the rest of the troops for ideas.

We need to lend a little science to this issue rather than relying on the gut feel of the starter scuffing his feet or a division director that is up in the tower sipping coffee. It is obvious that they do not understand the unique requirements associated with high horsepower, 2100#, throttle stop equipped cars with very low wheel speed going wide open 300 feet out. Mix in an unwillingness to lift because it's eliminations and you have a recipe for disaster.

[Alan Roehrich]

Rock, they don't always use the .90 Super Class racers to test the track. They also use Stock, we don't call ourselves "alarm Stock" and "crash test dummies" for nothing. Hell, I've been on a track loose enough that a low HP stick car spun hard on all three gear changes.

You know that I have friends, including you, that race those classes. And we all know that what causes the problem for the .90 Super class guys is they go on the stop about 1 foot into the run, hold about 800-1000HP or more, and go wide open off the stop instantly. So they're already down track a ways, where there's less grip than on the starting line, and they're coasting along, then hit the looser section of the track, and an unloaded car, with well over 800HP in a tenth of a second. The fact is, the .90 Super Class guys know full well what they're asking of the track and the cars, and they are their own worst enemy. Using 700HP to run 10.90, or 850HP to run 9.90, or 1200HP to run 8.90, is going to create a nasty problem if the track isn't great.

Yes, there should be minimum standards for the track. We've all seen tracks that either weren't prepped, or couldn't be "brought around".

Let's not make this an issue of who they use as a track tester. It's no more fair to put a guy in a $50K Stock Eliminator car on a loose track than it is to put a guy in a $50K Super Gas car on a loose track. The idea that a 9" tire Stock Eliminator car with 600HP should go down a track to see if it will work for .90 Super Class cars is just as absurd.

[Chad Rhodes]

I agree with Alan. Just another reason to either lower the indexes, take off the stops, or institute a MPH limit in the super classes.

[Andys dad]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

Rock, they don't always use the .90 Super Class racers to test the track. They also use Stock, we don't call ourselves "alarm Stock" and "crash test dummies" for nothing. Hell, I've been on a track loose enough that a low HP stick car spun hard on all three gear changes.

You know that I have friends, including you, that race those classes. And we all know that what causes the problem for the .90 Super class guys is they go on the stop about 1 foot into the run, hold about 800-1000HP or more, and go wide open off the stop instantly. So they're already down track a ways, where there's less grip than on the starting line, and they're coasting along, then hit the looser section of the track, and an unloaded car, with well over 800HP in a tenth of a second. The fact is, the .90 Super Class guys know full well what they're asking of the track and the cars, and they are their own worst enemy. Using 700HP to run 10.90, or 850HP to run 9.90, or 1200HP to run 8.90, is going to create a nasty problem if the track isn't great.

Yes, there should be minimum standards for the track. We've all seen tracks that either weren't prepped, or couldn't be "brought around".

Let's not make this an issue of who they use as a track tester. It's no more fair to put a guy in a $50K Stock Eliminator car on a loose track than it is to put a guy in a $50K Super Gas car on a loose track. The idea that a 9" tire Stock Eliminator car with 600HP should go down a track to see if it will work for .90 Super Class cars is just as absurd.

Man I don't often agree with you but this was "dead nuts", "spot on" really to the point.

[Alan Roehrich]

I'm not making an indictment of the .90 Super Class guys. We campaigned a Super Comp dragster and a Super Gas Camaro 20 years ago. They're doing different things on the same piece of asphalt with us.

I don't want to see anyone wreck their car or anyone else's car.

But the solution to the problem is not to complain that Super Street is usually the first class out, if they run Super Street at that particular event.

The solution is to fix the damned track. After that first pair gets out of shape, everyone needs to get out of their car and just stop. Don't pull forward in the lanes, don't do a burnout, don't stage. Just stop, get out, take your helmet off, and stand there until they fix the track.

If you see the track is absolutely unsafe, don't get on the track. It's that simple.

If enough people take a stand (yeah, that's asking a lot), they won't have much choice.

[Nitro Joe Jackson]

Because they know you Super class guys want to go 200 mph and are nuts on those stupid timers (which should be outlawed) and if, I say if Super classes did not have timers and went back to the old style throttle stops we would cut down big time on crashes. I know, I'm a broken record but damn it, it's the truth.

Bottom line does anybody know how much a track needs extra preped for the Super class cars timers to come back on past the 60 ft mark and on, it has to be as the starting line or better.
This is one of the main reasons a lot of tracks have done away with their super class programs.

[chebby2]

Here we go again.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Nitro Joe Jackson

Because they know you Super class guys want to go 200 mph and are nuts on those stupid timers (which should be outlawed) and if, I say if Super classes did not have timers and went back to the old style throttle stops we would cut down big time on crashes. I know, I'm a broken record but damn it, it's the truth.

Joe,
Almost 24 years ago, I was sitting in the lounge of the Holiday Inn, across from the "New Atlanta Dragway". Lex Dudas was working for NHRA, and he was sitting at the next table. He said "we ought to take every delay box and every throttle stop in the world, pile them up, I'll run them over with a bulldozer and we'll set them on fire." I'm not sure it wouldn't have been a good idea.

We were running two dragsters in Super Comp that weekend. We saw a guy in the lanes fire his S/C dragster up in reverse and back all the way up to the roll cage of the car behind him. The rear end would have been in the driver's lap. The next week, we all had to have neutral safety switches.