Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

For showing beyond the shadow of a doubt that when it comes to qualifying #1 in NHRA's Stock Eliminator, even against the best and baddest that Detoit can muster, (with their phony factored HP ratings,) a well-tuned 4-cylinder TURBO car can embarrass them all, due to NHRA's failure to police boost levels with a tell-tale gauge.

Read it and weep...
CLERMONT, Ind. - Final order, pending tech, after 4 rounds of qualifying in Stock Eliminator at the NHRA Full Throttle Drag Racing Series, 56th annual Mac Tools U.S. Nationals presented by Lucas Oil:

Psn--Num--Class-Driver, Home Town, Machine-----------------ET---Index---(+/-)

1 5508 DF/S Charles Blossom, Woodbury MN, '04 PT Cruis 13.774 15.60 -1.826
2 391 D/SA Irvin Johns, Charlestown IN, '09 Challenger10.087 11.55 -1.463
3 316D E/SA Carey Bales, Lebonon IN, '09 Dodge 10.245 11.70 -1.455
4 3334 E/SA Chris Holbrook, Livonia MI, '10 Mustang 10.251 11.70 -1.449
5 4909 C/SA Dempsey Pendarvis, Gonzales LA, '09 Challe 10.017 11.40 -1.383
6 4022 G/SA Jeff Teuton, Houma LA, '09 Challenger 10.629 12.00 -1.371
7 4312 E/SA PB Candies, Desa Allemands LA, '09 Challen 10.399 11.70 -1.301

Mr. Blossom may never win a round in competition, but that's not the point...
He makes the Ford and Mopar best factory efforts look like junk....

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Bill -

You have touched on the essence of an issue that is being thrown into everybody's face right now and that is the inaccuracy of power factors and the inadequate resources that NHRA expends to manage their system to keep competition within an acceptable range for the classes. It's not so much that Charles Blossom is a super engine builder as it is that he uncovered a combination that is woefully misfactored. It's the same as the performance level of the new factory race cars. The people who own them are not the sole secret to their performance; it's the inaccuracy of the power factors assigned that make their performance level so far outside the normal range of the classes they participate in. Charles's little display here points to the chink in the covering and gives rise to imaginations of many similar jewels in the classification guides to be exploited. Hopefully, NHRA or somebody can get outside the AFHS to correct some of these combinations that make a mockery of the illusion of head-to-head competition.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Years ago, sage Dan Dvorak commented on a suddenly fast, former mid-range racer: he ain't smarter, his engine builder didn't get better....HE'S IN THE WRONG CLASS!

funny and true then.....and now

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Amen!

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

My best run in DF/S was 14.93, heavy, in great air at Hagerstown MD. Nicole Stephenson has the record at 14.72, and ran 14.66 at Indy last year.

I guess we know now how y'all feel racing against the DP/CJ cars. LOL

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

What year PT cruiser is Charley racing, They didn`t make PT cruiser turbo convertible until 2005. Tom

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Thanks Dwight for the shortest,most descriptive reason we're in the boat we're in.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

04 PT Turbo Conv is in the classification runs at 14.13 pounds--comp

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Dwight and Ed:

Thank you for your responses. If you're right, why doesn't Bob Shaw own two of these Neons??? :)

Maybe I'm dead wrong, but it seems to me that the fault, in this case, lies not within the factoring system (and therefore the classification,) but the amount of boost available to the engine. These turbocharged engines are factory-rated at the boost levels dictated, to give minimal warranty problems, and in certain instances, it is possible through engine parameter manipulation, (cam profile, fuel delivery rates, ignition timing, etc.) to increase boost levels with OEM equipment, which can increase power output, dramatically and concurrently. A 150 horsepower engine (normally-aspirated) when treated to 15 pounds of boost, becomes a 300-horsepower engine. Give it another 8 pounds of boost, and it picks up another 75 horsepower. This is not my opinion, but rather seems to be generally-accepted theory according to several books on turbocharging theory, by authoritative sources.

My contention is, Mr. Blossom has, in true hot rodding fashion, has found the combination that will produce horsepower far beyond what would be generated by that engine at factory boost levels. As I have said, this is only my opinion; I don't claim to have any information beyond that.

But, if I am correct, a tell-tale boost gauge placed on the engine by NHRA, would go a long way toward rectifying this problem without resorting to re-factoring the engine. All it takes is a vacuum line and a gauge. But NHRA hasn't seemed to be pro-actve in pursuing this path... Surprise!!!

Food for thought....

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

I dont think Bob is a mopar guy.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Dwight -- Mockery ?? Maybe but i'm OK with it -- he found it and I didn't -- wish I did -- it was there for anyone to find and run and he had big enough kahoonas to spend his money and build it .Good for him ! !

Billy -- Amen ? You've spent your entire racing career looking for a combo this good .......

Mike / Randall -- D/FS -- i'll bet he gets a lot of heads-ups

Ed -- Rumor has it he's building a Nitro R/T for T/SA ...............

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Wrong They made them in 2004 All convertibles were turbocharged

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

And, shame on me for calling Mr. Blossom's PT Cruiser a Neon... I THINK the Neon's SRT turbo engine is a more powerful version of the OHC Mopar 4-cylinder than what goes (went?) into the PT Cruiser.

Sorry for any confusion....

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Different intake manifold

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Jack. Billy knew all about it, trust me.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Still doesn't make it right that the Blind Mice in Glendora let runaway combos like this keep making a sham of "their" AHFS.
Remember when you're GTO was the hot lick in E?I guess the DP's took care of that.
And I hold no ill will towards Charlie Blossom,or Bob Shaw,they used what was there in black and white.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Is there a full moon? For once, Ed and I are in total agreement on this one...

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

[QUOTE=Jack Matyas;207711]Dwight -- Mockery ?? Maybe but i'm OK with it -- he found it and I didn't -- wish I did -- it was there for anyone to find and run and he had big enough kahoonas to spend his money and build it .Good for him ! !
/QUOTE]
Maybe you missed the gist of my comment, Jack. It was not directed toward Charles or his work to find the combination; it was directed to NHRA and the way they have selected to deal with power factoring. They have attempted to take human judgment (and responsibility) out of the method and so they do not personally engage the process. You and I have seen the time when Farmer would have walked into the pits and changed classes for such a performance. NHRA's claiming that their AHFS is "protecting and insuring" equitable competition is a mockery of their claims to be so dedicated to the preservation of Sportsman racing. Let those other guys in D/FS testify.

In my first post, I alluded to many more such stars in the tech books, and I will applaude anyone who takes the leap to build one of those cars. However, as MLK stated, "Justice to long delayed is justice denied." and the AHFS will do just that. How many years at a 3 1/2% increase per pop will it take to make D/SA (or many others that are being abused by the factory takeover, and including D/FS) a level playing field again?

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

[QUOTE=Dwight Southerland;207930]Dwight. While I agree with you about most of the old days guys using common sense.
There was some vindictiveness used back then. Remember when pro stock had engine advantages, wheelbase advantages, Etc. Jenkins had a crying towel that would put most street racers to shame
And do you really want the "twits" in Glendora deciding things from their vast experience in stock and superstock.
I'd like to see the AHFS changed a bit to include corrected altitude. And any car that gets an instant hit should be torn down.
But it's better than the "dart board" method

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

I don't disgree with any of what I see here, but I think there's a tendency toward making this problem with superior performances from turbocharged cars more complicated that it is.

My opinion, for what it's worth, (and that may not be much, admittedly) is that increased boost levels are the culprit at ANY altitude, and they can be monitored and controlled through the use of an NHRA-mandated TELLTALE boost gauge. All NHRA tech needs, is information from the car manufacturer as to what boost was present when the engine was dyno-tested for factory rating, and when the car comes in after a qualifying run or a run in competition for his weight/fuel check, the NHRA tech looks at the telltale needle to see if the amount of boost exceeds the mandated limit. If it does, the car can't compete and that run is scrubbed.

This is not my idea.... I have read online, that Subaru sponsors a road race series that uses an onboard telltale boost gauge on ALL the cars (they're all turbocharged) in competition ffor monitoring boost levels.

This does nothing at all for the DP/Mustang problem, but one thing at a time....

Thanks for listening.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

The "next" issue will relate to altitude. A supercharged or turbocharged engine loses 0.5% of its power per 1000 ft. elevation, as a rule of thumb. Normally aspirated engines lose 3% per 1000 ft., again a rule of thumb. See the advantage at higher altitude tracks?

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Yes Ed its a sham -- but should he have had horsepower put on before he raced it ?And yes again - my GTO was the hot lick in E -- we all get our 15 minutes -- well maybe not all of us -- have you had yours ?

Dwight -- Justice ? Yes I raced under and worked for "Farmer" and i'll take the AFHS any day before I do that again . That dartboard stuff that was talked about did have some truth to it ............very little but ............

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Just lost in 2nd round. 8-inch MOV!

Car#-Driver(Opp'nt)-RT-----ET-- Speed-----Car#-Driver(Opp'nt)-RT-----ET-- Speed
5508 Charles Blossom 392 J. T. Shouse
E2 0.112 13.733 98.95 ****WINNER**** 0.109 10.512 116.90
DF/S Dial: 13.71 (+/-): 0.023 C/S Dial: 10.49 (+/-): 0.022
Prior rounds:
E1 (J Holzman ) 0.067 13.846 0.096 (J Beattie J) 0.078 10.465 -0.095
Qualified: #1 13.774 -1.826 #97 10.543 -0.807

Ah, the beauty of stock. We're looking at a PT Cruiser convertible going up against a late model Corvette.

Cubic inches wins this one over manifold pressure. J. T. Shouse's MOV: 0.0047 seconds (approximately 8 inches).

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

OK Ed -- Entertain us -- if you were the "Head Honcho" in the NHRA Tech Dept and this combo came across your desk - what's your next move ? Remember , just because his last combo may have been killer should you punish him from the Git-Go ?

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Guys, I am not advocating a return to the days of Farmer (although it was more entertaining). I would just like to see an attempt at something better than what is going on now. I think the AHFS is an attempt to come up with something that is "twitless", since NHRA seems to have a goal to turn a sport into an entertainment platform. Continuing to allow a different kind of "twitness" to erode the hope of competition based on performance will surely destroy what class racing is all about.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

In todays world probably not.Someone would cry "profiling".But in light of his previous
combo,don't you think NHRA would be a bit curious about such an odd ball combo?
It all comes back to them not wanting to do their job and make hp ratings somewhat
close to reality.
I haven't had my 15 minutes,yet.I have time,I'm still young.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Artie: "The dart board method" LMAO Sad part is, that comment is spot on......

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Yes Bobby I believe they hit your fathers car because of his wheel stands and beautiful paint.
And there was and a lot of jealousy by the officials back then. I remember when an NHRA "high up" told us we almost got factored because they were tired of us winning. Nothing to do with going fast.
The guy shielded us but said he didn't know if he could do it again.
Then there was the 3 round final at Seattle in 1980.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Nothing.Until he goes STUPID fast.Then the WHOLE drive train gets torn and measured,weighed and analyzed.Next,I'm sure NHRA can find,hire,whatever,someone with knowledge AND common sense to hit the combo with the appropriate HP.After that they follow his runs and see if the HP was appropriate,by checking ET/MPH.Not easy to do but better than doing what they're doing now.
This might make your GTO competitive again with the run away trains called DPs.
Is that entertaining enough?
And the idea of putting these new rockets in some sort of FX classes would go a long ways towards making heads up races more competitive.
Not a direct comparison but look at the Hemi Shootout.I'm not saying Wescott's stuff is bogus but he had over .10 on the field.Most qualified around 8.60-8.65.
If they didn't break their stuff it probably would have been a runaway.Instead it was one of the most enjoyable Shootouts ever.A lot of close races.
Do the same with these new cars in stock and I think you will see the same result.
Jack,in light of your ties to the people in Glendora we'll never agree on a fix,you have your position and I have mine.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Ed -- The actions you suggest -- well they are exactly what we had before the AHFS --- committee and all it just didn't work because of the human factor -- whatever we end up with it must be mathmatics and performance based only - because math has no feelings ..............and you may talk about "ties" all you want but i've never been accused of being biased .Ever ...........And Ed -- here's the thing - folks like us who care deeply about what goes on must continue to toss ideas around in order to someday have the problem solved .

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

The mathematical equations they're using now don't work.The system is broken.
I mention the ties because you were dismayed about my comments about the current
director of competition,who you said was associated with you for 40 years.That's fine.But it still doesn't take away from the fact that his,and the others in Glendora,are so far from solving the problems with S/SS in particular and the organization general,that a clean sweep is the only way to save NHRA.The old regime should go into high cost retirement.
As far as disagreeing,the forum is a good place to get these problems straightened out,
if everyone would put hidden agendas aside.
Jack we can still disagree,I still love ya.:>):>)

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

I humbly relinquish my former position as "KING OF THE THREAD HIJACKERS" to the people trying to solve the "New Car Crisis." There's not a lot of progress being made, but it sure is entertaining!!!

Keep on keepin' on! :)

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Some of you guys may remember me, most of you won't...

I haven't made a pass in Stock Eliminator in 7 or 8 years, but when I did, I was usually banging my index like a screen door in a hurricane. ie: I've essentially been in Charles Blossom's shoes... I ran a turbo car in the old AF/SA, and BF/SA class, before they combined, and redistributed. I ran as high as Bandimere, and as low as Topeka.

Here are a couple of things I would consider, based on past experience, if it were me...

A) Boost gauges read differently depending on what altitude you're running at. As such, a tell-tale boost gauge doesn't (in my opinion) reach the desired goal - a level playing field. It may DQ a perfectly untouched boost level depending on weather/altitude conditions. It also may allow an advantage under other weather/altitude conditions.

B) Factory turbochargers that pass tech are not an unlimited source of horsepower. They have a limit to their ability just like a naturally aspirated combination. That limitation has an unusual effect that some of you may not be aware of... If you are pushing a turbo to the edge of its efficiency range it essentially becomes like a naturally aspirated combination when at altitude. Correction factors are surprisingly accurate.

If a level playing field is the ultimate goal, the turbo cars need to be able to push the edge of performance the same way the naturally aspirated combos can. Limiting the amount of boost they run, sets up a whole new set of problems. If you allow the turbo car people to max out that turbo under all altitude conditions, you can now confidently factor it just like any other car. If you can factor it like any other combination, it makes putting it in the right class much easier. AHFS flaws aside, as that's a completely different ball of wax, that my opinion won't matter much on...

For anyone that cares, I may make a comeback with the old Buick someday soon. It's sitting out in the shop looking strikingly similar to the last time it was out. ;)

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

One other thing guys. Boost means nothing to power. Airflow does. Boost is not a measurement of airflow. Its a measurement of restriction in the intake system. You take a set up and leave the boost controller alone, and change other parameters that will increase airflow and the boost level will be lower. Add lift and or duration the boost will be lower. Add overlap the boost will be lower. Make the ports larger(obviously not allowed in stock) the boost will be lower.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Don't forget your old Chemistry course where PV=nRT. Boost Pressure P is a function of the number of moles n of air and Temperature. As you get closer to the end of the efficiency range, most of what you get is more T instead of more n. the n helps of course, but the T hurts. Presence and design of a wastegate, vs. no wastegate, and air flow capacity of the turbo matter a lot, and of course vary from one application to another. One model car may have a turbo that can do a lot more for power than it does in stock form, while another might be close to maxed out in stock configuration.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Exactly. Its not limitless power.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

Scott, I'm glad to know you still have your car, and will bring it back out to play again someday, but you (and the others) talking about turbos and altitude racing had me being thankful for "Drag Race Central". Back in 2003 at the Mile Highs I had to run class against a Turbo-charged Daytona, that in spite of his car being nearly 400lbs heavier than my car/driver combo, he plastered my car by running a 15.574 @ 85.95mph (with a .249rt), against my 16.788 @ 79.08mph (with a .061rt), against an altitude corrected DF/SA index of 16.82! Needless to say he qualified 3rd in the 77 car field, and I was 76th...the only reason I wasn't dead last was Toby Lang was there, and he wanted to be the last on the list (I know him well enough now to know that he does that on purpose, because his car is much quicker than he qualifies it, and it shows during elim's)! I wish I could be that savy to be able to do such a thing, but with a fwd stocker I wouldn't even feel it wise to try....

My point in this, is if I someday get to go to Indy my focus will not be to win class (especially since class doesn't pay but $100 to my car anymore), it would be to make it into the final 128, and I need nearly .45 sec to give myself a chance to make that work!! What I'm curious about is how could a car with a 14.13lbs per hp be able to run in DF/S anyway, when my lbs per hp is 20.09, for the same class???

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

As of the Class Guide, the car received 6 HP today, giving it a weight break of 17.42, making it a natural BF/S that can run A and C now. No more D.

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

It will still run -1.70 under in C. Jim

Re: Congrats to Charles Blossom
 

That's fine and dandy Jim, but for you and Mike, I'm just glad that his combo can't run in DF/S anymore...if I read the classification guide right (and I'm sure I did), only the non-turbo charged 146 had a weight to hp factor that allowed it to run in DF/S anyway, so I'm puzzled as to how he got to run that class with a turbo to begin with? Well it doesn't matter for two reasons, one I wasn't even there, and two he won't be running my class with that combo anymore!!!

Oh Jim, I hope he does run 1.70 under in C, because he'll get more hp, and have to run either A or B, w/o even being able to run C again! He might rethink that ideal of yours if it's crossed his mind???