Friday, May 2, 2008 - New servers are in! Click-in for more info!
VoyForums

[ VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 07/27/07 2:23pm
Author: DH
Subject: You guys KNEW I couldn't leave this alone!......CAUTION....long dissertation/epistle follows...click here at your own risk.(LOL)
In reply to: Dreamweaver 's message, "thats missing the whole point electronics will intergrate thier way into our cars via msd data recorders etc ,but lets keep as much in the drivers hands as we can I think any car in TPSA will go red if you leave on the first flash of yellow so a delay boxes could effect a drivers rt's LETS KEEP IT A HORSEPOWER WAR NOT AN ELECTRONIC WAR" on 07/27/07 8:15am

First, a short history lesson for those too young to remember. Way back, the tree used incandescent bulbs. Savvy racers discovered that the bulbs came on in three distinct stages. The bulb would first come on dimly, then get bright, and finally go out. Racers with good eyesight, or those that trained themselves, got to a point where they could see the first glimmer. There were no reaction times provided in those days. Later on, rt's were provided during TT's only and the "super" racers realized that if you reacted first you had an advantage. At this time the "super" racers really started working on rt. Most of the pros didn't focus on rt as much as et. In fact, one of my fondest memories is sitting around Baton Rouge in the early 80's bench racing with TC and Bruce Allen. The conversation led to rt's and super racing. Bruce commented on the great rt's (compared to the pros) and was absolutely convinced that we were guessing! TC assured him we weren't and tried to set up some sort of contest/demonstration, but it never developed. I'd like to hear Bruce's comment today. Anyway, the sportsmen led the R&D of better tires, converters, engine designs, chassis settings, etc. to improve rt's. Eventually, you had to be able to redlite to be competitive in the "super" classes, and while it wasn't needed every pass, or certainly didn't guarantee a round win, most cars carried a delay box. It was simply another tool available to maximize performance, much like the evolution of the 4 link suspensions, adjustable shocks, ignitions w/chips, front end limiters, etc.

When the NHRA introduced the LED bulbs in Pomona for the first time they created quite a stir. Top fuel cars, who had long considered a mid .500 rt to be killer, were cutting bottom .4's! Pro stock cars were redliting regularly, Pro stock bikes couldn't go green, and the best "super" drivers had .070 in the box! No it's not an exaggeration. Several drivers that I raced with back in those days called from Pomona and Phoenix and reported that to go green they had .03 to .05 more in the box than normal. The culprit was the drivers ability to see and react to the LED much quicker than the old bulbs...similar to racing at nite with the old incandescents. To fix this "problem" NHRA "adjusted" the amber to green time several times during that first year to help the pro's. They have adjusted it several times since then and today the .400 tree is actually closer to a .380.

Some of the TPSA host tracks have LED's and some do not. If you've never tracked the difference in your rt's it will provide some valuable info. With the old bulbs, you probably will see quite a difference between day and nite, and with the LED's you'll be consistantly quicker, with less difference in changing light conditions.

The delay box debate will never go away. Those racers that can't, or don't set up their car for maximum rt are against the "box" because they don't need it. Some believe it's magic....provides the proverbial "perfect lite" that you see mentioned in some posts on this thread. BALONEY...it's a tool, and if not set and used properly, just as much a disadvantage as not. If you don't need one or don't want to learn how to utilize it, it's your choice. Don't want to learn about suspensions, chassis settings, engine tuning, etc...it's your choice. Does having a 4 link, electric shocks, digital ignition, and the latest in hi tech hardware GUARANTEE you sucess? Absolutely not, they're just another tool in the chest in the quest to maximize performance or provide greater frustration to your efforts.

The suggestion to throw out the "boxes" and go instant green was recently made. He was convinced that without the box the class would benefit. As a racer, I'd love to see instant green or a .300 pro tree. I'm a chump as a driver, but I have two cars that can redlite deep a majority of the time. Doesn't mean I'll win rounds, NO (check my results this year..LOL) but if quick rt's weren't penalized, it could be a definite advantage. A quick example, when Conrad beat me at PVR by .0018 he had a .4414rt, while I had a .4105. If we had been running instant green with no box, I would have improved my rt by the .035 delay that was entered in my box. Pretty easy to do the math on that one. Another example, knowing that I had little chance to out run him, I got amped up, added another dime in the box, trying for a .410 or better lite against Pigford at HMP. Still went red by .03 and got a yellow time slip. That "magic" box sure saved me on that one..LOL!

As the director(dictator?)/janitor of the TPSA, however, instant green would be a bad move. It would penalize the slower reacting cars and increase the potential advantage of a hard leaver. As an example, Racer A, on his best day, can only go .430 on the tree with no delay. Racer B can go .370's at will. With instant green, Racer A still gets his .430, but with no redlite in effect, Racer B goes .370. Do the math, and it's obvious that B just put .06 in the bank and the cars haven't made it to the 60' stripe yet. That's why NHRA doesn't go instant green in the "super" classes. By keeping the tree at .400 (.380) and allowing delay boxes, it helps level the playing field. The guys that can cut .370 rt's are forced to use a tool that requires another decision to be made before staging the car to avoid the redlite. Using the same example as above with a .400 tree, Racer A still gets his .430, B makes the right choice with the box and goes .410 which results in a .02 advantage...not .06. B made the right decision this time but he certainly won't/can't make a perfect one every time. There's simply too many variables. Remember a box never improves rt, it slows it down. Therefore, if the wrong decision is made, you will still redlite, or be dead late. Make the right decision, and a good lite will result...IF the track hasn't changed, the lighting conditions haven't changed (sunny to cloudy, etc) and the driver is consistent. Not a "perfect" lite, but one in the range you've shot for, usually within a .01 or so if the driver does his job. By the way, most very experienced racers will vary around .01 in human reaction time. Seasoned pro's, with lots of track time each week, AJ Ashe for example, will be more consistent. The average weekend racer likely will see his rts vary from .01 to .02 at an event, strictly by how well he reacted to the tree. For the box to be any advantage (or be needed at all) the chassis must react deadly consistently and the driver has to be very consistent as well. The box is useless without consistency.

Many arguments will never go away...electronics vs. no electronics, trans brakes, programable ignitions, programable shocks/struts, hi tech vs. no tech, splayed valve SBC's in TPSA (LOL) and so on. I agree with NHRA that overall, the .400 pro tree with delay boxes allowed is the best solution. You can't penalize the combinations that react quickly anymore than you can penalize the tuner that makes his 4 link work better, or the guy that programs a killer ignition ramp in his MSD. At the same time, it minimizes the advantage that a quick rt car has by keeping the red lite in play. Any advantage that is found, or combination that is maximized to it's potential requires a lot of work in the form of testing and R&D to achieve. Some folks don't want to work that hard, but we shouldn't penalize those that do.

Bottom line, once again the original TPSA rules stand up very well to the test of time and in the light of day. I'm tired of typing (took me 2 days LOL) and I'm sure you're tired of reading...if you made if this far. Hope this gave you a little info and insight, stimulated some thought...or at the very least maybe provided a bit of entertainment.

See ya in the lanes

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> [> That is one of the best written disassertations, but the argument is much more basic than that. Why should a driver e given an belectronic device to keep him from redlighting? Simple huh? -- My opinion, take out the boxes., 07/27/07 11:17pm


[Edit]

[> [> [> [> Simple, boxes are allowed per the rules. How's that for basic?! -- ., 07/28/07 11:25am


[Edit]


[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-6
VF Version: 2.94, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2008 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.