Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'System One Pit Buzz' started by underby6, Nov 13, 2012.
to recap this....
I am not getting 50lbs for running a Veney right?
Merry Christmas everyone.
Is there a rule that says I can't switch from a clutch to a converter?... Oh there's not? Hmmm.
If anyone deserves a combination weight break it's the idiots running CamFX rocker assemblies. (Oh, there's only one idiot doing that?...)
Btw, Comp has a 50 lb. Weight break for automatics, but its a separate index.
The turbo cars have ran the lockup, they may run big mph but how long does it take them to get there? The aforementioned applies more to ADRL than NHRA. The only reason they're "dominating" NHRA is because the blower guys are getting choked. Jirka ran very well in Pomona, but it's a bit of a farce to say that's Les's 2nd race. Maybe it's his second race with that exact chassis but I'm nearly positive he and Jirka worked with a very similar setup in Comp. Look at his run in Pomona, exceptional track conditions, 5.60 was his best pass. That is a very good pass no doubt, but so was the 5.45 and 5.46 by Lombardo as well as the 5.47 by Bartone. With that said we have a disparity of .13 - .15. Mike Austin ran the B&J Converterdrive in Vegas; "low 40's"?...since when is 5.48 a low .40? This was Jim's identical setup and some of the brightest minds in the game calling the shots (read: Norm Grimes and Darren Mayer). I believe the first pass they went a mid/low .50 and then E1 knocked the belt off at the hit (same at both Regional & National). At the National and Regional events respectively the quickest blown car runs were 5.27 and 5.30 (both Whiteley), that's a difference of .18 - .21 (with the exact same cars/setup minus the driveline). I don't see the big deal with the weight break, there are still plenty of difference between the quickest runs clutch vs. converter in TAD and TAFC that 50 lbs. isn't leveling the field. There is no rule that says you have to run a Veney, converter, nitro, or screw; you do whatever you like and play with the hand you're dealt. The converter has been a lot of fun for us; to be the first to run a 5.3x and to run so well at Indy feels amazing...especially since so many told me we were wasting our time/it'd never work. As far as the two-step goes....take it, we don't even use the thing.
NHRA TAD #34
what chuck said........
I agree with Chuck.........time to give some of that overdrive back! But since we are on the subject of weight breaks, pass some this way.
I guess one of the things a lot of people are upset is when did the converter combo become a 'class' within the class such as b/ad, a/fd, or roots for that matter.
I'd say around 2001? It's a different combo, not as popular as others so rule changes seem drastic? It's comical how so many people are "converter experts" and know that "this" or "that" is going to push the converters right into the 5.20's. I'd say low .30's are possible, but a 5.17 is possible w/ a clutch so still we have .15 difference. The a-fuel cars can run teens so disparity is nearly equal with that as well.
NHRA TAD #34
To the best of my recollection, there used to be a 50lb weight break in dragster for running a wedge headed motor such as a big block Chevy or the famed KB olds until a certain dynamic duo one a few championships with one. To address the the comments about the promos cars running faster with the converters, obviously the rules favor the turbo cars, the converter deal is a by product for them and is a way to bandaide the take off a bit (build boost and such along with consistancy). If you have noticed they run a good bit more mph than everyone else in their class. I put the turbos on par with the screw blower not only in power level but efficiency as well. The turbo cars are running over 50 lbs of boost, while the blown cars are at 14.5% over now and the turbo cars are faster because they run converters? don't think that there is a legal NHRA BLOWN promod out there with a converter drive that is way faster than one with a clutch. I say let the lockups converters in, keep the weight break. If you think that it is that much of an advantage you can either switch over or go A/F racing. While I am on a rant, whats the deal with traction control is it legal or illegal? Does NHRA have a way to find it and police it?
I don't believe 50lbs is going to matter very much, but I think the point is why? As far as I know, there are 5 people running converter's out of 160 total dragsters/funny cars that took points last year. Why make a rule change to help a specific combo that only 3% of racers use? There's has to be a reason and I doubt it has anything to do with parity.
I could have missed a few, but the point remains the same-
Your guess is as good as any; Dean Dubbin and Kevin Newburgh in TAD and TAFC respectively also campaign the converter setup. We were heavy since we started, 40# or so. With the ADRL being so weight conscious we were set on getting to weight (2075), but with the new rule we have to work that much harder. In total we have taken off 90#....I'm not sure how much it'll help, if any, but it certainly won't hurt us. Either NHRA is making an adjustment with converter setups in general (broad spectrum - not just TA) or someone has an inside line with NHRA. If the latter is in fact the case, please call them back and explain to them why the C blower is a logical move for automatics. In response to the lockup, I don't think it'll work/be worth anything in a blown car.
NHRA TAD #34
I'm not as concerned with the 50 lbs as I am lock up.
I think more people are aggravated with the point of giving the converter cars a weight break.
50 lbs and a lock up and I think it will be the combo to have. I'm not a "converter expert" but I think the prospect of torque multiplication early with an 'activated' lock up (not reliant on engine rpm like a clutch) is an interesting proposition to say the least (from what little bit I know about converters). There are lock ups out there that run with a Bruno or B&J drive. I'm fairly certain a Lencodrive could be modified for a lock up.
In reference to my comments on the turbo cars...the point wasnt that the converter is what has made the turbo's dominant, rather to point out a lock up equipped car ran the quickest door car speed ever. What that means is a lock up equipped car can run great speed numbers if the hp is there. What I have been told is with a non lock up converter, when you get it too tight it has less slippage but really robs horsepower because of the fluid going stagnant as the pump speed decreases to the impeller speed.
slippage usually equals lost et. when i pull counterweight off it usually goes slower.
at least that's the theory i subscribe to. i guess we'll just have to respectfully disagree on that.
You guys left Wayne Morris off that list as well. He has run the converter drive in a dragster and more recently in a funny car. Again I would like to see that the lockups atleast be legal and if they offer a performance advantage readjust the rules. Whats so hard about that. The fact of the matter is even if they give a weight break some cars will NEVER get down that far. Our car is currently 2180 with a minimum weight of 2050. I am sure that we can lose some of that, but nowhere near all of it with out building a new car and spending a ton of money on the best and lightest of everything. It is funny that you mention about the c blower, I was thinking of making an OD reference when comparing the clutch cars to converter cars. The fact I the matter is that the converter combo will never run as well as a clutch in the 1/4mile even with the weight break. Brandon do you guys still use the two pedal deal for launch control since you mentioned that you didn't use the two step?
It's real simple rb, clutch cars don't have clutch management. we can't flip a switch, hit a button, set a timer, any of that. We get counter weight, static, rockwell and surface area. You have similar adjustments you can make with a converter.
i have been a fan of allowing clutch management across the board for a while in TAD. in the grand scheme of things I don't think it's a bad thing to simplify running one of these cars a bit. maybe that's what they are doing with converter rules (i wouldn't dare say they are easier to tune, but easier to operate sans clutch maintenance). that's another argument.
For the Lenco to lockup it's about a $20k experiment that nobody wants to undertake. We can make converters "tight" on the big end as it is now....you have no slippage but the car doesn't run. We've done this with sprag and without, same deal....doesn't work. If Lenco does decide to do a lockup, and for it to work, you're talking completely re-doing your converter, trans, rear end, and tune up. This would also have to include a new can....not a cheap endeavor. I agree in a clutch slippage is lost e.t., just not with a converter. The dynamic of the converter is something far different than a clutch, the cars run the absolute best with 3-5% slippage. We look at slippage but it's not the gospel...I care more about g-meter and front wheel than I do about slippage. The billet stators you touched on are only just now, today, becoming available for order (Coan). The pumps have been out for two years, but in reality until this past year and part of the year prior....they were just a fancy version of what we had before. It was great we had a billet converter....less weight etc, change stators, blah blah.. The bolt together deal is still a long ways from being "good". You got a lighter converter but you also moved a lot of the weight to the outer part of the converter....not good. The stators that should be available for 2013 have some better geometry but still...it's a guess. There aren't enough cars providing the mfgr's with data to say that this or that is the answer. As far as 1/4 mile stuff....in TA....like it was previously put you have very few cars. You can't really compare a suspended door car w/ a 5:14 rear and a 1.35 low, c blower, 524" motor, 1/8th mi. to a tafc or tad running 1/4 mi.. If the lockup was the answer, we'd have it by now....
NHRA TAD #34
one way or the other nhra needs to clarify where they stand on it. i would hate to see someone spend the time and money to develop it then be told after the fact it's not legal.
if you could bypass the fluid coupling to lock the converter to the input shaft, it should be faster than whatever the optimum converter slippage is.
Yes, that is the million dollar question, most think (with knowledge) that it won't work and will just pull the motor down. I don't get the big deal, when a converter car goes 5.17 we can worry about slowing the setup down. To me it seems like some think that the setup shouldn't be allowed change because the persons operating them must be of inferior intelligence. In their mind the converter should only do so much, and if those in question were smart they'd run a clutch. Who's to say that if some of us had as much clutch experience as we do converter experience that we couldn't run low .20's in TAD or .40's in TAFC? We have been running a torque converter for 14 years, since I got into a blown dragster at age 16. We'd like to think we may know a thing or two. The converter is still at a large disadvantage to the clutch setup, what is the problem with bringing the converter into a competitive state?
NHRA TAD #34
Not sure if I am understanding this so please help... A weight break was given to a combo that is run by less than 10% of the class? People claim that combo needs help to become competitive? Clutch cars have been the norm in this class from the beginning , so when the converter comes into play many years later they deserve a helpfull hand to keep up? What about the clutch car teams that spent years struggling to keep up? Going fast isn't cheap and creating your own path to going fast costs even more! So by doing it different you should get rule changes to be competitive right away??? Not cutting down those who run the combo just curious
The converter has been around for more than a decade in the NHRA ranks. Others have said that this is no different than rule changes for different blowers, added overdrive, or any number of items over the last several years. My observations tell me that the a-fuel setup has the largest advantage. They also have been the most penalized with rule changes. More and more teams are going to the nitro setup it appears. It seems if you don't have a dog in the race, why say anything?
So you read the rule the same way that I did, that they don't exactly say that you can or cannot run one. I have a working prototype for a lockup converter drive along with a converter or two. I would really like to go testing somewhere, but my unit is not NHRA approved and from what I understand from a few other racers that I have talked to is that it takes big $$ to get something like that even looked at and there is no guarantee on your investment that it will be approved. I don't know if that statement has any merit or even how to get the ball rolling.
522, lenco drive in a dragster I'm going to ask nhra I don't see a problem