Landracing Forum
Bonneville Salt Flats Discussion => Bonneville General Chat => Topic started by: tom04 on December 26, 2014, 07:13:43 PM
-
Scientists tell us that “horsepower needed” is an exponential function of “speed desired.” (i.e. horsepower needed = old horsepower * (speed desired / old top speed)^cubed.) From that, racers quickly learn that “money needed” to achieve that horsepower is an exponential function of “horsepower desired.” (i.e. money needed = (home equity – (current mortgage + kid’s college tuition)) * (horsepower desired / (arm + leg))^cubed). Once big horsepower is achieved, every other component in the car must be upgraded to handle the stress – with its own exponential cost. We can’t cry about it – that’s just the way life is.
While planning my next build, I had a thought. Let me start by saying that I’ve been around several different kinds of racing, and normally think that adding classes is a very bad thing. It means diluted competition, small fields and a pretty bad show for the fans. (See: Score offroad: 41 classes of cars and motorcycles, many with no, or only one entry; or, any local dirt track with 4-car heat races and 10-car features.) But, LSR is different. Having lots of classes works well for us because we are racing against records (some of which have stood for decades), not other racers. Lots of classes also means that teams can chase multiple records with relatively small changes to the car. The result is cooperation, civility and home-built-innovation that is absent in other forms of racing.
With that in mind, I thought about how LSR could reward innovation and yet still control the cost for those of us where the "home equity : current mortgage" ratio is still in the “growing” stage. Most other forms of racing have successfully turned to spec engines to control cost. (See: IMCA late models, modifies & street stock; SCORE 6100 trophy trucks; SCCA Mazda & Ford formula cars etc.; NMCA LS3 based drag racing; and a nearly endless list of others.) This has led to a good supply of affordable, reliable and (most importantly) identical factory-built race engines.
The GM “604” crate motor sells for $5,574.99 from Speedway Motors and makes a reliable 400 horsepower on pump gas. The GM “602” crate motor makes 350 bullet-proof horsepower and sells for $3,649.99 including the distributor and spark plugs. Most series require a rev limiter set at 6800RPM for the 604 and 6200RPM for the 602. Both are 350 CI, are low compression and come sealed with tamper-proof bolts. Neither would be good for LSR as a “C” class motor. But, they are cheap and all the same (which is really the point of a spec motor).
So, here are my questions:
- Do you think there would be an interest in a new, sealed-spec-motor class for LSR - maybe just for lakesters & streamliners to start?
- Would you be more likely to build a new streamliner if you could challenge for a record without a car that cost more than my house?
- Do you have a car sitting in your garage that you might bring out again if you didn’t need a motor that cost more than my parent’s house (which while less than mine, was still a lot when they bought it)?
- If we assume there would be a mandatory rev limiter within the safe range, do you see any mandatory modifications necessary to use the GM 602 or 604 for LSR (these are wet-sump motors)?
- If we also assume that creating a new class is way too complicated, does anybody want to join a 604/300 challenge? Each car puts $100 in a pot and the first GM604 spec-motor over 300MPH wins. (We buy our own hats.)
-
"- Do you have a car sitting in your garage that you might bring out again if you didn’t need a motor that cost more than my parent’s house (which while less than mine, was still a lot when they bought it)?"
First let me answer your questions and then make a few comments.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, etc. Those are just my opinions -- and I'm an opinionated bas/tard.
Couple thoughts . . .
If you wanna win money you can always find someone (maybe even in your class) to bet with.
We have enuf classes. If we double the car classes we may get near the total of motorcycle classes (What? You have a green seat, then that moves you to . . .).
For example, a couple of years ago, unfortunately, there was a movement about to get all the old, non-competitive roadsters out of the garages and running again (see C/AIR class). You know, the old Olds motors, the Cads, Studebakers, Packard V-8s. Well, you know, they could all run in the regular C/Gas Roadster class if they wanted to. Most of them just needed to spend a few thousands on fire systems, cages, tires, driving suits, etc. It never happened. But there are some entries in the class -- with BB Chevies, Panella engines and the like that fit. Some by our most prominent teams.
You've almost grasped the whole of what LSR so intriguing. If you want a record, do some studying and you'll find something you may see as soft to go after. Or join the fray. Years ago we entered the most competitive class of cars there was. Had great success for a couple, then they passed us by. We knew what it would take to challenge again. We just got old and broke and now pick our fights.
Lots of ways to play the game -- just choose the one that fits. Please don't try to alter the playing board or the rules.
Stan Back
-
+1 Stan
Pete
-
Several years ago Jack Costalla went well over 300 with a single 4 bbl 300 inch SBC on alcohol. And i can assure you Jack does not have tons of money in his cars. Several years before that I seem to remember Vesco going over 300 with a single 4 bbl 350 on gas. I think I remember him going through the lights upside down and still over 300. So it has been done pretty much already except for the Crate motor part. I would say to you that if you want to try to build a 300 mph car with a crate motor, go for it. If you can find like minded souls to compete with you within the established SCTA rules, Have fun. No body will stop you and you don't need anyone's permission.
-
There's spec racing that's on TV every weekend that squashes ANY kind of "original thinking" and it's for people who don't know what "real" racing is...it's called NASCAR!! Hopefully the SCTA NEVER follows the really bad lead of the France family and tries to make it a "fair" deal and passes out "participation" hats!
-
I like the idea allowing the C/AIR motor specs in other car classes similar to the vintage “X” engines. Call it XAI or something like that. I would even have a blown class but only allow GMC style blowers. Magnetos and points distributer only, no electronic engine controls. NO aftermarket blocks or Heads. Only classes that already allow “X” engines would be allowed to run “XAI” engine class.
(XAI) Cast iron V-8 engine block and heads produced before 1973 with a limit of 306-373 cid. Carburetor or mechanical fuel injection only, Gas only. Ignition limited to a single magneto or point’s style distributer only. No EFI, computer controlled ignition or electronic data collection are allowed.
(BXAI)Same as above but with a supercharger allowed. Blower limited to a 6-71 roots blower with a limit of 2 or 3 lobe rotors. I have to admit I don’t know anything about GMC blowers other then they should be allowed in vintage classes.
Not saying it should be done just that I like the idea.
-
Race a bike. Costs a lot less.
-
Race a bike. Costs a lot less.
Uhh.... yea right.... unless you want to be a record holder in a popular class... :roll:
-
I've probably got more dollars invested in my safety equipment than my engine. :roll: I'm not going to add it up. It doesn't matter. What am I going to do? Stop? :roll: Wayno
-
There's spec racing that's on TV every weekend that squashes ANY kind of "original thinking" and it's for people who don't know what "real" racing is...it's called NASCAR!! Hopefully the SCTA NEVER follows the really bad lead of the France family and tries to make it a "fair" deal and passes out "participation" hats!
X2!!
Over the years I have been involved with several different types of racing. The basis of "commie" racing is to control costs, this is a false premise to try to attract people. While this does work for a very short amount of time, it will also have a large downfall that takes other unknowing victims with it. Karting, SCCA, NASA are just a couple that have done the peak and valley.
LSR has been and will continue to be diverse and experimental. People talk about cost control, think about this, what do you do when the rules mandate that you step up to a technology or you cannot run. If I cannot afford any more than a 36hp VW, I can run it in LSR/SCTA.
BTW, the C/AIR class inception was to bring out older cars that were just hibernating. A few have shown up, but not what the promise was to be.
All the best, Happy New Year, John
-
IMCA land speed racing .... ?
-
Run with the big dogs or stay on the porch :cheers:
-
Scientists tell us that “horsepower needed” is an exponential function of “speed desired.” (i.e. horsepower needed = old horsepower * (speed desired / old top speed)^cubed.)
So do I, but my degree is a BA, not a BS.
:wink:
Tom, I was thinking the same thing 5 years ago.
And then I realized, we are a tribe that insists on knitting our own uglyass sweaters.
It's all about mousetrap building.
Spec engines are fine for racers at tracks where you're trying to find out who the best driver is, but in a sport where the quick reflexes of a F1 driver are not necessarily an advantage over an experienced octogenarian with cataracts, what would be proven? At that point, you're just joyriding.
Particularly in my case, it's not even about driving the car, it's about building it. The only reason I have a record in my name is because it rained at Speedweek, the fellow I had slated to drive it had to go back to Australia, and I couldn't pawn the driving duties off onto someone else at World of Speed.
I've been involved in two types of racing, Bonneville and Soap Box Derby.
The Soap Box Derby had a cost cap.
When I built my soap box car in 1971, there was a limit of $35.00 placed on the total cost of construction materials, sans paint. Wheels were provided by a "Sponsor", and they were all, allegedly, the same.
By the time you dropped the $18.00 for the 3/4 plywood, the cost of bolts, lath, body filler, fiberglass, etc., I found out, yes, it could be done.
And it looked like a $35.00 Soap Box Derby car.
And the teams who had older brothers with the Teflon insert wheels from previous years would always run faster than the new kids with the new-design slower wheels.
And most of them had better body finishing than any 1971 Camaro you would see on the lot of the event sponsor.
I suppose if you subtract from the cost of the fiberglass and body filler they sanded off the cars, they might have been able to make an argument that the cars were compliant. And it certainly wasn't my fault I didn't have an older brother with the fast wheels.
I ran SBD for three years and never got past the first elimination round.
And if I had to do it all over again, the only thing I would do differently is find a set of those damned Teflon insert wheels.
I caught the tail end of the SVRA seminar at Indianapolis. The idea of keeping costs low is a theme pounded on by some of the competitors.
One argument is that by using older, vintage correct technology, the spirit of the racing will be accurate. And we all want to relive the childhood we never had.
But the second point of the argument is that by using vintage correct pieces, the costs will be kept in check, because it's cheaper than modern technology. To both, I say hogwash.
First off, there were ALWAYS superior cars on the track during the old days. Your Spitfire will remain as slow off the turns as it was in 1967, and will continue to get its butt kicked by the 1971 510 that wasn't there in 1967 when the Triumph went to the regionals.
Secondly, what is happening is precisely what has happened in Europe where FIA standards for vintage correct are in place. Junk Hewland gearboxes - an item any reasonable human being would scrap, now are demanding astronomical prices as "repairable cores". Factory crankshafts that are turned .010 under what any serious racer would consider unsafe are being welded up and pressed back into service. Twin gear Cooper cams with lobes indistinguishable from their base circles are having thousands of dollars in repairs spent on them.
I built a 1960's Formula Junior spec engine from an MG block for Bonneville with custom made parts for less than half of what I would have spent trying to chase down correct vintage racing parts that meet a requirement that is intended to keep costs down in vintage racing. And had it met the authenticity check, it's likely it would not have sustained my 9500 RPM holeshot.
I could have built 3 really strong small block Chevys with off the shelf pieces for the same money, or possibly one fairly competitive NA modern, small bore liner motor.
You can do that at Bonneville.
I've discovered that, at least in my case, that's why I do this.
And this may sound cold, snobbish and elitist, but I've come to the conclusion that racing shouldn't be cheap. It doesn't necessarily have to cost a lot of money, but it should take a lot of investment. By keeping the bar high, it keeps those who probably shouldn't be racing off of the flats.
-
Midget,
Very well stated. It takes TIME, EFFORT, $$$$ and help from your FRIENDS to be competitive on the salt.
For me so far it has been over 40 years, much effort, all of our credit cards and the help of the best people you could ever meet.
As far as CAPS go there are some. RED, BLUE,and BLACK. :cheers:
John
-
The big problem would be who would manufacture and police these motors on such a limited scale.
-
If it did happen, how COULD you police it? This is racing and the guys who push it to the edge will ALWAYS be faster than everyone else. Those "spec" motors are supposed to be "even" but how even are they? Is there a 5-10 HP difference from one to another? If I got the tools from the Snap On truck to remove the "weird bolts" from the engine in order to make mine MORE fair (squaring the deck, degreeing the cam, blueprinting every inch of the motor) does that make me or the motor a cheater if it's still technically the same? I'm building my car because I want it to be the fastest in it's class in the WORLD, not just with 4 or 5 guys. I don't see how spec racing could ever work in this group...
-
"I like the idea allowing the C/AIR motor specs in other car classes similar to the vintage “X” engines." . . . and spec blowers, too?
Got to include all the displacement levels, too. Fuel and Gas. Got to be fair. That would, in essence, triple the now enuf car classes.
Years ago the sage J.D. Tone suggested the relief to the "problems" that started this thread. You're running vehicle #3345? Every time you run faster than before, you get a record (for vehicle #3345). Congratulations! For an extra $299.95 (plus s&h), we'll send you your trophy.
-
If I was writing rules for a C/AIR kind of class and wanted to promote guys running Lincoln, Packard and Olds motors, I would have included "Single rocker shaft engines only". Keep out the 350 Chevys and Hemi Chryslers. Then I would make an exception for Pontiacs and 348 Chevys. Chevys and Chryslers don't need a protected class. Or just not have the class. The idea of crate motors and rev limiters at Bonneville, would never have occurred to me except for this thread.
-
We just got old and broke and now pick our fights.
Lots of ways to play the game -- just choose the one that fits. Please don't try to alter the playing board or the rules.
Stan Back
:cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Stan, I am with you and while we are at it :dhorse: KILL AIR TOO-- :dhorse: --- happened just like we figured
-
Remember the 'claim rule' in other forms of racing? Say the rules allow any engine in a particular class can not be worth more than a thousand bucks. You set a record, or win a race, a competitor can step up and buy your engine for a thousand bucks. Keeps the price down and expands knowlege.
-
Hell Stainless has lots of recording holding motors he would sell for $1000 each. Their fastest run is almost always their last :cheers:
-
My experience with claim rules is with IMCA modifieds. The rule only somewhat works. Those who want to will spend what it takes to win and consider the claim as a part of doing business. There's a fair bit more spent on most competitive claimer class engines than the price of the claim. Claimer rules don't really work.
Pete
-
My personal suggestion for rule changes in the SCTA....If It Ain't Broke, Don't Fix It! :cheers:
Bill
-
The IMCA deal is same size engines ... as in 355 cu in SBC. That covers just "C" engine class. Would need a spec engine for each engine class. Plus fuel / supercharged.
-
Soooo, how would you police the engines in a spec class? Seals, Claims, tear down? Who or how would this be done?
-
One last thought on this from me - and as my wife points out, sometimes I'm open minded to a fault.
I've gotten involved up to my eyelids in this sport, so maybe - maybe - I'm not seeing a clear path that an outsider might see.
But let's test this theory.
Might there be interest in this idea if it were set up as a stand-alone event, independent of SCTA-BNI or USFRA?
On these forums, I'll acknowledge the fact that most of us are invested in the status quo.
And as a follower of these boards, I've seen countless build diaries start off with the best intentions, but the cars never materialize.
It's fair to assume that one of the reasons is that they ran out of money.
This spec engine idea is so contrary to what currently happens, that I could see it having an appeal to folks who simply want to get some salt in their diet, but are stymied by the cost of an engine.
With between 500 and 600 entries at Speedweek, I don't know that putting more cars up at the event is the best idea.
But if this spec engine idea was strong enough to stand on its own, it might - again, might -
A. Relieve some pressure on Speedweek by siphoning off a few competitors who are there simply to drive fast on the salt, AND
B. Expose those who might want to move on to the next step with a taste of what this really involves.
I doubt there is room in the current structure for what's being proposed here, but if an independent sanctioning body were willing to step up to the plate, it might succeed - I just don't see it working in the sanctioning structure that already exists.
-
That's why USFRA has the 130 and 150 clubs. If the poster want's a 300 club of sorts, it's up to him to do it. Most of the people here have been doing it the hard way for 20 or 30 years or more. For me cost control depends on what I am willing to spend. No reason for not running a Speedway crate motor with a rev limiter. Or a Packard motor for that matter. But don't expect a record. Just be happy for the experience.
-
Yep, you want to run a crate motor put it in a street legal car and try the 130 club.... then add a roll bar and go for 150.
Cost control at its finest. :cheers:
The sport is landspeed racing, not limited landspeed racing.
BTW which of my doorstops would like to claim for $1000 :-D
-
The ultimate in cost control is about where the SSS team is right now: Run out of money and you're done.
See?? It's very simple. :-D :-D
-
Hopefully the SCTA NEVER follows the really bad lead of the France family and tries to make it a "fair" deal and passes out "participation" hats!
I'd wager that a number of participants in this thread have a SCTA/BNI t-shirt that says "Participant"; it's a component of an entrant's package. And there are hats, too. Be careful what you wish for... :evil: :-D
vic
-
Wow guys, settle down. It was just a few simple questions. Suddenly I'm a NASCAR loving commie racer who wants a participation trophy and is told to stay on the porch? Really? Relax, nobody is rewriting any rule books. In the words of the first George Bush, I'll just mark you guys down as "undecided."
I know I'm going to regret this, but I'll try to explain, just in case there is anyone else reading who likes a challenge. There are lots of factors that go into making speed on the salt. Horsepower is one. Aerodynamic design, fabrication, setup and luck are others. The question I posed is simply a challenge to eliminate what I consider the easiest, least interesting and most expensive factor (i.e. horsepower). When in say "easiest," I don't mean that it is easy to build a motor that makes big horsepower. Actually, I think the opposite is true. But, big horsepower is easy to buy. I'll offer this story as an example: A couple years ago I was talking to the father of a single-car-team sprint cup driver. His son's motor-lease deal was $90,000 for the weekend. That's right, $90K to "borrow" a motor for 3-1/2 days. When they failed to qualify for a race, they dyno'd the rental motor and found it was 50hp under the primary team. Some people might find the challenge of building big horsepower more interesting. More power to them. But for me, big horsepower means buying a retired NASCAR motor and there is always a "primary team" that will have a better bullet.
Again, it's not a matter of "low horsepower," but rather "reliable and repeatable horsepower." (Although, some of the best racing and best people are in the small-bore motorcycles trying to get to 100MPH.) The effect a spec motor is to emphasis the other factors like aerodynamic design and fabrication skills. As stated in a prior post, driver reflexes are probably not as important in LSR as in other forms of racing. Plus, the assumption is that once a spec car gets sorted, the owner would put a bigger motor and go for a record. So the challenge is really for the car builder. I'll agree that spec racing has been a disaster when the organizers try to specify too much stuff. (See, Pro trucks and Trophy Light in off-road.) But, spec motors have actually been a good thing when the rest of the car is left open to innovation. (IMCA and 6100 in offroad.)
Finally, I'll confess that I have a self interest in the challenge. Two years ago, I converted my daily driver into a salt racer as a bucket list project for three friends to go 200 mph. After we all got our "A" licenses, I started sneaking the rev limiter up and got to within 1-1/2% of the class record before I got too scared of breaking parts. The plan was to return this year with a higher gear and get the record. Then, since "that would have been so easy," I'd take the NASCAR motor out of the current car and go back next year to check off the 300MPH box in a new special construction car. We all know what happened this year. Now, since I only have so many seasons left, I'm thinking about taking two cars next year. A spec challenge means I don't have to buy another big motor, but keeps a little friendly competition.
Flame on.
-
No flames...but :dhorse:
Bill
-
yes....but does the CG change or does the CP when running a CRATE Engine... ?
:-D
-
C-air seemed like a good idea except I saw it a place for a retired small inch pro stock motor. Cost control should require factory rods, maybe an iron crank, 2-bolt mains, 10:1 compression, 2bbl carb, aftermarket intake, factory heads limited to valve work and first 1/2" with mods, factory rockers, hydraulic lifters, aftermarket exhaust, four speed tranny or three speed automatic, low tech ignition.
I still think a class for retired Nascar chassis woud be good, they are already designed for high speed crashes and have tons of safety equipment.
For bikes I would like to see a twin class like the ECTA does, this would bring in a lot of fast twins, Ducati, Buell, Aprilia, Honda, Suzuki, etc. These don't take much space and will further encourage new riders and bring more $$$.
Last, I want a Formula 200 MPH bike class to allow a number of different class bikes to compete on a roughly 200 mph target. Blown 600/ 4's, pushrod 1650's, stock 1350 & 1650's, lightly modded 1000/4s, streamliner 500's, etc. This would be a blast to watch and create a lot of interest as maybe 20 bikes compete for a single trophy rather than one or two in hter classes each year. More entry fees too!
-
Bracket land speed racing?
-
Break out the shoe polish...
-
Motorcycle racing has had and does now have spec classes. The Thruxton Cup for Triumphs is one. It brings a number of people into racing that normally would not because of the cost. Most of the bike and engine needs to be standard. The bikes are low cost and plentiful Triumph twins. There are a limited amount of parts that can be changed so this keeps the expense down. A fellow in our Triumph club races in it.
There was an RD Yamaha class in England and a few others I knew about at one time. Lots of big name road racers started in spec classes. The bikes are pretty much equal so the rider and tuner need to be real good.
They can work to keep costs down, to bring new people into the sport, and to develop future professional racers.
-
You could do the 36HP challenge. How hard could that be? :dhorse:
-
I have some IRL engines in crates for sale. Tony
-
brackets and spec suck. Creativity rules. just look at a couple three groups from Montana and choose you own path.
-
Yeah? So tell me -- what's so creative about a Jaguar running a straight-8 Buick engine? You see 'em every day at our local WalMart. :roll:
-
And the Cat will be back! :-D
Doug :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
-
For those who understand, no explanation is needed, for those who don't, none is possible! :dhorse:
John
-
"I still think a class for retired Nascar chassis woud be good"
What year? We'll start stocking up on templates.
-
Tom: There is nothing wrong with your idea. If that is what you would like to build, go for it. You asked what the general list member thought about it. And I think you have your answer. It seems to go against everything Land Speed racing has always been about. Still lots of projects have run on the salt just because the owner wanted to build and run it. The difference I see is that you want the recognition of a record for indulging your dream. You live near Jack Costella. Have you talked this over with him. It sounds like something Jack might be interested in and have some ideas about.
-
Nascar chassis is basically a 66 Chevelle with truck arms.
-
It is now and will always be about money! If you look at the circle track and road racing classes that use "crate" motors you will still find that the consistent winners are the guys with the most money. One reason is that they don't buy just one crate motor, they buy 10 then dyno them all and pick the best 2 or 3 and sell the rest to their competitors! It is all about the money. When you start restricting innovation and engineering you make small, and expensive, improvements the difference between winning and second place. Run what ever you want for a motor that fits the class you want to run but if you want a record or a "hat" you will have to step up to the "Horse power bar"!
Rex
-
Cost "control" as it is labeled by many is nothing more than creativity control.
Take Smokey Yunick for example. He was involved in NASCAR untill the France's pushed him because of creativity. How would LSR be different today if Smokey had decided to go LSR racing instead. This is a guy who figured out how to build boost out of a sealed bellhousing and impeller shaped clutch. That sort of innovation is what LSR is about.
We can easily all go buy a new (Howe, Port City, Lefthander, etc.) car, turn key and go racing. Then have someone set it up for us and so on. Circle track racing was at one time pioneers of the sport, now most are just cookie cutter wanna-be's with big check books.
LSR on the other hand does cost a ton of money, however I bet a guy can go LSR racing for under $5k and have the time of his life
-
Wow guys, settle down...
Again, it's not a matter of "low horsepower," but rather "reliable and repeatable horsepower." .... Plus, the assumption is that once a spec car gets sorted, the owner would put a bigger motor and go for a record. So the challenge is really for the car builder.
Finally, I'll confess that I have a self interest in the challenge. Two years ago, I converted my daily driver into a salt racer as a bucket list project for three friends to go 200 mph. After we all got our "A" licenses, I started sneaking the rev limiter up and got to within 1-1/2% of the class record before I got too scared of breaking parts. The plan was to return this year with a higher gear and get the record. Then, since "that would have been so easy," I'd take the NASCAR motor out of the current car and go back next year to check off the 300MPH box in a new special construction car. We all know what happened this year. Now, since I only have so many seasons left, I'm thinking about taking two cars next year. A spec challenge means I don't have to buy another big motor, but keeps a little friendly competition.
Flame on.
Tom, Not planning a flame, but did you read that post...
What makes you think most people don't build a car, get it sorted, and then get serious to go after a record...
While I always shoot for a reliable engine, the difference between records and participants is the edge... and how close you are willing to run your motor to it.... where you are hoping you have a 10 mile motor, not an 8 mile motor....
If breaking the record is going to be that easy with your current car, get your red hats for you and your buddys and start building that 300 MPH car so you can get your blue hat next. If you worry about breaking parts you are in the wrong type of racing.
What if the spec motor is a honda 2 liter.... now your screwed :-o
Just go out and race, be safe, have fun, go fast :cheers:
-
As Andy loves to say "We go to break, RECORDS or parts!!
-
It is possible to race without breaking all sorts of parts. A person just needs to be careful and to set realistic goals with that limitation in mind. A lot of times that means no record. Consider that a winner is a person who can walk away from a sport like this with his/her finances, health, marriage, etc intact.
-
Spec Class or business model for " Experience Bonneville Racing from the drivers seat " without having to actually build a car or anything , we do it for you. You even have a chance at setting a real record on the famous Salt Flats with our fleet of proven cars. For $$$$$$$ you will be hands on experiencing an American tradition of racing without the hard work. Blah blah blah Check our ad on FACEBOOK and sign up now!! Be a real Bonneville record holder today!
Ken S
-
Sadly, There are hats out there that are hanging on that hat tree!
-
It is possible to race without breaking all sorts of parts.
Very True - everything I broke let loose before I even put the car on the trailer. :wink:
-
Getting into land speed racing was pretty cheap (recycled dragbike and a bunch of ebay/craigslist parts of questionable origin). Staying in land speed racing has become more and more expensive. I have a stash of broken parts to prove it.
-
Spec Class or business model for " Experience Bonneville Racing from the drivers seat " without having to actually build a car or anything , we do it for you. You even have a chance at setting a real record on the famous Salt Flats with our fleet of proven cars. For $$$$$$$ you will be hands on experiencing an American tradition of racing without the hard work. Blah blah blah Check our ad on FACEBOOK and sign up now!! Be a real Bonneville record holder today!
Ken S
I wish I would have seen this advertisement years ago............
I meet so many young engineers these days and constantly have to tell them that there was no school to learn this, you have to study and work at it.
-
Before car, helmet, gloves, fire boots, Fire suit, Hans device.
Then fire system, seat belts, and parachute,
Tow truck, trailer, gas and race gas, shade, beer and tequila :-D
And the rip off hotels
Nothing cheap
So if your getting into this, tell your wife Its only $15,000, when she says I THOUGHT YOU SAID 15,000, you say
no honey I said $50,000 :-D
JL222
-
Spec Class or business model for " Experience Bonneville Racing from the drivers seat " without having to actually build a car or anything , we do it for you. You even have a chance at setting a real record on the famous Salt Flats with our fleet of proven cars. For $$$$$$$ you will be hands on experiencing an American tradition of racing without the hard work. Blah blah blah Check our ad on FACEBOOK and sign up now!! Be a real Bonneville record holder today!
Ken S
Being new to salt LSR, this piqued my curiosity.
google = http://www.forbes.com/2004/10/26/cz_jc_1026sport.html (http://www.forbes.com/2004/10/26/cz_jc_1026sport.html)
the article is from 2004 but interesting...
karl
-
Before car, helmet, gloves, fire boots, Fire suit, Hans device.
Then fire system, seat belts, and parachute,
Tow truck, trailer, gas and race gas, shade, beer and tequila :-D
And the rip off hotels
Nothing cheap
So if your getting into this, tell your wife Its only $15,000, when she says I THOUGHT YOU SAID 15,000, you say
no honey I said $50,000 :-D
JL222
Like :cheers:
-
After the third or fourth season competing, my wife said she wanted a deck and pool. We spent about 20,000 on them. After it was done she said we were about even on my racing expense. I said yes dear. not even close. And I race motorcycles. :-D :dhorse:
-
Fred, I think I'd have used the :evil: instead of the :dhorse: in your situation. I agree about the relative costs, though.
-
When any asks, I say "What price glory?"
-
Well, maybe Tom didn't like the answers... he has left the building... Slim, did you do something to unfriend him?
Maybe it was the overuse of dead horse beating... anyway maybe he will be back after he gets his easy hats with his car.
Tom, special construction cars... the engine is probably the cheap part....
-
Nah, I wouldn't do that to a new guy. Someone like you -- maybe. But not a new guy. :-D Especially someone like you. :evil:
-
Every year I take an afternoon off from racing to stroll through the pits. I try to see all the bikes and say hello to folks I know. There is a decline in the diversity of the different types of bikes and there seems to be fewer people. The biggest decline is in the number of streamliners. This is the top end of the racing classes and I know the expenses have hurt at least one team enough so they are not there.
It is inevitable that the records will get so high that only a few are interested in pursuing them. It might be affecting us now. We need to consider ways to contain costs and provide opportunities. It might be vital to do address this in a decade or two if the sport is to have broad appeal.
-
I don't think LSR has a very broad appeal. There are a 1000 participants in a nation of 300,000,000.
-
I see all this talk about records. I could run pass after pass and never set a record and I would be fine with that. Just being involved keeps my glass half full.....well sometimes its only 1/4 filled, and sometimes the glass breaks...well you get my point :-D
-
I don't think LSR has a very broad appeal. There are a 1000 participants in a nation of 300,000,000.
Yep if it was easy everyone would be doing it :-D
-
I don't think LSR has a very broad appeal. There are a 1000 participants in a nation of 300,000,000.
Yep if it was easy everyone would be doing it :-D
The hard part is taking time from building/crewing/ racing to volunteer your help to make the event happen. The ones who can are real participants, special thanks to them!
Ken S
-
That's a valid point, Ken. We've slacked off on racing one of our bikes -- and manage to keep enjoyably busy enough moving toilets and selling t-shirts & rule books (me, Nancy). And then there's this website to put stuff on, and helping out with sundry other jobs as they appear. And with all of this -- it's still a veritable ball for us.
That isn't saying that I don't take my leathers and helmet and stuff with when we go to the salt. I'll always be begging for rides - no change there! :evil: :cheers: :cheers:
-
"The biggest decline is in the number of streamliners."
Wobby..I've got to totally disagree with you. This year there were 33 streamliner pre-entries not counting M/C's, in 2005 there were 22 pre-entries (and that's before the economical crunch) and in 1997 there 15 pre-entries.
This shows the class is more popular than ever and we all know others are being built. There were 6 pre-entries for classes over 400..I believe will never lack for streamliners or anything else for that matter...............JD
-
You are probably right on this. I was posting about the number of streamliners I saw running. It wasn't very many of the really fast ones. The course condition was the big influence on what I saw. It was wet around the edges and this likely made some folks stay away.
-
most of the fastest ones EVER were out there running...in 2014 for the limited time and salt
available......
Vesco Turbinator...Vesco liner..Royal Purple Nish...Danny Thompson...Marlo Treit's Project 550
Speed Demon, Ack Attack, Castrol liner....etal
-
Bo (wobbly) you are right about the motorcycle liners at your BMST event. Not many left in that game. At Speedweek we also see far more records broken in Vintage or Pushrod bike classes. There are not many who can afford or ride those superfast, hot rodded superbikes. They have already reached incredible speeds, far beyond what most of us would ever try.
-
Regarding motorcycle liners, there was the big attempt a few years back to up tubing size. It would have essentially scrapheaped quite a few of them.
I don't know what the rules folks are thinking right now, but if I were contemplating a bike liner, I'd certainly be looking for an approach that would be able to circumvent any potential disqualification.
So I'd have to add in the cost of a crystal ball - clearly less opaque than the rules committee.
To Tom -
I'm sorry if we came across as harsh, but look at what's happened because you suggested an out-of-the-box idea!
This has turned into a really good discussion, and we'd certainly like to hear your thoughts.
These threads don't always work as the original poster intends, but very good thoughts and information are coming out of it, and we have you to thank for that.
I think you should sign back on. :cheers:
Chris
-
I personally think a lot of the 'liner records in the motorcycle class won't get beat because of a rule change. When the Smokey Yunick of the salt (Jack Costella) started making his little itty bitty cars that were sitting on the ground with 6" wide front wheels he was onto something. Technically yes, they were motorcycle's (spirit of the rules?) and yes he went really fast without a bunch of horsepower, but to punish him and everyone else and saying they now have to lean at a 20 degree angle it became an apples to oranges thing. Now by design the liners have more surface area and less aero and will take more horsepower to go just as fast. They should have the SAME tubing requirements as a 4 wheel car just for the safety aspect, but looking at the rule change it just became harder for anyone to beat him.
-
Brad They did not make the rule to "punish" Jack. The made the rule after one of Jacks riders was killed. The rule was made in the interest of safety!
-
Its interesting to note in the 150cc records that H. Mueller's S/BF record of 150.000 mph is only 1.444 mph slower than Costella-Compton's S/F record set in 2006. The interesting part is there is 50 years between the two records. Its not all H.P. A lot of it is in how you open and close the air.
(http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/800x600q90/537/zDvGNH.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/exzDvGNHj)
-
I didn't post up to start an argument or have anyone mad at me. I was commenting with the comments on the "lack" of motorcycle streamliners out there. Did "raising" the motorcycle streamliner height from 3/4" to 3 or 4" make them "safer", hardly. If you're going 200+ mph, 2 or 4 wheels is irrelevant. You make the " living quarters" the safest possible, so you DON'T get killed. Sure it all costs money (trying not to get too far off track) but safety and technology always does. Knowing Jack and his simplicity, his "fuel" record was probably still with gas in the tank. Also the car design of Jack's was outlawed, so I wouldn't plan on seeing any records ever broken with that design, because you couldn't legally make anything that small again.
-
I didn't post up to start an argument or have anyone mad at me. I was commenting with the comments on the "lack" of motorcycle streamliners out there. Did "raising" the motorcycle streamliner height from 3/4" to 3 or 4" make them "safer", hardly. If you're going 200+ mph, 2 or 4 wheels is irrelevant. You make the " living quarters" the safest possible, so you DON'T get killed. Sure it all costs money (trying not to get too far off track) but safety and technology always does. Knowing Jack and his simplicity, his "fuel" record was probably still with gas in the tank. Also the car design of Jack's was outlawed, so I wouldn't plan on seeing any records ever broken with that design, because you couldn't legally make anything that small again.
I don't think anyone is mad at you. But fear not. At some stage Jack's records, like most, will be broken. Designs change and somebody will come up with a design that will allow him (or her) to go faster.
-
I didn't post up to start an argument or have anyone mad at me. I was commenting with the comments on the "lack" of motorcycle streamliners out there. Did "raising" the motorcycle streamliner height from 3/4" to 3 or 4" make them "safer", hardly. If you're going 200+ mph, 2 or 4 wheels is irrelevant. You make the " living quarters" the safest possible, so you DON'T get killed. Sure it all costs money (trying not to get too far off track) but safety and technology always does. Knowing Jack and his simplicity, his "fuel" record was probably still with gas in the tank. Also the car design of Jack's was outlawed, so I wouldn't plan on seeing any records ever broken with that design, because you couldn't legally make anything that small again.
Jack is a very talented guy, no doubt. His achievements stand on their own merit, I do like the Smokey assimilation though.
Jack also had a vehicle "red tagged". This was not for punishing or banning him. Rather it was a safety issue and trust me, the SCTA/BNI does its homework before making a move like this.
If I may offer a small bit of advise, take the time to visit one of the SCTA/BNI safety seminars. It is not a propaganda show, rather it is an informative look into safety systems and vehicle construction. It usually has a prominent guest speaker and some of the research is very eye opening. Detailed data and video analysis is incredible, do you remember the Danny Thompson crash at Bonneville a few years ago? Yes, in car video showing the reasons for just some of the current safety requirements.
We as a society have too many laws on the books trying to protect everyone from stupidity. Texting, seatbelts, helmets, etc. really?
The Rulebook is a guide line of minimum requirements to race at SCTA events, watch the video of the Gillespie crash Nov 2013 (hondata el mirage on youtube).
One last comment, the SCTA allows for people like Jack to be inventive, creative and express himself. Try that in some commie racing org.
Stepping down off soapbox now, flame away.
J
-
Subscribing
-
Thanks to swap meets and Ebay I have an engine that is nearly finished with all top of the line parts for under 4K. If I live long enough I hope to go over 350 with it. You just have to go to about 10 swap meets and bid on about 200 auctions to get the right deals. If you are rich you just call Kenny Detweiler. My engine has under 300 c.i.
-
Thanks to swap meets and Ebay I have an engine that is nearly finished with all top of the line parts for under 4K. If I live long enough I hope to go over 350 with it. You just have to go to about 10 swap meets and bid on about 200 auctions to get the right deals. If you are rich you just call Kenny Detweiler. My engine has under 300 c.i.
I second this.
IMO the only way to have cost control is for the person holding the purse strings to exercise cost control. It can't be driven externally.