[dorrisdormouse]

Trying to recall what was said so as i dont give out the wrong information - like i said they were much more knowledgeable than me.

There was definitely talk about the fuel system, mentioning expensive fuel pumps and a need to turn high RPM's. I think they also mentioned supercharger size. I guess that relates to the high rpm's as a larger blower would push more air at a lower RPM. I think a mention on the mag also - a single 44 amp being preferred. Also rear end ratio / tyre size combination i think. Realistically they were talking about a comparison between NFAA rules and NFC rules I think - saying that the NFAA rules allowed nitro racing with the same sort of numbers on a lower budget. Also if the rules were compatible I guess you _could_ see NFAA runners moving across to NFC.

[Rob]

Under NFAA rules I'm not sure what the overdrive limit is for a 14-71 but I'm guessing about 25%. If you believe that running a 44 amp MSD mag, a 29-30 gpm (U.S.) fuel pump and a 14-71 blower 25% over is going to be cheaper than the U.S. Nostalgia regs I'd be interested to hear the logic.
Competitive engines turn high rpm, that's how it is. The most valuable asset you can have for a race car is good primary data, in the absence of primary data you need a reliable secondary data source and right now there's probably 50 NFC's pounding away with the same regs as those on the Santa Pod site. That's free development and anyone who thinks that's not valuable either isn't going very fast or wont race for very long.

The only way to keep the cost down is to run an index or a bracket and these classes account for probably 90% of British drag racing.

[ukdrn]

Thanks for your input Rob, I was hoping somebody could throw some light on the proposal.

I guess I shouldn't be such a pessimist but we've all seen so many teams come and go over the years when trying to run nitro cars.

Being positive I really hope this class does develop and come to fruition because nobody will be happier than myself being a huge funny car fan anyway, the class in America and Australia is growing all the time and fantastic.

[dorrisdormouse]

Ok Rob - I cant give you the logic they are using, i dont have the experience - just repeating really what i was told.

I just really want to see the class do well - same as you.

Let me say as well that this is in no way personal - I respect you guys alot - love the car, and as i hope ive made clear i dont personally have the knowledge to say whats right or wrong.

Totally understand your logic when it comes to data. Learning costs money.

[Rob]

You're welcome Jon.

We expected some 'static' from the methanol teams but there's really no big issue. If there's sufficient interest amongst the methanol cars then they should start putting a package together and develop it alongside the nitro cars. All that's needed is a decent set of technical regulations that people can work towards and they're off and running. The difficulty will be getting agreement on the engine package, it always is.

If you try and run the two together you'll still need engine regs for the methanol cars. If you run it as a 'run what ya' brung' deal it'll either disappear or turn into a bracket. As for balancing the two engine packages, IHRA tried the same thing in Pro Mod and it took about 10 years.

Life's too short.

[Rat_Fink_67]

Anyone who thinks that building & running a legal nostalgia funny car takes anywhere near the same level of funding as it does to field a competitive Pro Mod is wired up to the moon. Ball park doesn't come close, it's not even the same sport. You can purchase a fresh hat to pan, legal nitro setup complete with fuel system and a decent pedigree for roughly the same price as 2 top shelf pro modified blowers.

As Rob has already touched on, any decent methanol-burning, roots-blown, aftermarket hemi isn't exactly pocket change either. As with all combinations, yes you can cobble one together cheaper, but false economy immediately springs to mind. As for the fuel pump and blower restrictions, if they were removed then things would get seriously out of hand; a level playing field is the best scenario for all concerned.

Just like nitrous oxide doesn't automatically mean your big block Chevy will implode (despite common misconceptions), nitromethane doesn't have to lead to bankruptcy and an extensive collection of aluminium boat-anchors. Approached in the right way, and in the right mindset people may be surprised.

[PaulS]

A diverse range of comments and opinions as to be expected but taking a slightly biased view here's my take on things.

Like it or not we will always be tied to what is happening in America as that is where the sport as we know it was born and it is where we get most of our equipment from, drag racing is so small in Europe compared to other Motor Sport it would be an uphill struggle to try and go it alone with home bred rules that do not have a direct link to an established and accredited organisation. That being said there are significant differences between the recently published European rules and the current Heritage Series rules which make sense in an emerging class.

The reason the current US cars are turning such high RPM is a direct result of the limitations on both Blower size / overdrive and pump size - to overcome the limitations the teams in the States are building smaller capacity motors (to reduce rotating mass) and spinning them higher in the rev range (by using lower ratio rear gears) to get the air & fuel delivery higher (this is also why they have started using "Pedal Clutches" so they can "up" the idle fuel delivery & pressure at launch). This is the same thing that happened in NTF a few years ago and you are now starting to see the same result through the traps.

As for a Methanol car costing less than a Nitro car, Body & Rolling chassis costs are identical (apart from an extra £200 for a chrome molly motor plate) as they both are the same SFI 10.1E specification. Engine build costs are pretty much identical, bellhousing and clutch costs are the same, transmission costs are actually less for a Nitro car as a 2 speed Lenco is cheaper than a 3 speed Lenco. Supercharger cost is near identical if you are really talking Nostalgia (i.e. pre 1979) as a standard helix 6/71 is about the same as a standard helix 8/71. A points magneto is cheaper (by about 2/3) than a 44amp mag and fuel pump costs are only about $300 apart (providing again you are talking real nostalgia and not the modern gear pumps). Driver safety equipment is the same spec for both as they are both front engine with transmission in the car, so I guess the main "cost" difference is that many people have equipment that doesn't fit in the rules so for them the cost is perceived as being higher as they would have to buy something they "already have".
As Rob said the rules do not come in until 2016 so until then the methanol cars can run alongside (although I'm not sure there are 4) if after that if they want to sort out some rules then they could start their own group.

Do you need a 44amp mag - not really, ours is about 5 amps, do you need a modern gear pump - ours is an Enderle 1200 (probably cheaper than some of the pumps in Super Pro), we run a big capacity, slow revving motor (probably never gets over about 9000rpm) and it's had the same valve springs in it for the last 5 years. Sure we hurt parts - pistons being the main "consumable" but probably not as many as you may think.

So from where I sit the only cost difference between a Methanol car and a Nitro car is the running costs and of those the only significant difference is the fuel as they both use the same amount of oil, both have 8 plugs and we don't see any more bearing damage than when we ran methanol - but the smile factor with NItro is so much more .

[ukdrn]

For somebody thinking of entering the class and for the less knowledgeable people like myself is there a big difference in the tuning of the different motors.
Is it easier to tune a Methanol motor? learning curve etc.

[Rob]

Interesting question Jon

In my opinion no, it's no more difficult. In broad terms, both engines require an air/fuel ratio that's in sync and an appropriate amount of ignition timing throughout the usable rpm range. What makes the methanol route more straightforward is the size of the database that's available both in the U.S. and the U.K.

I'm out for the rest of the day so if this keeps running don't think I'm ignoring anyone.

Have a good day

Rob

[ahensman]

Sure and as with any engine, the principles of air-to-fuel ratio apply. When one thinks of an engine as nothing more than an air-pump and the fuel as an ignition catalyst.
Due to the large percentage of inert Nitrogen gas present, air doesn't exactly like to ignite easily (otherwise we'd all be walking around in a constant fireball) so a tuner has to balance his (fuel) catalyst quantity to the amount of combustible oxygen in the air. That's why analysis of the race-time air is essential if a tuner is to get the best from his engine.

Most present-day NHRA teams have a very accurate portable weather station on board their race rig. They can measure pretty much any component of the atmosphere and then use their previously documented data to set up the engine for the measured conditions. If you ever have the chance to compare the atmospheric data for Denver (6,000 feet above sea level) versus Sonoma (sea-level) then look at the tune-ups for each track for the same engine, you'd probably have a heart attack. And those two races are a week apart!

As for fuel. The type of fuel is critical. A good tuner knows that he can lean a lot harder on a Methanol motor than a Nitro one, and it's mainly because of the chemical characteristics of the fuel molecules.

In short and due to its Nitrogen-to-Oxygen double-bond (remember your high-school organic chemistry?) and it's low latent heat of evaporation (the energy needed to convert 1-mole of liquid into 1-mole of gas) Nitro burns a lot more readily and a lot hotter than Methanol.

On the other hand, the very high latent heat of evaporation of Methanol means it burns very cool compared with Nitro. It even has a cooling effect on yhe engine so there's far less risk of burning up the motor. So because Methanol burns so much cooler, a tuner can really lean on the motor compared to a Nito-burner.

For example. Remember the days when all the Indianapolis-500 cars were turbo-charged and ran average speeds of 200mph for 500 mile straight. That's because they were running Methanol and utilized its cooling effects so they could run boost pressures of 50psi and the like. If they had run Nitro, they might have got a couple of laps out of the engine before the metal of the engine melted and ignited.

Back in the 70's and 80's I ran a Methanol burning, turbo-charged Kawasaki competition bike in the UK and Europe. Times and speeds were very comparible to similar Nitro-burning bikes and many racers wondered how we did it, but the answer was simple.
With the knowledge of cool-burning Methanol, plus some trick (Dereck Chinn) crank and head-work we really leaned on that engine. There was a boost-gauge on-board, but I seldom looked at it because typically the intake boost pressure was up way over 60psi. Try that with Nitro in the pipes! What was really amazing is that we used stock Kawasaki parts. No fancy big bore kit, just a stock Kawasaki 1015 block. Reworked stock head, huge Manley valves, stock, but retimed cams, stock bottom end and crank (albeit both pinned and welded)

In summary, look how recent Nitro racing has transpired. NHRA runs 1000 feet Nitro classes and 1320 feet for everyone else. One of the reasons why is the differences between Nitro and other fuels including Methanol.

Remember the days of 1320 Nitro racing? A car would get to about 1000 feet and one would see a bright white flash followed by an oil fire, culmonating in one burnt up motor at the end of the track.
That's because the tuners were leaning on that nitro motor so had to get a 4-second run that the heat build-up inside the cylinders got so high that the temperatur surpassed the ignition temperature of the cylinder head metal. That being mostly Magnesium, it ignited and birned very quickly with that bright white flame (remember again high-school chemistry and burning Magnesium ribbon with the same bright white flame. Replacing an engine every run comes in a little pricey so eventually the race track was reduced to 1000 feet so as to accomodate the tuning limits of the Nitro motors. Along with other factors, the biggest of which is most US tracks have short shutdown areas, unlike places such as Santa-Pod.

So while I agree that the basic tuning principles are the same, one has to know and understand the limits of the fuel one chooses to use. That said, My experience is that Methanol is cheaper overall, if only because there's less stress on the mechanical parts which results in less cost of replacement parts.

Andy