Quantcast
Channel: Thom Taylor – Hot Rod Network
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 220

The Beginning and End of the Front-Engine Dragster

$
0
0

At the dawn of drag racing, it was easy to tell which cars were fastest. They were the ones that looked like two rails, an engine, and four tires that someone sat on. Those stripped-down “bugs” or “rail jobs” were always the fastest, because they were pared down to the absolute minimum necessary to blitz the quarter-mile.

The evolution of the dragster has seen leaps and also years that seemed they hit the limit of physics and technology for any further reduction in elapsed times. Then, the continued march of lower times and increased speeds would erupt, with teams and builders sharing or otherwise divining the factors for the latest chop-chop to conquering that familiar strip of concrete and asphalt. The advancement happened natively, with trial and error or a secret shared. Says longtime chassis builder Don Long, “There was no science with the early dragsters, you just looked at what was out there and you added to it.”

There were advances from things like slicks, superchargers, nitromethane, slipper clutches, and ultimately data logging, but mostly it came down to slow tinkering. For the spectator, this arc of higher speeds and shortening elapsed times drew crowds witnessing a spectacle—“the show”—but also possibly a record, something he or she could hold onto as a historic, meaningful mark in the evolution of man and machine.

Held at abandoned airstrips or blocked-off country roads, “slingshots” as dragsters were called, hit more than 120 mph in 1950, the beginning of organized drag racing in California at the Santa Ana airstrip just east of Newport Bay. Then within a few years, the march quickly saw dragsters topping 150 mph.

Dragster evolution came from a myriad of sources. With organizers like HOT ROD’s Wally Parks, who founded the National Hot Rod Association (NHRA), and promoters like Mickey Thompson, CJ Hart, and Lou Baney, opportunity and incentive converged with safety to mold drag racing into a more homogenous assemblage. Hundreds of different classes for every conceivable variation of machine were developed, but the “unlimited” Top Fuel dragsters were the top tier of the professional category. By the early 1960s, there were certain combinations normalizing the front-engine dragster to a general form evolving until the early 1970s when a major shift in the dragster paradigm happened: the modern rear-engine dragster.

Early chassis builders were Pat Bilbow’s Lyndwood Chassis, Joe Schubeck’s Lakewood Chassis, Frank Ito, and Scotty Fenn’s Chassis Research, all helping to make Top Fuel more attainable. The earliest “standard,” if you could call out a standard in this still-chaotic time, was the “dogsled” style of dragster at a 98-inch wheelbase. The Chassis Research TE 440 model was most identified with this design. The downside was that it left the area over a driver’s head exposed, so soon there were cross bars added from one side to the other, before an additional hoop surrounded the driver, adding more weight and complexity. By 1961 most dragsters had adopted the three-point roll bar or something similar, and by 1963 the evolution was complete. Writer and historian Don Prieto gives credit for the three-point cage to Bay Area builders Pete Ogden and also Romeo Palamedes, who would eventually found American Racing Wheels.

Once Mickey Thompson found luck with the driver sitting behind the axle, builders all saw the driver’s weight leveraged behind the rear axle produced better traction. Traction was always a problem with these lightweight cars and 8.20 skinny tires. By the early 1960s, professional builders like Don Long, Kent Fuller, Roy Fjastad, and Woody Gilmore added more development and refinement for pro chassis—or a good copy. Combined with the aftermarket providing accessories and components, there were more cars and more minds advancing the state of the art.

Failure was always on the minds of chassis builders and, really, all component manufacturers, because if you pushed the envelope too far, you and your product or services were instantly no good. So dragster momentum was artificially slowed as builders trickled into dragster evolution, even though the drag racer’s creed that more is better was abundant throughout drag racing.

At match races and non-NHRA sanctioned tracks across the country, nitromethane was the breakfast of champions. But with it came new problems. Dragsters and drivers that previously tamed gasoline power were introduced to an insane abundance of power. Nitro was banned by the NHRA in 1957, but this inadvertently resulted in drivers racing full time like “TV” Tommy Ivo, who was paid handsomely to race at nitro tracks across the country because the noise, times, and quality of the Top Fuel dragsters brought in the crowds. Tommy was making $3,000 a weekend booking match races, and that was real money in the late-1950s. With Top Fuel classes allowing nitro again at NHRA-sanctioned events in 1964, it wasn’t long before every run at every Top Fuel meet became an unpredictable performance, ranging from a riveting, clean run to all manner of mayhem and even death—plus plenty of death-defying brushes along the way.

Engines were not immune to experiments in chassis installations. Weight shift was of prime concern because traction was needed to fight the effects of inertia, while at mid-track the need shifted to speed, not launching traction. Woody tried mounting engines on tubing attached to the Chrysler Hemi blocks, which ran forward attaching to the chassis. This allowed the engine to move up upon acceleration. Fuller went one step further by making a structure the engine sat in, separate from the chassis, that pivoted up and down in the “Magicar” Top Fueler. (That’s how the Magicar got its name.) Frank Cannon’s “Hustler VI” went even further. It had a hydraulic cylinder between the bellhousing and chassis mount. The foot-brake hydraulics were tied to the cylinder, so when brake was released to launch, the hydraulics actuated the cylinder, lifting the engine 2 inches. Once it reached its apex, it slowly bled off so the engine moved back into the chassis. Clever minds, theories, and experimentation have always been part of drag racing.

As new ideas were introduced and new components perfected, there needed to be some oversight to recommend and even conduct testing of components. The SEMA Technical Committee was established in 1966 to put forth safe construction practices, as insurance was becoming an issue from the “high death-to-accident ratio.” And, of course, NHRA had clear sets of rules instituted with inspection of each car, and ultimately certification to ensure the safest, technologically up-to-date advances for both racers and spectators.

As chassis developed, everyone had a theory for where the engine should be positioned. Some liked the “Tampa Dump” named for Garlits’ penchant for angling the engine down at the front for perceived better torque transfer. Others wanted the engine level with the ground. Then how high or low should the engine be in the chassis, and how far forward? The accepted location was that there wasn’t an accepted location. Some believed you wanted the center of gravity as close to the ground as possible, so the dump was a means to get the engine down as low as it could go and still clear the oil pump and oil pan; it was a case of clearance rather than weight shift. Rear-end pinion height and how far from the rear-end the engine also factored into its location. As you can see, there was no magic awakening, but rather theories proved or not, and the march of dragster evolution continued.

Slowly it was determined that the longer chassis handled better, but in the late-1950s no one needed the length for taming wheelies because nobody was popping wheelies. That didn’t occur until Tommy Ivo experienced the phenomena at San Fernando Dragstrip after putting on a pair of Ted Cyr’s new M & H “slicks.” Prieto says, “When Tommy launched, his front end went up 4 or 5 inches. When he came around to run again, there were 10 guys lying on the side of the track to see if there was daylight under the wheels. That time he got about a foot in the air.” With those 10.50-16 tires, there was extra shear in the sidewalls, so the extra grip, weight transfer, and inertia made the car climb the ring gear in the axle, creating the wheelie and also a new phenomenon racers would face. While sounding prosaic, at the time it caused a major challenge, and an added attraction—air under the front tires had never been seen in drag racing.

Mathematics took a part in adapting the dragster to this new challenge posed. The theory of angular acceleration started factoring into dragster design. It posits that, all things being equal (weight distribution, engine, engine location, and so on), a 200-inch wheelbase dragster will have four times the resistance to lifting as a 100-inch car. As the wheelbase is lengthened, it squares the resistance. There’s more to it because you have traction issues and rate of climb, but whenever you get acceleration and then resistance, you have a transfer of weight, and something is going to happen—usually a wheelie.

By 1967 speeds of more than 220 mph were seen from the rapid march past the magic 200 mph. Then after 1967 the speed and e.t. gains fell flat. Everyone hovered around the mid-220-mph mark at 6 seconds for years. Was this all there was? It seemed that way until that fateful day in 1970 at Lions Drag Strip when Don Garlits’ clutch sliced through his car and the age of the rear-engine dragster had dawned. This paradigm shift not only radically affected dragster design but also speeds.

Garlits’ revolutionary rear-engine dragster seemed to magically appear, but everyone in Top Fuel knew for years that dragster evolution had bigger problems than stagnant times, and this represented a more sensible design. Violent, deadly engine and clutch explosions were occurring on a regular basis. One seen on a weekly basis was Jim Nicoll’s dragster ripping apart at the 1970 Nationals, used as part of the opening segment of the weekly ABC TV series Wide World of Sports.

But the timing was interesting, as chassis builder Woody Gilmore had just given up on a rear-engine design with the horrific obliteration of his experimental dragster piloted by Pat Foster. And we do mean “piloted,” as the dragster flew into the air at Lions Drag Strip in December 1969, smashing into a light pole at 200-plus mph. Foster spent months recuperating. His suggestion to Garlits? Slow down the steering, which “Dyno Don” heeded.

Bill Schultz, owner of the Schultz and Glenn Top Fuel dragster, thought front-engine dragsters had plenty of developments left to reveal. He ordered a new car from California Chassis Engineering with the engine set forward 50 inches from conventional dragsters of the time. It set both ends of the record at the 1971 NHRA Nationals, but was runner-up to Steve Carbone in his front-engine dragster. Some—like Tom McEwen, Don Prudhomme, and Roland Leong—campaigned both flavors of Fuelers to hedge their bets. But with Garlits winning the 1971 NHRA Winternationals, 1971 March Meet, plus runner-up at both Lions and Orange County Raceway just before the Winters, there was no longer any need to ponder Top Fuel’s future.

Rear-engine dragsters were lighter, the weight distribution kept front ends planted, locked rear spools could now be used to help dragsters achieve quicker launches, steering corrections were easier and more controllable (not to mention drivers were out of harm’s way from an engine or blower explosion), and they could see without a big, blown Hemi engine to look around. Before the end of 1971, Garlits had discovered the rear wing, giving designers another development to incorporate into their dragster designs. Gilmore, Huszar, Long, and Fjastad immediately began getting orders for rear-engine machines. “It increased my business especially,” Long says.

Eventually, big increases in dragster wheelbases got crazy. Where front-engine dragsters went to 225 inches, the rear-engine rails ramped up to 300 inches (and also bigger rear wings) before the NHRA mandated 300 inches maximum, squelching the racer’s creed of more is better. One of the last innovations to keep front-engine dragsters competitive was the introduction of canards ahead of the slicks. These wings created a low-pressure area ahead of the slicks and also helped direct air over the slicks, aiding aerodynamics. But by 1974 the front-engine dragster had disappeared, giving racers and builders a whole new combination of challenges and puzzles to solve.

At the dawn of drag racing, the slingshot dragster design was in a state of chaos—crazy combos came and went. The prevailing factor was that these were machines made for one thing only: to get down the quarter-mile in the shortest amount of time. More expensive than other cars, your investment required having a truck and trailer, as these, unlike most other quarter-mile terrors, were not legal to drive on streets.
It was quickly determined that an independent suspension on a dragster, as posited here by chassis builder Woody Gilmore in 1966, did nothing to improve a dragster’s performance—but, man, it looked good. And that was part of dragster development, too: getting attention and recognition for your and your shop’s efforts. Woody was good at that. The simple, efficient stuff garnered no attention.

For years, this was the standard dragster front end, developed from Kent Fuller’s original use of a narrowed VW front end with the two torsion bars used on Dick Guyette’s “Clown” dragster from the late-1950s. From there, Fuller felt that only one bar was needed and soon the VW trailing arms were pitched in favor of this simple, light approach with friction shocks for dampening. The design stuck for more than 10 years, before solidly attaching the axle found favor in the early 1970s.

The pursuit of lighter weight in most cases took precedence over safety to a degree, or at least to the degree you could keep within the rules. Complicating a basic Huszar or Long chassis in most cases only added weight and could also complicate maintenance, because among all of the parameters a dragster required, it had to be worked on under less than perfect conditions in the pits between rounds.
“TV” Tommy Ivo’s first dragster, this Chassis Research copy done by a young Kent Fuller is considered the first digger to pop a wheelie after Ivo got a couple of practice runs on a borrowed set of M&H 10.50 slicks belonging to top racers Ted Cyr and Bill Hopper. The following Monday, Ivo headed to Isky’s shop and convinced him to use his influence to obtain a set for Tommy. By that Saturday, the news of wheelie antics had traveled to Lions, where operator CJ Hart told Ivo not to or he’d be kicked out. Ivo did, and Hart kicked him out.
“I was making the cars a little longer and longer because my name was Long, and they seemed to be handling better,” chassis builder Don Long jokes. “It was just something to offer the customer against my competitors, so I was always a little longer, but I noticed that my front ends stayed down better with the longer length.”
Jim Ward put a wing on the front of the Yeakel Plymouth dragster, and when he quit Yeakel, he put it on his Imperial dragster, but he bolted it onto the cage instead; as best we know, that was the first back wing on a dragster. He did it because he thought it looked cool, and because he was a disciple of Chet Herbert. Herbert was always coming up with theories and ideas for people to try. There were instances where plastic or aluminum (even wood) wings started showing up in about 1962 on the front of dragsters because racers knew they needed to keep a front end down. For some, those front wings also hid lead shot for added weight to help plant the front.
Weight up front, longer wheelbases, better slicks, slipping the clutch, how far out the engine was from the rear end, slipper clutches, and even wings and winglets above the front axle were all the approaches to wheelies—sometimes adapted individually, and sometimes in concert. But you still had thousands of combinations with engines, clutches, chassis setups, track conditions, and more, all needing attention before every run. Dragster design jockeyed between weight, chassis length, chassis rigidity, power, a team’s actual and perceived success, available resources, luck, and a lot more.
Continued improvements in traction, a result of the introduction of slicks, created other phenomena to further complicate mysteries and challenges. As Long told us, “It was like a card game. Everyone could have the same amount of cards, but it was the order they were placed that could lead to the winning hand.”
The march of dragster design, speeds, and innovations, took on a whole new look in 1971 with this dragster, Don Garlits’ “Swamp Rat 14.” Rear-engine dragsters were not new—they were seen at the very beginning of drag racing—but dragster evolution, technology, and continued instances of destruction and sometimes death had advanced to where the advantages and success of the rear-engine slingshot could not be ignored.
This is a Dragmaster “Dart” chassis, one of hundreds built by Jim Nelson and Dode Martin out of San Diego. Their lightweight chassis, which won the 1962 NHRA Winternationals, saw action around the country, giving more racers a chance to experience drag racing and advance innovations.
If you accelerate at 1 g, moving the engine back or up the same amount gives you the same results. At 1 g, your vector is 45 degrees, so the more you accelerate, that angle gets smaller, and the higher the engine is in the chassis, the more weight is transferred to the rear. But the height of the tires, clutch, and pinion height all factor into the equation, so it was not simple math; in reality, it was more like art.
The Schultz and Glenn Fueler from 1971 was the archetype for the final evolution of the front-engine dragster, with the engine set 50 inches farther forward than contemporary dragsters of the time. Unfortunately, few followed their lead. Adding weight further forward balanced the chassis, with this car setting a world record of a 6.41 e.t. at 226.13 mph at Lions in July 1971, right in the midst of the rear-engine revolution, but it lost out to Steve Carbone’s front-engine dragster in the finals at the Indy Nationals.
The “Hawaiian II” 173-inch wheelbase dragster with the latest Top Fuel puzzle, the new Gen II 426 Chrysler “Marine Engine,” might have started the “flexy flyer” period of flexing chassis. After a disappointing run, engine builder Keith Black hacksawed the uprights in the chassis to gain flex and won the meet with a 7.07 .e.t at 221.66 mph. “The car came back to me all cut up, and I fixed it. I didn’t agree with what they did at all,” Long says. “This one episode started the experiment by chassis builders of the flexing chassis.” Sleeved uprights, no uprights, uprights with saddles that could slide on the main rails, independent front suspensions—all kinds of flex-sanity developed. “Everyone thought they ran better because they flexed the chassis,” Long says. “But there were a chain of cars that didn’t have flex that beat them.”
Beautiful in their own right, the beginning of the rear-engine revolution gave birth to slingshots like this Don Long car campaigned by JL Walton, Wes Cerny, and driver Don Moody. Here it’s participating in the Last Drag Race at Lions Drag Strip in December 1972, having just come off of winning the 1972 NHRA Supernationals at Ontario, just an hour drive from “the beach.” The Kuhl and Olson rear-engine digger with a Woody chassis won this event.
One aspect of dragster evolution seldom considered is the marketing potential from advertising and how “the show” factors into slingshot design. George Schribner’s “Yellow Fang” was as much a 175-mph advertisement for Ed “Big Daddy” Roth as it was a cog in the dragster-development gear. “The show” became a key ingredient to drag racing, even if it meant a reduced speed.
As beautiful as they were, aluminum bodies added weight, negating any perceived advantage in aerodynamics. Still, there were advantages from a marketing and also identification standpoint. This is Dusty Rhodes’ “Rhodes Runner” Top Fuel dragster from 1965 with a Kent Fuller chassis, Steve Swaja body design, and Pat Foster at the wheel.
The last front-engine dragsters benefitted from engines set further out from the driver, longer chassis length, and those canards located ahead of the slicks, which helped move air over the tires and also created a low-pressure area at each side of the engine to move through the atmosphere quicker. This is from the 1971 NHRA Summernationals at Ontario, California.
In 1966 the second-gen 426 Hemi appeared, which wasn’t initially accepted by drag racers because it represented the unknown, with few components and no experience behind it. Some racers did embrace it, including Garlits, shown here from 1966, but this may have been as much because Dodge was a sponsor as it was to be the first kid on the block with the latest toy.

The post The Beginning and End of the Front-Engine Dragster appeared first on Hot Rod Network.


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 220

Trending Articles