- The LSR Launch -

[entropy]

I cannot remember one perfect run out of any
of the maybe 800 LSR runs I have made.

BRILLIANT!

I don't have 800 LSR runs

But over the last 4 years or so, I kept increasingly detailed notes on each pass; weather, data logging, bike set up, my riding.
Even when the bike was "perfect", there was always something to improve on my riding style.
That's how I identified the components of how to get more mph in the front half.

[Warp12]

But over the last 4 years or so, I kept increasingly detailed notes on each pass; weather, data logging, bike set up, my riding.

That's how I identified the components of how to get more mph in the front half.

Honest injun, in this case, I don't give a shit about the science

Aside from trying to reconcile the above statements, I am still wondering how the "launch" discussion turned into the "front half of the track" discussion.

Shane

[entropy]

But over the last 4 years or so, I kept increasingly detailed notes on each pass; weather, data logging, bike set up, my riding.

That's how I identified the components of how to get more mph in the front half.

Honest injun, in this case, I don't give a shit about the science

Aside from trying to reconcile the above statements, I am still wondering how the "launch" discussion turned into the "front half of the track" discussion.

Shane

Shane, reconciling  those statements is easy.
I made observations on each pass, then made what i felt were improvements on the next pass. 
If that improvement didn't add mph, it was discarded.
This is not simple because even when I decided to try a new technique, it often took time to get it right,
AND
wind direction trumps almost everything.

As I have stated time and again, I don't have calculations (your science) to back up the basis of my technique; thus my comment "i don't give a shit about science" (in this case).

Simply, I care about results. 
I got results.

But this is your thread,
you have again pointed out it's about "the launch" (not about going faster)

[Warp12]

But this is your thread,
you have again pointed out it's about "the launch" (not about going faster)

Yes, I made this thread to focus on the "launch"....and whether the "launch" was that critical to going faster, and if so, what scientific evidence supported that. Especially in light of what we all know about the often non-correlation of ET and MPH at the dragstrip. Simple.

I am glad that so many people have contributed, as I say. Even off-topic, some very good discussion.

We may never agree 100%. But I think there are some points that we DO agree on....actually, as a group, a lot of points. As someone else pointed out, a lot of semantics involved here....it's the internet, after all. 

Shane

[color me gone racing]

My NA bike went 220.xx mph in the mile, the next 2640 ft we picked up 6 mph.  Scott Davis aka drag racer, utilized his skills as a 8 sec 170 mph drag racer for a very Modest but brisk start down Lorings runway.
How will a full blown tire smoking 60 foot add anything to the last 2640' & 6mph??? If you made the track 60' longer than 1.5 mile how much mph would you pic up???

No one has demonstrated the value of a hot 60' from a dead stop relating to any meaningful gain on the big end.  No one.

Will a tire blazing Mirock dig out the hole....translate to 5-7 mph at the end of the mile? IF so then that will take our 222.xx mph best in the mile to close to 230 mph.
That would make my 1427 Kawasaki the baddest SOB cc for cc on the planet.?

Shane has stated and restated that the gains over the last 1000 '+ are modest as we all know to be true. So why beat the crap out of our hi dollar equipment in the FIRST 60' ?

What is he missing and why?

cmg

[scott g]

... the gains over the last 1000 '+ are modest
as we all know to be true. So why beat the crap out
of our hi dollar equipment in the FIRST 60' ?

What is he missing and why?

cmg

Are we getting warmer ?

[Team Millholland]

Shane has stated and restated that the gains over the last 1000 '+ are modest as we all know to be true.

I'll take ANY gain.......even modest ones!
Dan  (I'm a hard launching kinda guy)

[Warp12]

Shane has stated and restated that the gains over the last 1000 '+ are modest as we all know to be true.

I'll take ANY gain.......even modest ones!
Dan  (I'm a hard launching kinda guy)

The problem is, Dan, that many of us have seen that the quicker 60' (Launch) is not tied to higher mph at the dragstrip. Even if you think I am crazy and/or stubborn, here is what Steve Knecum posted:

The key is getting to 100% WOT a.s.a.p.. if you leave like the dragstrip your taking up ground to quick and not at full throttle if your feathering the clutch to keep it from a wheelie.

Steve has a lot of experience, as we all know. I recently discussed this with another very experienced drag racer who confirmed that a quicker ET can cost you mph.

Shane

[Team Millholland]

Now Shane, I've never thought of you being crazy....

I know what Steve said as I've read every post but even his opinion doesn't convince me. I believe there is a lot of experienced LSR & drag racing folks reading this topic and I take in what ALL of them have to say. It does seem as if we keep going around in circles and at times beating the old horse to death but your topic has got racers thinking.

I can't relate or comment on high hp bikes that run a turbo but the boys and I have been doing this a while on our n/a streetbikes and we believe in hard launching as you are aware.
Years ago when Maxton gave an entrance and exit speed at the traps it was evident that our low hp bikes were still accelerating. When that window time decreased we had higher trap speeds, we launched as aggressive as possible to shorten that time. Back then you could round robin, 15 to 20 passes on a Sunday could be done. We beat on our bikes, took notes and tried different things.
For US on OUR bikes (not claiming to know what works for other racers) we had our best numbers by leaving hard and getting to WOT as soon as possible.
 I believe most n/a bikes are done by the 1.5 mile, you even touched on this Shane. You were at Loring when I ran three passes within .5mph of each other. I tried a couple different things at that meet but my bike was at maximum velocity with me in the seat......I don't believe another half mike would have helped.
At one mile it is still picking up speed though and I think being aggressive at the launch helps, even if the mph is nominal it's still moving in the right direction.

Different opinions make this world go round, it sure would be boring if we all thought and done the same things. You mileage may vary.

Dan

[Warp12]

Now Shane, I've never thought of you being crazy....

I know what Steve said as I've read every post but even his opinion doesn't convince me. I believe there is a lot of experienced LSR & drag racing folks reading this topic and I take in what ALL of them have to say. It does seem as if we keep going around in circles and at times beating the old horse to death but your topic has got racers thinking.

I can't relate or comment on high hp bikes that run a turbo but the boys and I have been doing this a while on our n/a streetbikes and we believe in hard launching as you are aware.
Years ago when Maxton gave an entrance and exit speed at the traps it was evident that our low hp bikes were still accelerating. When that window time decreased we had higher trap speeds, we launched as aggressive as possible to shorten that time. Back then you could round robin, 15 to 20 passes on a Sunday could be done. We beat on our bikes, took notes and tried different things.
For US on OUR bikes (not claiming to know what works for other racers) we had our best numbers by leaving hard and getting to WOT as soon as possible.
 I believe most n/a bikes are done by the 1.5 mile, you even touched on this Shane. You were at Loring when I ran three passes within .5mph of each other. I tried a couple different things at that meet but my bike was at maximum velocity with me in the seat......I don't believe another half mike would have helped.
At one mile it is still picking up speed though and I think being aggressive at the launch helps, even if the mph is nominal it's still moving in the right direction.

Different opinions make this world go round, it sure would be boring if we all thought and done the same things. You mileage may vary.

Dan

Great post, Dan. I really like seeing everyone passionate about the racing, and sharing their experiences.

It's not possible for us all to agree all the time. In fact, I bet we all of know of fast racers who have very different techniques....but they do what works for them. 

Shane

[scott g]

Now Shane, I've never thought of you being crazy....

I know what Steve said as I've read every post but even his opinion doesn't convince me. I believe there is a lot of experienced LSR & drag racing folks reading this topic and I take in what ALL of them have to say. It does seem as if we keep going around in circles and at times beating the old horse to death but your topic has got racers thinking.

I can't relate or comment on high hp bikes that run a turbo but the boys and I have been doing this a while on our n/a streetbikes and we believe in hard launching as you are aware.
Years ago when Maxton gave an entrance and exit speed at the traps it was evident that our low hp bikes were still accelerating. When that window time decreased we had higher trap speeds, we launched as aggressive as possible to shorten that time. Back then you could round robin, 15 to 20 passes on a Sunday could be done. We beat on our bikes, took notes and tried different things.
For US on OUR bikes (not claiming to know what works for other racers) we had our best numbers by leaving hard and getting to WOT as soon as possible.
 I believe most n/a bikes are done by the 1.5 mile, you even touched on this Shane. You were at Loring when I ran three passes within .5mph of each other. I tried a couple different things at that meet but my bike was at maximum velocity with me in the seat......I don't believe another half mike would have helped.
At one mile it is still picking up speed though and I think being aggressive at the launch helps, even if the mph is nominal it's still moving in the right direction.

Different opinions make this world go round, it sure would be boring if we all thought and done the same things. You mileage may vary.

Dan

Dan:

You have expressed yourself very well.

Thanks for posting.

[Warp12]

Here is something for everyone to ponder:

Look at these numbers from the same day. Pay careful attention to the 60', 1/8th, and MPH numbers:





How can a 1.47 60 foot equal less mph than a 2.3 60 foot, same day, same rider, similar conditions?? I promise you that on the 1.47, I had the throttle locked early (64" bike). Sorry the pics are blurry, it was all I had on hand. I should mention, the slow ET/Big MPH pass was made intentionally.

We've got .8 seconds slower to the 60 foot, and 1.24 seconds slower in the 1/4....but more mph. Curious results, right? Without the dragstrip launch, might I have put down more average hp over the distance of the 1/4 mile?

Shane

[Oz Booster]

Shane I look at the 1/8 mph and see the faster launch helped ??

After all this discussion i would think many will try something different , main thing is what works for you...

For me its as much about the attitude you leave the line with as the actual technique

[Warp12]

Shane I look at the 1/8 mph and see the faster launch helped ??

After all this discussion i would think many will try something different , main thing is what works for you...

For me its as much about the attitude you leave the line with as the actual technique

I wouldn't look too hard at the 1/8th mile mph...as the shift point was very close to those traps. A slight change in the track distance is a significant mph difference there, due to the shift point on the that particular setup. And as I have mentioned, the bikes gain speed rapidly on the small end. I was more saying...look how lazy the bike is to the 1/8th, ET-wise. Look at the big end mph. Notice how the mph split more than makes up for that lazy start. There is more to my methodology than just "tip-toeing" the bike off the line. But that is for each person to determine...the best way for them.

Agree 100%...what works for your bike, rider, and setup is what's most important. 

Shane

[SEJ]

Here is something for everyone to ponder:

Look at these numbers from the same day. Pay careful attention to the 60', 1/8th, and MPH numbers:





How can a 1.47 60 foot equal less mph than a 2.3 60 foot, same day, same rider, similar conditions?? I promise you that on the 1.47, I had the throttle locked early (64" bike). Sorry the pics are blurry, it was all I had on hand. I should mention, the slow ET/Big MPH pass was made intentionally.

We've got .8 seconds slower to the 60 foot, and 1.24 seconds slower in the 1/4....but more mph. Curious results, right? Without the dragstrip launch, might I have put down more average hp over the distance of the 1/4 mile?

Shane

What I notice is that the first 2 very, very similar passes are 7 minutes apart. The 3rd is 3 1/2 hours later. Wind conditions? Wind direction? Barometric changes? Track conditions? Rider aero... soft easy launch allows the rider to get into optimal position much sooner and easier. Just food for thought. I've owned bikes that my fastest mph was also on the quickest et. I've had others where it was not even close...

[knecum]

Your reaction SUCKED!! That's why you went slower!! No?

[Warp12]

Here is something for everyone to ponder:

Look at these numbers from the same day. Pay careful attention to the 60', 1/8th, and MPH numbers:





How can a 1.47 60 foot equal less mph than a 2.3 60 foot, same day, same rider, similar conditions?? I promise you that on the 1.47, I had the throttle locked early (64" bike). Sorry the pics are blurry, it was all I had on hand. I should mention, the slow ET/Big MPH pass was made intentionally.

We've got .8 seconds slower to the 60 foot, and 1.24 seconds slower in the 1/4....but more mph. Curious results, right? Without the dragstrip launch, might I have put down more average hp over the distance of the 1/4 mile?

Shane

What I notice is that the first 2 very, very similar passes are 7 minutes apart. The 3rd is 3 1/2 hours later. Wind conditions? Wind direction? Barometric changes? Track conditions? Rider aero... soft easy launch allows the rider to get into optimal position much sooner and easier. Just food for thought. I've owned bikes that my fastest mph was also on the quickest et. I've had others where it was not even close...

Glad you asked:

Density altitude was 500' worse in the afternoon, which robs power:



Winds, pretty comparable:



If .8s less 60 foot (HUGE) didn't hurt my mph, what does that say about the "dragstrip" launch??

Shane

[Warp12]

Your reaction SUCKED!! That's why you went slower!! No?

 

[Warp12]

What I notice is that the first 2 very, very similar passes are 7 minutes apart. The 3rd is 3 1/2 hours later. Wind conditions? Wind direction? Barometric changes? Track conditions? Rider aero... soft easy launch allows the rider to get into optimal position much sooner and easier. Just food for thought. I've owned bikes that my fastest mph was also on the quickest et. I've had others where it was not even close...

There is more than meets the eye to a good "launch" strategy, SEJ, and you touched on some good points. I'm sure Entropy and I agree on that point. A hard launch always makes you look like a pro....but is it faster? I have a funny story about that, maybe later.

Shane

[SEJ]

Yeah...like everything can go to hell in a hurry after a killer 60'   

[Warp12]

Yeah...like everything can go to hell in a hurry after a killer 60'   

Yup. At the dragstrip I try to coach the new guys to be more concerned about the 330' than the 60'. Not that I am a "pro"...but it's all relative, right?

Shane

[SEJ]

You bet!   

[SEJ]

Density altitude was 500' worse in the afternoon, which robs power:

Do you think that the % difference in humidity more than offsets the 500'? I'm no expert, not even close and trying to learn all of the time, but a 21% drop makes a lot more room for more oxygen.

[Warp12]

Density altitude was 500' worse in the afternoon, which robs power:

Do you think that the % difference in humidity more than offsets the 500'? I'm no expert, not even close and trying to learn all of the time, but a 21% drop makes a lot more room for more oxygen.

Density altitude is calculated with temperature AND humidity. Temperature has by far the most affect on engine power.

Shane

[SEJ]

Density altitude is calculated with temperature AND humidity.

Thanks! I just learned something.