Forum: HoseHeads Sprint Car General Forum (go)
Moderators: dirtonly  /  dmantx  /  hosehead

I see that most PA 410 tracks are adopting a one inch top wing wicker bill rule to keep up with the national series rules. Is it supposed to improve racing? I consider a wicker bill to create extra drag, will it be enough to noticeably shorten engine, drivetrain, tire life? Does it make the cars easier to drive? 

The wickerbill size is actually being reduced from 2" to 1" with the idea of increasing competition due to less "dirty air", and drivetrain and tire life by reducing drag.  Attica and Fremont in Ohio have gone the other way by increasing the wickerbill size to 3" for some reason.  The jury is still out on whether any of this is going to help anything.

Personally I think they'd all be best off taking Mitch Harble's suggestion of removing the wickerbill completely, and combining that with Brad Doty's wing angle rule.

Signature here.

Wickerbills add more downforce to wing.  You may not even use a wickerbill if track is real heravy.  Driver told me they use a 1/2 in-1 in-1 and 1/2 and 2 in in the past dependingon on track.  I was told the Aussies use and love the dished wing without wickers. Who knows as it can be up to a drivers preception on what feels best.

It was common for myself & many others to run up to a 3" wickerbill 30+ years ago.  And I remember seeing several cars with multiple "wickerbill" type pieces on the top surface, they were maybe only a foot wide and 2" tall but there were maybe 10 of them scattered across the top surface 

Thanks, I didn't know the wickerbill was being reduced, hopefully it will benefit all.  Probably would't hurt to get rid of them.

I do remember some interesting wickerbill concepts thirty or more years ago. One was Don Kreitz jr's wing with several wickers about a foot long in some kind of diamond pattern right in the center of the wing. I remember when the left wing panels had an offset built into them. 

Bobby Allen

Wouldn't eliminating them altogether save wear and tear, and thus save money for every winged sprint car team? Since everyone would be taking them off, it seems like it would affect everybody equally.

I agree. The cars would be more difficult to drive withouth the wicker, and maybe result in less passing though? I believe the cars should be more difficult to drive then maybe they wouldn't need a thousand horsepower, but then that would separate the racers from the drivers and possibly lead to smaller fields.

Some of the NASCAR Drivers say that more horsepower would make for better racing. Evening up the playing field will make for less passing. Allowing teams to try new stuff with fewer rules seems like the best idea.

I wouldn't equate the issues in NASCAR Cup to this situation.  Two completely different situations.  From my partially-educated point of view, removing the wickerbill and limiting wing angle would unhook the cars to a degree.  There would be 2 results: 1. The setup window would get narrower, so the driver would have to make up the difference. Should result in better drivers running well, and more passing as cars are handling poorly.  2. Horsepower is still important but at less of a premium, so engine costs and rebuild frequency should reduce (again, to a degree) which might allow some teams that have been out-priced out of the sport to return.

Signature here.

Less passing? I dunno. There's some sprint car racers who have removed the wicker bill and even the wing! They seem to do a lot of passing

Some drivers may not like it, but making the cars more unhooked and difficult to drive usually leads to better racing and more passing. Anything that brings throttle control into the equation is almost always better than stomp and steer slot cars. It puts more emphasis on driver skill and set up. I don't keep up with rules anymore as they are changing all the time, but I remeber a decade or 2 ago when teams had a choice to run a wicker bill with a flat wing or else a dished wing with no wicker bill.

A