Acceleration put into perspective

[Mr 5 0]

Interesting, and a testament to the awesome acceleration potential of a nitro-methane powered dragster. However, the reality is that a Top Fuel dragster has about as much relation to that Corvette Z06 used as an example in the article - or any other street car - as a kids bicycle has to a Honda CBR 600F crotch-rocket. It's strictly for 'show'. A 'serious' motorcycle doing the quarter-mile in 9 seconds (or less) @ 140 mph is quite a show and a dragster running 4 second quarter miles @ over 300 mph makes for quite a show, too. Just don't confuse it with an actual car.

[Unit 5302]

I'm not entirely sure who came up with the comparison of the Boeing 747, but it's grossly inaccurate.

The Boeing 747 is powered by 4 engines capable of producing 55,000-60,000lbs of thrust each, but they use only 1/4 of their power while cruising at an altitude of 40,000ft at 0.9 mach (it's normal cruise speed). This number (using 55,145lbs) is still equivelent to approximately 87,325hp... or roughly 11 times more than a top fuel dragster. A 747 burns approximately 1 gallon of fuel per second in flight. A top fuel dragster produces 8,000hp and burns 11.2 gallons per second during its run. Obviously the 747 would use more fuel during take off than 1 gallon per second; however, it would also be producing 4 times more power. With 350,000hp on tap, it makes the top fuel dragster look like a marshmallow peep. The 747 is not only far more powerful, but also far more efficient.