 | |
Chicagoland
Nascar NASCAR and other professional stock car racing (rec.autos.sport.nascar)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Chicagoland -
08-31-2009
, 06:16 PM
|
It's a stupid gimmick to create closer racing. |
of too close racing.
The IRL has got themselves in a bind, because they've ended up
with one engine manufacturer, and one chassis (*). So the only
difference between the cars is the drivers. That's fine when
you compare the good guys at the front to the slow guys at the
back, but when you just look at the 8 or 10 guys at the sharp
end of the field, they're all too equal. They can run side by
side or nose to tail for 100 miles, but none of them can get
enough of an edge to get past the one in front.
So, the push-to-pass is intended to introduce some difference
between the good drivers - who picks the right time to use it,
and who wastes it (or conversely, saves it till the end and
then doesn't have a chance to use it). It's not an ideal
solution, but until they can figure out a way to get three or
four engines and 3 or 4 chassis in the series, I'm not sure
there's a better one.
John
(* you'll note this is NASCAR's goal...you think racing on the
mile-and-a-half tracks is bad now, wait until they get a true
common chassis and common engine)
#22
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Aug 30, 11:51 am, Ken Plotkin <kplot... (AT) nospam-cox (DOT) net> wrote: I like the traditional "extra oomph" methods that involve abusing the engine (with risk of blowing it) or traction (risk of sliding off). Technically, it does increase the risk of blowing it up. But the engines are tuned so conservatively for long life to begin with that increasing the output by 1% for a few seconds makes the odds one in a million. :-) |
--
Shaun.
"Give a man a fire and he's warm for the day. But set fire to him and he's
warm for the rest of his life." Terry Pratchet, 'Jingo'.
#23
| |||
| |||
|
|
TS02_05champ <tonystewart02_05champ (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in news:4a9c2035$0$4986$9a6e19ea (AT) unlimited (DOT) newshosting.com: It's a stupid gimmick to create closer racing. Actually, you have that backwards - it's to solve the problem of too close racing. The IRL has got themselves in a bind, because they've ended up with one engine manufacturer, and one chassis (*). So the only difference between the cars is the drivers. That's fine when you compare the good guys at the front to the slow guys at the back, but when you just look at the 8 or 10 guys at the sharp end of the field, they're all too equal. They can run side by side or nose to tail for 100 miles, but none of them can get enough of an edge to get past the one in front. So, the push-to-pass is intended to introduce some difference between the good drivers - who picks the right time to use it, and who wastes it (or conversely, saves it till the end and then doesn't have a chance to use it). It's not an ideal solution, but until they can figure out a way to get three or four engines and 3 or 4 chassis in the series, I'm not sure there's a better one. |
The first use of the push-to-pass system was last week at Kentucky
Speedway, a 1.5-mile tri-oval where Ryan Briscoe out-dueled Ed Carpenter
by a .0162 of a second, the 11th closest finish in series history.
“For some reason, our races have become slightly more processional than
we’ve been used to in the past,” Indy Racing League senior technical
director Les Mactaggart said of the implementation of Push to Pass. “One
of the IRL trademarks, particularly on the 1.5-mile tracks, was people
tended to run side-by-side, and we got close finishes.
“There didn’t seem to be that level of activity at either Texas (in
June) or Kansas before the Indy 500. So, we looked at our current aero
package and wondered if we could add a few tweaks to it to see if it
would improve the environment for the drivers and improve the enjoyment
for the fans.”
The button advances a spark and gives a driver 200 rpm to help complete
passes, Mactaggart said.
“The driver is already driving at maximum power and maximum fuel, so he
gets an extra five horsepower,” Mactaggart explained. “It’s no more than
that. If you consider these engines are making 630, five horsepower is
not a great deal.”
But it was enough for Briscoe, the IndyCar Series points leader, to
average 200.893 mph, which was the second-fastest race in series history
and just the second to exceed 200 mph.
<snip>
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/story/1367223.html
#24
| |||
| |||
|
|
TS02_05champ <tonystewart02_05champ (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in news:4a9c2035$0$4986$9a6e19ea (AT) unlimited (DOT) newshosting.com: It's a stupid gimmick to create closer racing. Actually, you have that backwards - it's to solve the problem of too close racing. The IRL has got themselves in a bind, because they've ended up with one engine manufacturer, and one chassis (*). So the only difference between the cars is the drivers. That's fine when you compare the good guys at the front to the slow guys at the back, but when you just look at the 8 or 10 guys at the sharp end of the field, they're all too equal. They can run side by side or nose to tail for 100 miles, but none of them can get enough of an edge to get past the one in front. So, the push-to-pass is intended to introduce some difference between the good drivers - who picks the right time to use it, and who wastes it (or conversely, saves it till the end and then doesn't have a chance to use it). It's not an ideal solution, but until they can figure out a way to get three or four engines and 3 or 4 chassis in the series, I'm not sure there's a better one. John (* you'll note this is NASCAR's goal...you think racing on the mile-and-a-half tracks is bad now, wait until they get a true common chassis and common engine) |
they already have a common chasisis and body.
and any innovation is engines in penalized.
so they have already achieved what the IRL has.
FI is heading that way too
#25
| |||
| |||
|
|
they already have a common chasisis and body. and any innovation is engines in penalized. so they have already achieved what the IRL has. FI is heading that way too |
that every team has to produce their own chassis, and their rules
allow a fair bit of room for development (as the Brawn and Red Bull,
and to a lesser extent Force India teams shown by taking advantage,
and embarassing the likes of Ferrari and McLaren). And by
introducing the KERS rule, they've provided a huge area for teams
to experiment and differentiate themselves.
John
#26
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Ray O'Hara" <raymond-ohara (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote in news:h7ia80$o57$1 they already have a common chasisis and body. I don't think you can say that about F1. John |
While the chassis does indeed have to fit a lot of standards,
there are still a lot of areas to tweak.
They aren't really all the same.
Just look at how badly RCR has done this year.
They tried something over the winter that they thought
was going to be good, and without the testing they used
to have, found that it was a dog...
They are now slowly getting back to the 'old' setups,
with their more recent builds.
#27
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Ray O'Hara" <raymond-ohara (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote in news:h7ia80$o57$1 @news.eternal-september.org: they already have a common chasisis and body. and any innovation is engines in penalized. so they have already achieved what the IRL has. FI is heading that way too I don't think you can say that about F1. They still have a rule that every team has to produce their own chassis, and their rules allow a fair bit of room for development (as the Brawn and Red Bull, and to a lesser extent Force India teams shown by taking advantage, and embarassing the likes of Ferrari and McLaren). And by introducing the KERS rule, they've provided a huge area for teams to experiment and differentiate themselves. John |
F1 is talking about it.
commonality has always been in Indy, there were the offy days and the era of
march chassis.
#28
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <Xns9C797E59B43ABpogosupernews (AT) 216 (DOT) 168.3.30>, John McCoy igopogo (AT) ix (DOT) netcom.com> wrote: "Ray O'Hara" <raymond-ohara (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote in news:h7ia80$o57$1 they already have a common chasisis and body. I don't think you can say that about F1. John It can't be said totally about NASCAR either. While the chassis does indeed have to fit a lot of standards, there are still a lot of areas to tweak. They aren't really all the same. Just look at how badly RCR has done this year. They tried something over the winter that they thought was going to be good, and without the testing they used to have, found that it was a dog... They are now slowly getting back to the 'old' setups, with their more recent builds. |
IRL teams can "tweak" but like NA$AR they start from a stadard starting
point.
#29
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <Xns9C797E59B43ABpogosupernews (AT) 216 (DOT) 168.3.30>, John McCoy igopogo (AT) ix (DOT) netcom.com> wrote: "Ray O'Hara" <raymond-ohara (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote in news:h7ia80$o57$1 they already have a common chasisis and body. I don't think you can say that about F1. It can't be said totally about NASCAR either. |
be the case), or at least doesn't care if it ends up that way.
The powers that be in F1 seem to be actively trying to ensure
that there are differences in the equipment.
John
#30
| |||
| |||
|
|
"John McCoy" <igopogo (AT) ix (DOT) netcom.com> wrote in message news:Xns9C797E59B43ABpogosupernews (AT) 216 (DOT) 168.3.30... "Ray O'Hara" <raymond-ohara (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote in news:h7ia80$o57$1 @news.eternal-september.org: they already have a common chasisis and body. and any innovation is engines in penalized. so they have already achieved what the IRL has. FI is heading that way too I don't think you can say that about F1. They still have a rule that every team has to produce their own chassis, and their rules allow a fair bit of room for development (as the Brawn and Red Bull, and to a lesser extent Force India teams shown by taking advantage, and embarassing the likes of Ferrari and McLaren). And by introducing the KERS rule, they've provided a huge area for teams to experiment and differentiate themselves. John F1 is talking about it. commonality has always been in Indy, there were the offy days and the era of march chassis. But you weren't limited to using that equipment by the rules back then. |
able to choose from other manufacturers or even design their own.
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.