![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#21
| |||
| |||
|
|
Anyone that thinks the engines are as generic as the cars doesn't know much about racing engines from the Big 3. And if they contend to claim that they're correct, I'd like to see the explanation of 1 second separating 1st to 43rd at Richmond if all the engines are "generic" and therefore implied as "equal". That's a huge separation at a place only ¾ of a mile long. |
#22
| |||
| |||
|
|
"SimRacer" <NOsimracer68 (AT) yahoo (DOT) comSPAM> wrote in message news:95o143tpj2cl1g8538keo5k1sebfj68jhk (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... Anyone that thinks the engines are as generic as the cars doesn't know much about racing engines from the Big 3. And if they contend to claim that they're correct, I'd like to see the explanation of 1 second separating 1st to 43rd at Richmond if all the engines are "generic" and therefore implied as "equal". That's a huge separation at a place only ¾ of a mile long. Oh please get off your fucking high horse will you? And what makes you know any more about engines than anyone else here? How many racing engines do you actually build each year? Just because you live next door to some NASCAR garages doesn't qualify you as any kind expert in my book. Being the "racer" that you think you are, you of all people should understand why some teams run better than others. Horsepower is not always the deciding factor. Chassis setup is extremely important. That's why they all test the shit out of their cars every chance they get. That's one reason why DEI is getting their asses handed to them this year. |
#23
| |||
| |||
|
|
"armpit" <armarmpitpit (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in news:wsidnTqSc6cOQN3bnZ2dnUVZ_u6rnZ2d (AT) giganews (DOT) com: "win-77" <77-wins (AT) and (DOT) pulling.away.com> wrote in message news:QW40i.12974$3P3.9782 (AT) newsread3 (DOT) news.pas.earthlink.net... "SimRacer" <NOsimracer68 (AT) yahoo (DOT) comSPAM> wrote in message news:2u4v3392c50kfphaifdola0v3ce199ofpu (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... On Fri, 4 May 2007 16:29:22 -0400, "Crusader" <cru357 (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net wrote: As for automakers, it has less to do with the sheet metal, and more to do with factory support and the power under the hood to me. These things were not really "stock" cars when I started attending races back in 1970, so that's not that big a deal to me. BUT, a Chevy bullet under the hood makes all the difference. The cars are gonna look like whatever they look like, brand badges be damned. And yes, they *all* run Ford 9" rear-ends...but the bread is buttered at the end of the throttle linkage IMO, and I've always fancied Chevy V8 engines, from the lowly first 265 Small Blocks up to the 454 Big Blocks of late 60s/early 70s lore and every derivative that's come about since. (Eagerly waiting to see whose the first smarta$$ to say that the end of the throttle linkage is at the carb, not the engine itself... ![]() How about.... "The engine doesn't know if its a Ford or Chevy or Mopar." $$ to Smokey Yunick (I believe) The current engines are just as generic as the current bodies. Look at photos of current GM, Ford, Mopar, even Toyo NASCAR engines. Except for the valve cover logos, they are nearly identical inside. Then why did Chevy need a new engine design? Because Ford got one with the Yates head... Id doesn't even resemble what a true ford piece looks like....in fact I was told that it has siameesed ports just like the Chevy and Dodge..... Another Ole Fart |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
| |