Re: NASCAR Speeds

#11

On Jul 22, 8:18*pm, Chuck_St... (AT) nospam (DOT) com (Chuck Steak) wrote:

Quote:

In article TS02_05champ <tonystewart02_05ch... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

Isn't it common sense why there is no concern for Indy cars going over
200MPH?
"Stock" cars weigh about 3,400 lbs, an Indy car weighs about half that,
if that much.

I don't know that there is "no" concern.
Although I would agree, that an Indy car going into the stands
would probably kill fewer people than the stock car.

Quote:

The catchfence will contain an Indy car *much* easier than it will a
"stock" car.

Maybe easier, but has a NASCAR stocker ever gone through?

well for sure pieces of carl edward's car went through the fence at
taladega but do they really have to wait for an accident to happen to
fix something, it wouldn't make any sense to say "Hey let's let them
run 230 mph laps at daytona and taladega until one of them flips into
the fence and kills members of our already declining fanbase"
installing restrictor plates was one of the few things nascar did
proactively, before something happened (though fans have died at
races, and cars had gone into the stands previously) when they saw
bill elliot's qualifying lap of what, 212 mph or so? trust me, i would
looove to see these cars let loose on taladega at 230 mph but the
logistics of it just aren't possible in the present.

#12

"Tim Shelton" <noemail1543 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:

The case for keeping car speeds down below 200 MPH at NASCAR tracks
does not cut it. Indy cars exceed 200 MPH on tracks they run and
there does not seem to be the same level of concern for that. Indy
cars have a greater capability of going airborne over that of a NASCAR
COT. Dump that stupid restrictor plate and let these guys run, let
the engineers buid the car to run..

You are one of only two or three people that I've decided to dump into the
trash - but you've made it there. I'll be happy to see none of your posts
from here on out, unless they are part of someone else's response.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE (AT) windstream (DOT) net

#13

"Tim Shelton" <noemail1543 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:

NASCAR shoud back off many of their rules and let the teams build
these cars and from that, maybe Goodyear can step up to the plate and
provide a better tire, though that may be a stretch. NASCAR wants to
regulate every part on a car and that is just the wrong direction to
go with racing.

And you should find a new sandbox. Look fool - you hate NASCAR - fine. Get
the hell out and quit bitching. Damned - you aren't too smart are you boy?

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE (AT) windstream (DOT) net

#14

"Tim Shelton" <noemail1543 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:

I have followed this sport since the days of King Petty running around
the tracks with his winged dodge.

I highly doubt that.

Quote:

Maybe you should consider a well
thought response to the thread instead of the criticism.

Why - your posts are not in the least well thought out.

Quote:

These
threads spark discussion and for most of the responders,

Ummmm - no they don't. Most responders are quite critical of your tired
rhetoric.

Quote:

the threads
do provide some level of insight,

Absolutely untrue. They demonstrate no such thing at all.

Quote:

whether it is revealing that I don't
know crap about NASCAR or not. I do have an opinion and you obviously
do also..

So what is it - have you been into this since Petty's days, or do you not
know crap about NASCAR? You contradict yourself, but I suspect most will go
with the second half of that question.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE (AT) windstream (DOT) net

#15

In article Fish <godwin.dave8 (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

On Jul 22, 8:18=A0pm, Chuck_St... (AT) nospam (DOT) com (Chuck Steak) wrote:

Maybe easier, but has a NASCAR stocker ever gone through?

well for sure pieces of carl edward's car went through the fence at
taladega

Really?
What I heard was, the injuries incurred were due to things that
were on the fence, on the stand side, and not car debris.
If you look at the video you can see this.
There was probably some sort of track debris or dirt that went in,
but the objects were the track's, not the car's..
Marble sized stuff will go through, no matter what the speed.

Quote:

but do they really have to wait for an accident to happen to
fix something, it wouldn't make any sense to say "Hey let's let them
run 230 mph laps at daytona and taladega until one of them flips into
the fence and kills members of our already declining fanbase"

All I have ever said, is that the cars have never gone through the fence.
Even when they were fast.
We think nothing about seeing 30 million dollar race efforts,
but don't want to inconvenience ISC to do what other tracks have done?
Like reconfig the track?

My thoughts are, if the cars are too fast for those two tracks,
then do something about the tracks... because they are okay at all the others.
Quit shifting all the burden on the car owners.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dan

No matter how much you push the envelope,
it'll still be stationery

#16

"Fish" <godwin.dave8 (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

On Jul 22, 5:23 pm, Tim Shelton <noemail1... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

The case for keeping car speeds down below 200 MPH at NASCAR tracks
does not cut it. Indy cars exceed 200 MPH on tracks they run and
there does not seem to be the same level of concern for that. Indy
cars have a greater capability of going airborne over that of a NASCAR
COT. Dump that stupid restrictor plate and let these guys run, let
the engineers buid the car to run..

indy cars have a hell of a lot more downforce on their cars than cup
cars do,

And a much lower COG

and as such, corner better, handle better, and stay on the
ground better the fast they go. it is because of their ability to
handle more nimbly that the tires probably wear better (i say
probably, as i'll admit i don't follow indy very closely unless my
countryman paul tracy is running)

that all said ............... when the open wheelers touch (which almost
inevitably ends up being wheel to wheel) - they are much more likely lift
and disrupt the normal aero (which as you said, is much higher down_force at
speed)

#17

In article <rod.gramlich (AT) ualberta (DOT) ca> wrote:

Quote:

indy cars have a hell of a lot more downforce on their cars than cup
cars do,

that all said ............... when the open wheelers touch (which almost
inevitably ends up being wheel to wheel) - they are much more likely lift
and disrupt the normal aero (which as you said, is much higher down_force at
speed)

And what happens to all that downforce, when the car is upside down?

Ground Control to Major Tom...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dan

No matter how much you push the envelope,
it'll still be stationery

#18

Quote:

cars have a greater capability of going airborne over that of a NASCAR
COT. Dump that stupid restrictor plate and let these guys run, let
the engineers buid the car to run..

You need to take some trolling lessons from RickyBobby.

LOL. I couldn't think of the appropriate retort, so I'm glad you
stepped in. What a clueless question from the OP.

N.

#19

"Fish" <godwin.dave8 (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

On Jul 22, 6:19 pm, Tim Shelton <noemail1... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:54:40 -0700 (PDT), Fish

godwin.da... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:
On Jul 22, 5:23 pm, Tim Shelton <noemail1... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:
The case for keeping car speeds down below 200 MPH at NASCAR tracks
does not cut it. Indy cars exceed 200 MPH on tracks they run and
there does not seem to be the same level of concern for that. Indy
cars have a greater capability of going airborne over that of a NASCAR
COT. Dump that stupid restrictor plate and let these guys run, let
the engineers buid the car to run..

indy cars have a hell of a lot more downforce on their cars than cup
cars do, and as such, corner better, handle better, and stay on the
ground better the fast they go. it is because of their ability to
handle more nimbly that the tires probably wear better (i say
probably, as i'll admit i don't follow indy very closely unless my
countryman paul tracy is running)

And the rulling body of NASCAR could allow engineers to build COT cars
with better down force, better aero packages, better suspensions. BUT
NASCAR DOES NOT ALLOW THAT.

NASCAR shoud back off many of their rules and let the teams build
these cars and from that, maybe Goodyear can step up to the plate and
provide a better tire, though that may be a stretch. NASCAR wants to
regulate every part on a car and that is just the wrong direction to
go with racing.

the problem is that by the very nature of stock cars, is that you will
never achieve downforce levels close to an open wheel car, there isn't
room on a stock car for winglets, other than the front splitter and
rear wing currently on there, but nascar could allow teams to work on
the front fenders and such as they did the old car to achieve a little
more downforce, but nothing significant. rumour has it nascar's
insurance also won't allow teams to travel faster than 200 mph, which
is why that has long been the magic number restrictor plates limit the
cars at.

---------------------

hehe, no room for winglets. Have you ever seen the aero packages they run on
German "Stock Cars"?

http://fourtitude.com/news/uploads/Motorsport_News/new_dtm.jpg

#20

"Chuck Steak" <Chuck_Steak (AT) nospam (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:

In article <rod.gramlich (AT) ualberta (DOT) ca> wrote:

indy cars have a hell of a lot more downforce on their cars than cup
cars do,

that all said ............... when the open wheelers touch (which almost
inevitably ends up being wheel to wheel) - they are much more likely lift
and disrupt the normal aero (which as you said, is much higher down_force
at
speed)

And what happens to all that downforce, when the car is upside down?

Ground Control to Major Tom...

yes, ................... buuuuuuuuutttttt,............. that was my point.

Major Tom: Over