Re: NASCAR Speeds

#21

"Nancy2" <nancy-dooley (AT) uiowa (DOT) edu> wrote

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.

It's better than the politics/guns/race threads. Post More Dumb Questions I
say, as long as they are NASCAR related.

Chad

#22

On Jul 23, 1:15*pm, "Chad" <cbs... (AT) safemail (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

"Fish" <godwin.da... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in message

news:65356cfa-bf3f-4367-8831-b42a985ea8da (AT) t13g2000yqt (DOT) googlegroups.com...
On Jul 22, 6:19 pm, Tim Shelton <noemail1... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

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 runon
German "Stock Cars"?

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

that looks more like a sports car series or lemans GT series cars...

#23

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

On Jul 23, 1:15 pm, "Chad" <cbs... (AT) safemail (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

"Fish" <godwin.da... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in message

news:65356cfa-bf3f-4367-8831-b42a985ea8da (AT) t13g2000yqt (DOT) googlegroups.com...
On Jul 22, 6:19 pm, Tim Shelton <noemail1... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

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

that looks more like a sports car series or lemans GT series cars...

-------

It's DTM. German Touring Car Championship. Only seen a handful of races
myself but it looks pretty good. They do a fair bit of rubbin and knock that
stuff off the side sometimes.

#24

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

<snip>

Quote:

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

From your keyboard, to...

--
Tom in Bristol

#25

In article Tim Shelton <noemail1543 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

NASCAR has achieved the level of respect that WWE and Roller Derby
have.

the truth is, the "old" NASCAR that people keep thinking was so
great, was actually a little known activity.
A hick sport.

Let's not equate good old days, to good racing.
Because often, it wasn't.
The present day NASCAR has had as close racing as it has ever had.

As for respect, it's trendy and cute to compare it to
Roller Derby and Rasslin', and plenty like to jump on that
band wagon, but again, NASCAR has a lot more respect now
than it did when your king was a prince....

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

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

#26

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..

The restrictor plate needs to be removed for saftey purposes so the
drivers can get seperation with the accerator. NASCAR can slow the
cars down with body and frame if they wanted to, but for some reason
they are stuck on the plate.

#27

Chuck_Steak (AT) nospam (DOT) com (Chuck Steak) wrote in
news:YP7am.762$646.173 (AT) nwrddc01 (DOT) gnilink.net:

Quote:

Let's not equate good old days, to good racing.
Because often, it wasn't.
The present day NASCAR has had as close racing as it has ever had.

I dunno if that's strictly so. Certainly in the sense you're
thinking, comparing now to the 60s or 70s it is, but I think
there was a period in the late 80s and early 90s, when there
was a "sweet spot" in the development of the sport - when cars
had enough downforce to be fast, without aero dominating
performance like it does now; when there were 10 or 12 twelve
owners fielding competitive cars, rather than 5 or 6; when
the rules allowed enough variation that different teams were
strong at different types of tracks - that back then the racing
was closer than it is now. Closer in the sense of having many
competitive cars at the front of the field, and the best of
them trading the lead back & forth; rather than closer in the
sense of "top 10 cars finished within 0.5 seconds" (but in the
same order they'd run the last 50 laps).

John

#28

In article John McCoy <igopogo (AT) ix (DOT) netcom.com> wrote:

Quote:

Chuck_Steak (AT) nospam (DOT) com (Chuck Steak) wrote in
news:YP7am.762$646.173 (AT) nwrddc01 (DOT) gnilink.net:

Let's not equate good old days, to good racing.
Because often, it wasn't.
The present day NASCAR has had as close racing as it has ever had.

I dunno if that's strictly so. Certainly in the sense you're
thinking, comparing now to the 60s or 70s it is, but I think
there was a period in the late 80s and early 90s,

John

You always make good points... but I guess a lot has to do with
how we want to define 'good old days'.
When you are older than NASCAR,
the early 90's don't seem like "the old days"!!!!!!

btw, did my email get to you, or did I screw it up?

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

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

#29

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

Quote:

I will just go ahead and change my profile and alter the .exe file of
the newsreader and it really won't matter, you will have another alias
to deal with.

Class act....

#30

"Joey Tribiani" <Joey (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:

"Tim Shelton" <noemail1543 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:qnsh65119ms7pbjrtbkooonr7e5m9fub2h (AT) ccr (DOT) org...

I will just go ahead and change my profile and alter the .exe file of
the newsreader and it really won't matter, you will have another alias
to deal with.

Class act....

Not to mention, a rather foolish one. He's going to alter the .exe of his
newsreader... He can change is profile all he wants, the character of his
posts will still be just as clear. It takes him more effort to create a new
profile than it does for me to continue to ignore him.

--

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