Talledega: How many drivers will be punished for telling the truth?

RedS13Coupe wrote: How about not driving the cars on a 90* banking. You guys talk about limiting downforce, but really so much of the weight on the tires comes from driving around the inside of a ring.

That's the winner, The car Bill Elliott made up all those laps it had little down force, if you look at pics of it the spoiler it is flat, and they ran soft rear springs to make sure it stayed out of the air. When we went to Daytona in 95 they started requiring the spoiler to be at a certain angle and stiff rear springs because as they tried to get rid of drag and downforce some cars were starting to generate lift going into the corners and backing into the walls.

Sultan wrote: I love NASCAR!!! I live for it!! It is the best racing ever or ever will be!!!!

Bot?

Probably just your typical beer-goggled, slackjawed, hilljack nascar fan.

Shawn

NASCAR is the biggest load of crap trying to sell itself off as racing. The cars weight to much and look like crap. They only turn left and it is generally watched by drunk idiots. Why couldn't the U.S. have good stock car racing like the V8 Supercars series down under or DTM or BTCC? And being an engineer in training ,the damn things just seem so badly designed. I mean I love big V8s and 4 barrels but this is supposed to be a top flight series. And don't get me started on the amazingly advanced suspension under the car (live axle for the win). Maybe it is time to put some technology in the things. Sure they have almost as much horsepower as an F1 car but they weight in at 3500lbs. How can you call anything that weights that much a race car? Stock car racing needs to get back to its roots. It should be about the OEMs making the fastest car and not some stupid overweight Camry/Impala/Fusion/Charger looking thing. I mean how can anyone be excited about seeing a bunch of plain ass sedans with ricer wings, driven by WWE wannabes, turning left. If I really want to watch a bunch of brightly colored objects go around in circles, I would just flush a bunch of skittles down the toilet. It would be about the same result and would waste a lot less of my time. Don't think I hate circle track. I love watch cars fly around the dirt tracks. That is what NASCAR should be not this bloated corporate B.S. And don't even get me started on the Nationwide or whatever the hell it is called now series COT. That may be the biggest pile of crap ever to be passed off as a race car.

Anyway this is the end of my rant.

96DXCivic wrote: If I really want to watch a bunch of brightly colored objects go around in circles, I would just flush a bunch of skittles down the toilet. It would be about the same result and would waste a lot less of my time.

More entertaining, too!

Edited for length

96DXCivic wrote: I hate nascar .... Nobody should like things I don't like ... Anyway this is the end of my rant.

Is someone tying you to a chair forcing you to watch it? I suppose you also don't like formula 1 because cars are suposed to have fenders. Have you ever looked at one to see how poorly designed they are or are you just assuming because it isn't just like every other series it must be bad. Even Formula 1 is falling behind street car tech as they try and figure out how to control cost. I'd Love to get your opinon on drag racing, they don't turn at all.

Toyman01 wrote:

tuna55 wrote:

Toyman01 wrote:

tuna55 wrote: I don't think they attract more fans, just different, dumber, sitcom type fans that also watch WWE and monster trucks and American Idol. Idiots, in other words. They do this on purpose, no doubt, and it, as I said, makes me mad. And Wally, what race series is like that?

I resent that tuna, I enjoy watching monster trucks with my boys. That's how I get my wanton destruction fix every now and again. It comes from my redneck side. Nascar on the other hand puts me to sleep.

No offense intended, I simply meant that Monster Trucks, like NASCAR nowadays, is clearly intended for spectators and entertainment rather than racing or competition. Which monster truck is leading the points this year? Exactly. Read this, this is where NASCAR is heading, the IHRA just leap-frogged over them. Hopefully, they'll Obama style pull everyone so hard it'll be resented and never tried again. You guys may not care about drag racing, but trust me, the following articles are worth your time. http://www.competitionplus.com/index.php/drag-racing/news/12241-ihra-announces-major-changes-to-format http://www.competitionplus.com/index.php/drag-racing/editorials/12289-bobby-bennett-friday-wasnt-good-for-the-ihra http://www.competitionplus.com/index.php/drag-racing/feature-stories/12286-the-ihra-community-weighs-in-on-the-new-format

Not offended in the least. I know Monster Jam isn't a motorsport. I watch it to see them break crap and I am never disappointed. The following is a quote from the above article. It will answer all your questions about IHRA and NASCAR. "We are making wholesale changes that will make the product both more entertaining and financially responsible at the same time" The operative word is "product" NASCAR, IHRA and Monster Jam isn't about the racing. The promoters couldn't care less about the racing. It is all about having a sellable product. Give the customer what they want in a short period of time for the right price. The racing is secondary.

+10000

And let's remember, the love of the profit and the 'product' is what got Mickey Thompson and his wife killed, RIP.

96DXCivic wrote: NASCAR is the biggest load of crap trying to sell itself off as racing. The cars weight to much and look like crap. They only turn left and it is generally watched by drunk idiots. Why couldn't the U.S. have good stock car racing like the V8 Supercars series down under or DTM or BTCC? And being an engineer in training ,the damn things just seem so badly designed. I mean I love big V8s and 4 barrels but this is supposed to be a top flight series. And don't get me started on the amazingly advanced suspension under the car (live axle for the win). Maybe it is time to put some technology in the things. Sure they have almost as much horsepower as an F1 car but they weight in at 3500lbs. How can you call anything that weights that much a race car? Stock car racing needs to get back to its roots. It should be about the OEMs making the fastest car and not some stupid overweight Camry/Impala/Fusion/Charger looking thing. I mean how can anyone be excited about seeing a bunch of plain ass sedans with ricer wings, driven by WWE wannabes, turning left. If I really want to watch a bunch of brightly colored objects go around in circles, I would just flush a bunch of skittles down the toilet. It would be about the same result and would waste a lot less of my time. Don't think I hate circle track. I love watch cars fly around the dirt tracks. That is what NASCAR should be not this bloated corporate B.S. And don't even get me started on the Nationwide or whatever the hell it is called now series COT. That may be the biggest pile of crap ever to be passed off as a race car. Anyway this is the end of my rant.

As an actual automotive engineer, you need to pay more attention in class. You are missing a LOT.

Seriously. Pay attention.

You'll appreciate these cars for what they are- knowing some of what tech IS in them, they are as high tech as an F1 car in many repsects. Where they are not is live data acquisition, and control systems. But all other aspects, within the windows as defined by the rules- there's a lot more tech than all of you give them credit for.

We all pretend that F1 is so uuber high tech, but if you saw the report from the USGP group, you would have seen the huge number of boxes where the rules clearly define what is and isn't allowed in that area- there's very little room for real creativity in F1. Which is one reason it IS so expensive. A few more steps, and it will be like IRL/NASCAR- a spec series.

Relative to NASCAR- DTM, BTCC, and the Supercars are way overrated. They all share the same tech relative to the rules. The difference between DTM and NASCAR is that the Cup rules mean that they don't have to spend countless hours in the wind tunnel finding that last 2%. That's not tech, that's just development and money. Do you like the DTM cars since they stay flat going on road courses? I don't- I love watching the cup cars move around on the suspension as they navigate the Glen.

I'm not a NASCAR fan by any means, but I do appreciate the engineering in them, and I also appreciate the actual skill it takes to drive those cars. Having a large car, with high power, low downforce, and small tires takes a LOT of skill to drive fast. It's not exciting skill, no, but very skillful.

Eric

alfadriver wrote:

96DXCivic wrote: NASCAR is the biggest load of crap trying to sell itself off as racing. The cars weight to much and look like crap. They only turn left and it is generally watched by drunk idiots. Why couldn't the U.S. have good stock car racing like the V8 Supercars series down under or DTM or BTCC? And being an engineer in training ,the damn things just seem so badly designed. I mean I love big V8s and 4 barrels but this is supposed to be a top flight series. And don't get me started on the amazingly advanced suspension under the car (live axle for the win). Maybe it is time to put some technology in the things. Sure they have almost as much horsepower as an F1 car but they weight in at 3500lbs. How can you call anything that weights that much a race car? Stock car racing needs to get back to its roots. It should be about the OEMs making the fastest car and not some stupid overweight Camry/Impala/Fusion/Charger looking thing. I mean how can anyone be excited about seeing a bunch of plain ass sedans with ricer wings, driven by WWE wannabes, turning left. If I really want to watch a bunch of brightly colored objects go around in circles, I would just flush a bunch of skittles down the toilet. It would be about the same result and would waste a lot less of my time. Don't think I hate circle track. I love watch cars fly around the dirt tracks. That is what NASCAR should be not this bloated corporate B.S. And don't even get me started on the Nationwide or whatever the hell it is called now series COT. That may be the biggest pile of crap ever to be passed off as a race car. Anyway this is the end of my rant.

As an actual automotive engineer, you need to pay more attention in class. You are missing a LOT. Seriously. Pay attention. You'll appreciate these cars for what they are- knowing some of what tech IS in them, they are as high tech as an F1 car in many repsects. Where they are not is live data acquisition, and control systems. But all other aspects, within the windows as defined by the rules- there's a lot more tech than all of you give them credit for. We all pretend that F1 is so uuber high tech, but if you saw the report from the USGP group, you would have seen the huge number of boxes where the rules clearly define what is and isn't allowed in that area- there's very little room for real creativity in F1. Which is one reason it IS so expensive. A few more steps, and it will be like IRL/NASCAR- a spec series. Relative to NASCAR- DTM, BTCC, and the Supercars are way overrated. They all share the same tech relative to the rules. The difference between DTM and NASCAR is that the Cup rules mean that they don't have to spend countless hours in the wind tunnel finding that last 2%. That's not tech, that's just development and money. Do you like the DTM cars since they stay flat going on road courses? I don't- I love watching the cup cars move around on the suspension as they navigate the Glen. I'm not a NASCAR fan by any means, but I do appreciate the engineering in them, and I also appreciate the actual skill it takes to drive those cars. Having a large car, with high power, low downforce, and small tires takes a LOT of skill to drive fast. It's not exciting skill, no, but very skillful. Eric

+1

I don't sit and watch too many NASCAR races myself, but I can definitely appreciate what the drivers do and what they do it with.

I also think it's a bit closed minded to generalize what a NASCAR fan is. Talking down about NASCAR fans as beer guzzling, partying, Marlboro smoking bafoons is ridiculous. That describes the attendees and most of the participants (myself included!) of just about every race event I've ever been to...including three GRM Challenges! :-)

I'm not a trained engineer, but I like to think of myself as being able to appreciate things which are properly engineered. I am also no NA$CAR fan, mostly due to the whole 'WWF' aspect. But I've driven Cup cars twice in schools so I have up close and personal experience with them.

Once you take the carbed V8 out, the rest of it is pretty much state of the art. Beautifully engineered tube frames and roll cages, etc. The old live axle is actually a pretty good choice; simple and easily tuned. The weight comes from the massive and well engineered cage which allows them to fly at 200 MPH and have the driver walk away.

I love F1 cars, the sound and the sights never cease to thrill me. But compare what happens to an F1 car and a Cup car in a big wad up; the F1 car sheds parts everywhere and all that's left is the driver's safety cage, a marvel of engineering that has shown its worth again and again. But if you have the same type wad up in NA$CAR, you rarely see the F1 kind of mechanical carnage.

I joke about the 'Billy Bob' aspect of NA$CAR all the time but I have solid respect for the people who do the engineering and car building. I put them on the same level as the folks who build the top rank WRC rally cars.

One of the reasons I dislike NASCAR is the ass-backward tech optimization.

There are some really great engineers working in NASCAR, but they are spending all their time working on making the best typwriter in the world. Guess what we ditched typewritters long ago.

Carbs? Nobody runs carbs anymore so why does a top flight series mandate them. Let guys run EFI. Well come to the 1990's. Live axles? Come on. Lets get to the 80's run independant suspensions.

Also 3500lbs? Why? I am certain they can build just as safe a car at 2500lbs? 5 lug hubs and a dude running around iwth a floor jack? Heck go to center locks and air jacks. How many pit guys get injured carrying that damn jack around? You may not see it in a race, but it does happen practice.

I could go on.... and on...

NASCAR = Skittles in toilet ... I love it. HA.

Slide a cup car backwards into a wall at 100mph and slide any other race car into the same wall at the same speed. Which car will finish the race? More often then not the cup car will.

joepaluch wrote: One of the reasons I dislike NASCAR is the ass-backward tech optimization. There are some really great engineers working in NASCAR, but they are spending all their time working on making the best typwriter in the world. Guess what we ditched typewritters long ago. Carbs? Nobody runs carbs anymore so why does a top flight series mandate them. Let guys run EFI. Well come to the 1990's. Live axles? Come on. Lets get to the 80's run independant suspensions. Also 3500lbs? Why? I am certain they can build just as safe a car at 2500lbs? 5 lug hubs and a dude running around iwth a floor jack? Heck go to center locks and air jacks. How many pit guys get injured carrying that damn jack around? You may not see it in a race, but it does happen practice. I could go on.... and on... NASCAR = Skittles in toilet ... I love it. HA.

You're right. Make it easier for them. That should do it.

About the weight- remember 3500lb is on the light side for the cars that they actually represent. Fusion, Camry, whatever that GM is. They are all 3500lb cars. So that matches quite well for the "homologation" specials you all wish for.

I'm not a big carb fan either, but how is that really that much different than a spec controller? You can't be really creative either way. F1's controller is tech for the sake of tech by some measure.

The rest of the engine? They are pretty amazing- think about how much effort it takes to build a pushrod motor that spins 9500 rpm for HOURS. In terms of being relative- I can tell you for sure the metal springs in a cup car are far more applicable than the air springs in an F1 car. A cup engine can help fix a valve float issue due to spring damping properties. An air spring can't. Oh, and let's not pretend that OHC's are something new- DOHC engines were around almost 100 years ago.

Live axle vs independant? Red herring. IMHO, it's a LOT harder to make a live axle car handle well. So making a cup car turn requires a lot of creativity. Making an F1 car turn is more about downforce than suspension. Cup cars can be tuned easily during the race- changing wedge, taking spring parts out- you rarely see them adjust the aero like on F1 cars.

Jacks and 5 lug tires make it more of a team sport. I personally don't like F1 pits with 3 people/corner + all the fuel people. That mimizes the effort, IMHO. Oh, and since you brought up EFI, how many cars out there have air jacks? Zero, right? And the percentage of cars with cetner hubs? <0.001%. Again, NASCAR is more real world in that respect. I also am not a fan of the pressurized refuling rig in F1- and am glad to see it go back to the 80's w/o refulling.

So in terms of relevance, F1 is less relevant to what I do than a cup car is. We don't do wings, we don't have air springs, we don't have engines that rev past 7000 rpm, we do have 3500lb family sedans with narrow tires. We do have RWD cars with live axles that people buy in droves. And we do have RWD live axle trucks that dominate the market.

I still don't watch them, but I do pay attention.

Eric

Aren't V8 supercars V8 power'd, live axle'd, spooled diff'd, spec chassis'd cars? Sounds like a NASCAR "stock" car to me. . .

I like both cars . . . I tend to watch only one series though . . .

I wrote this because I get sick of reading this crap. If you watch NASCAR then you are labeled a white trash fool.

Sunday I watched the F1 race and then the Talladega race because I love racing period!

If NASCAR is full of fools then why is the new USF1 team in Charlotte North Carolina? It is because that is where the technology is and if NASCAR really sucks then why are the F1 drivers fighting to get rides?

Shawn you are a narrow minded ass. In reply to Trans_Maro:

High tech, low tech, doesn't matter. The people will like what they are brought up to like or what is near by. Nascar is nation wide and F1 barely has a presence. All forms of racing have rules to try to keep the compatition close. On another thread here they were discussing the new Solo rules and which cars were going to be the new hot cars in which class. There has only been one race series that had open tech. You had to have a certain wheel base. track and a min weight. Do you remember the CanAm? The team that won more races in that series didn;t use the highest tech. They went with big push rod american V8's. They lest it up to others to try new tech and lots of people did. but new tech has a very steep curve to make it workable. If you want to win races you use what is known to work and try little improvements.

I love racing! All forms. I prefer road racing. Watching the Cup cars at The Glen is great. Just remember the skill it takes to drive a car 200 mph 6" off the wall, and would you like to try that in your Miata? After all Miata is the answer to everything isn't it?

I am wasn't trying to say that NASCAR vehicles don't have huge amounts of engineering in them but rather they are backwards ass engineered. I am not trying to say that the engineers in NASCAR are bad. They have to make those things handle. I am simply saying that the vehicles are old fashioned and why waste your time working on the things. In comparing, the BTCC, DTM and V8 Supercars to NASCAR I was simply comparing the quality of the racing. And drag racing is fairly cool. Sure there is no turning but the engine technology is incredible. They sound incredible. If I had to watch them go straight for hours, I wouldn't enjoy it. It isn't that I don't like the concept of NASCAR. If they changed a couple things such as the WWF attitude, the COT (and went to real stock cars) or started racing on road coarses I would watch.

96DXCivic wrote: I am wasn't trying to say that NASCAR vehicles don't have huge amounts of engineering in them but rather they are backwards ass engineered.

Again, you need to wake up in class. You are missing at least half of what is important. They are NOT backwards. Since you are sleeping in class, you think they are.

Like I've said, there's a lot more that can transfer from a NASCAR to a real car than from F1. By a lot. In terms contols systems, there's more transferring TO F1 than the other way around, so EFI doesn't cut it.

OTOH, if F1 was supported by Boeing, McDonald Douglass, Aerobus, etc- it's probably be more useful.

Eric

Sure there are cars with live axle but seriously look at the new cars with live axles but you can't call them serious sports cars. The only reason to use a live axle comes down to cost or heritage (Mustang). Sure NASCAR vehicles have around the same weight as road cars but honestly how many cars now have live axles, carbs, pushrods or tubeframes? As far as the Spec engine controller, I never said I really loved the changes going on in F1 right now.

I'll argue in favor of Eric here.

A live axle doesn't make a car not serious in any way, nor does it reduce technology, really. A live axle is a perfectly acceptable solution for a sports car, especially on a smooth track.

Not to mention, you complain about lacking technology and then complain because they have state of the art tube frames? Sure, you are arguing about the resemblance to stock cars, but they are fairly "high tech" within the rulebook.

Ride on a sportbike with four Mikunis and tell me carbs are antiquated for performance...

Lots of cars "still" have pushrods, even though OHC and OHV technologies were within ten years of each other, or thereabouts, and I think pushrods were newer. The engine becomes lighter and more compact when in a V configuration.

Everybody has talked about the crazy RPM they are running, too, and frankly, it's not that crazy for a V8 with pushrods, Super Stock cars do that stuff all the time, and higher... what it is crazy for, is for a flat tappet camshaft! That's not crazy, that's insane. The technology in one of those cam/lifter assemblies to use a flat tappet system and go 9500+ for 600 miles is more than you'd think.

96DXCivic wrote: Sure there are cars with live axle but seriously look at the new cars with live axles but you can't call them serious sports cars. The only reason to use a live axle comes down to cost or heritage (Mustang). Sure NASCAR vehicles have around the same weight as road cars but honestly how many cars now have live axles, carbs, pushrods or tubeframes? As far as the Spec engine controller, I never said I really loved the changes going on in F1 right now.

What makes any of that low tech? Seriously, why are pushrods low tech? It's different, yes, but you can't be serious that it make the engines low reving- all Cup engines RACE at higher speeds than the S2000 redline. And they do it hours on end.

What makes tubeframes low tech? Sure, it doesn't appear to be as cool as carbon fiber, but steel is STILL the main material in making cars. And making small volumes, it's one of the most effective ways of doing it.

Carbs = spec EFI. In my eye, they are exactly the same thing. I KNOW what a modern EFI system is capable of, and rules prevent all of the cool stuff.

Live Axles- every single truck on the market or about half of ALL vehicles sold in the US. Why does it have to be sporty? You are mising the boat on Mustangs- customers swapped out the IRS to put live axles in- since drag racing with live axles is much better. So in a straight line, live axle = faster. I don't see how live axles equates to low tech. For smooth tracks (aka ovals), there's no real need for IRS.

And since when did NASCAR pretend that their cars mimic in any way sports cars? That's never, ever, ever been part of their radar. It is a sport, they do use cars, sure. So the whole idea of "serious sports car" is just being snobbish. It's NOT what they are, nor what they intend to be.

Here's what I don't get- why do we all project what we see as racing onto NASCAR, when our version of racing is already out there, but isn't nearly as popular? Don't you understand that there is a reason for that? NASCAR is popular for what it IS. Not what it isn't. It's not for me, but for more than enough Americans, it IS great.

You want stock cars going around tracks, then start watching NASCAR owned Koni Challenge. Note the number of fans, and total lack of live coverage. Or see the even cooler, higher tech DP cars, also owned by NASCAR- cars can be different, engines different, EFI, ect, ect, etc- and note that qualifying for the D-500 has more people than the 24hrs of Daytona.

tuna55 wrote: Everybody has talked about the crazy RPM they are running, too, and frankly, it's not that crazy for a V8 with pushrods, Super Stock cars do that stuff all the time, and higher... what it is crazy for, is for a flat tappet camshaft! That's not crazy, that's insane. The technology in one of those cam/lifter assemblies to use a flat tappet system and go 9500+ for 600 miles is more than you'd think.

I keep forgetting to mention this- but with the engine speeds that Cup cars regularly see- the mean piston speeds are generally higher than F1 cars. So in terms of rotating mass, bearings, and oiling, Cup engines are far more tech than F1 engines.

Which takes Pro Stock and pretty much all other drag racing motors to a completly different level....

E-

alfadriver wrote: Seriously, why are pushrods low tech? It's different, yes, but you can't be serious that it make the engines low reving- all Cup engines RACE at higher speeds than the S2000 redline. And they do it hours on end... So the whole idea of "serious sports car" is just being snobbish. It's NOT what they are, nor what they intend to be... Here's what I don't get- why do we all project what we see as racing onto NASCAR, when our version of racing is already out there, but isn't nearly as popular? Don't you understand that there is a reason for that?

[golf clap]

I don't really enjoy NASCAR - I only watch the Glen and Sears Point races - but I don't for a minute think that the cars and drivers aren't good at what they do, or that it takes no skill. Only people who have closed minds complain about pushrod engines and low tech (and, to generalize mightily, it's usually the Japanamaniacs who do it the most).

The same people who care about horsepower-per-litre outside of displacement-based racing classes.

Guys,

This thread is very entertaining, but got a BIT off topic (Grin).

I saw suggestions for running cast iron motors, low octane fuel, etc to lower the speeds and re-introduce racing at Talledega.

Any other ideas?

Rog