Isn't the Banner Pontiac a tube frame car as well?
Isn't the Banner Pontiac a tube frame car as well?
Vinz Clortho wrote: Shock R&D is much higher in the big league than most people could dream.
And its gotten even more intensive now that they're using bump stops on the front shocks over the coil bind stuff they used to do.
That GXPr may look stock, but there is nothing in/on the car that is stock. Tube frame chassis, carbon fiber body,engine set so far back the driver has to find room. It sure is pretty though.
JetMech wrote:plance1 wrote: You guys still watch Nascar???????I gave up on it about the time Dale Sr. was killed. It just makes me sick now--it's morphed into a soap opera for men. The things I say when SPEED airs NASCAR are not repeatable in this venue...
I hear ya. I gave up on a few years prior, with the exception of sometimes watching the Daytona 500. Just got to be too boring, cars that have decals for headlights, cars that are all the same (even more true now!), no innovation or uniqueness
NASCAR is NASCAR. As long as it makes money it will remain the way it is. Think of racing like ice cream. If you don't like vanilla try some rainbow sherbert? No reason to hate on the vanilla lover because he still eats it.
The good thing is that there are tons of other race series out there to watch and enjoy. Ever since I've started doing track days I'm just not that interested in "watching" racing anymore.
I loves me some good vanilla ice cream
I have NEVER posted to correct spelling. I am going to now, because likely the poster intended to spell it that way, and it's a pet peeve.
It's called SHERBET.
Okay, for the live axle vs IRS debate:
Tell me 10 cars you can buy brand new in the U.S. today that handle better than an S197-chassis Mustang GT.
For the sake of argument, let's discount anything that costs more than double what the Mustang does, that shouldn't be too limiting to your list, being that every other car on the market is IRS.
ReverendDexter wrote: Okay, for the live axle vs IRS debate: Tell me 10 cars you can buy brand new in the U.S. today that handle better than an S197-chassis Mustang GT. For the sake of argument, let's discount anything that costs more than double what the Mustang does, that shouldn't be too limiting to your list, being that every other car on the market is IRS.
I still want to know how NASCAR would transform into a better series if they went to IRS. I just don't see it.
I think, as of right now, they should get rid of the restrictor plate when it comes to the big tracks. Having the field that close at those types of speeds is asking for trouble, I.E. last Sunday.
As we are on the topic of changing things up, let them use a STOCK car. I want to see a REAL Camry, REAL Fusion, REAL Chevy out there, in all its Front Wheel Drive glory. If they are gonna body some fwd, 6 cylinder turd buckets, let them run turd buckets. If they want a traditional RWD, V8 hot rod (cough cough Camaro, Mustang, Challenger, Lexus of somesort cough) then use that formula...
In the end it all boils down to what YOU like. If you like NASCAR great, if you like SCCA great. If you don't just quit your complaining about what other people like. If you don't like it don't watch. Nascar has evolved as has most other series. Just because you don't like the way it has developed does not mean that it is wrong, just different.
Go watch or partisipate in what you do like and leave the others to do as they like. It won't hurt you.
I like all kinds of racing as long as it includes an engine. I think I like NASCAR because of so many cars that there is racing going on all around the track. F1,to me is the most boring of all. Indycar next.
NASCAR really needs to do something about restrictor racing. Maybe create more drag on the cars. Maybe they should use the "busstop" idea. Two races and two really serious crashes, not good.
Xceler8x wrote: NASCAR is NASCAR. As long as it makes money it will remain the way it is. Think of racing like ice cream. If you don't like vanilla try some rainbow sherbert? No reason to hate on the vanilla lover because he still eats it. The good thing is that there are tons of other race series out there to watch and enjoy. Ever since I've started doing track days I'm just not that interested in "watching" racing anymore.
Really? You can watch racing on TV? Where? I caught one, count them one ALMS race on network TV and a couple of F1 races, thats it. The Pink Elephant in the room that no one is talking about is that NASCAR has all but killed off the ability for those other series to get TV time.
fiat22turbo wrote: The Pink Elephant in the room that no one is talking about is that NASCAR has all but killed off the ability for those other series to get TV time.
Because there is a market for NASCAR TV time. If there were more of a market for F1 (or other series for that matter), there would be more television coverage.
One of the reason I like racing is watching the technological development of it all. That is what makes F1 so amazing.
Carbon brakes... Those are AMAZING in the way those cars stop. Now you say no street application. Well you are wrong. As a result of carbon-carbon brake development in F1 prototype sports cars you see that coming in high dollar street sports cars. Porsche GT3 and Ferrari's now have optional ceramic brakes. These are a derviateive of carbon-carbon technolgy.
Sequetial transmissions also come from racing. They have been used for years in F1 and rally and are now coming into more widespread use in road cars.
Active suspensions were first tested in F1 and then banned. However this concept has been worked on for road cars too.
Also Porsche is not making street cars with center locks. Their advantage is arguable, but there is a simple reasont usem on race cars. Faster tire changes.
See part of racing is developing technology to make the cars faster. Some times is directly translates to road cars and other times not.
Still to me racing is about watching amazing cars, driven by amazing drivers doing amazing things. If not we could all just race lawnmowers. He racing is racing right.
Now you want to talk about cazy racing. Look up European truck racing on You Tube. That is some crazy stuff there. It is in reality insane to see big rig racing like that. Of course the point of that series is to be over the top and like WTF??? One cool aspect of that series is the water cooled brakes. Yep they carry water to spray on to the brakes to cool them. That is the steam you see.
So back to NAStyCar. The problem is that back in the late 60's and early 70's these were STOCK CARS. This meant they were mostly stock, but the modded. They ran big pushrod V8's with live acxles and carbs since that is what the street cars ran. Somewhere along the way they ditch the stock aspect and just stayed with 70's tech by keeping pushrod V8's, Carbs, Live axles and 3500lbs weights.
Ok if you dont want to tie the car directly to production cars fine, but why not allow some basic forms technolgy.
Air jacks are common place. Center locks on aluminum wheels are commong place. Heck refuling rigs vs a giant can are common place. This old stuff is just stupid.
The formula for cup cars needs to be updated.
Engines. V8 to 4.0L max - Any valve arrangement, Any cam arrangement. If you want to rev limit them to 8000 rpm find. This will keep costs down.
Now why 4.0L reduces power and you could try to tie to stock blocks to may be drive development of road car 4.0L V8's as way to balance performance vs efficency.
Engine control - EFI or direct injection
Suspension - double wish bones allowed front & rear, Live axle too if you want it.
Brakes - keep them as steel fine since steel = longer braking distances and may be better racing
Wheels = Pick a diameter maybe 18" and fixed width. Material open.
Aero = Force the aero to match the production body. If it sucks.. well too bad. Like the Grand AM car use front splitters & wings to balance.
Drive layout = Must be the same as production car. ie now making RWD from a FWD car.
Then ditch restrictor plates entirely. If you need performance adjustments do it with rev limits and bell mouth inlet restrictors. NASCAR has the skiils as they can just look at their Grand Am series. At least those cars are not stuck in the 70's.
tuna55 wrote: It's called SHERBET.
Go eat some bratwurst and beer flavored ice cream then YOU SPELLING NAZI! 
fiat22turbo wrote: Really? You can watch racing on TV? Where? I caught one, count them one ALMS race on network TV and a couple of F1 races, thats it. The Pink Elephant in the room that no one is talking about is that NASCAR has all but killed off the ability for those other series to get TV time.
That is very frustrating. I know Speedvision went all NASCAR on us and I hated that. No dig on NASCAR but like being at the strip club....having some variety in your entertainment is good. Check out the HDTheater thread if you want some good car related TV tips.
Really? You can watch racing on TV? Where? I caught one, count them one ALMS race on network TV and a couple of F1 races, thats it. The Pink Elephant in the room that no one is talking about is that NASCAR has all but killed off the ability for those other series to get TV time.
Without the right cable or satellite package, there's not much besides NASCAR on network tv, and even networks don't broadcast every race.
If you follow the broadcast schedules, one can find (on average) four F1 races on Fox, two or three ALMS races on either CBS or NBC, and the perennial Indy 500 on ABC. Unfortunately, that's about it.
oldsaw wrote:Really? You can watch racing on TV? Where? I caught one, count them one ALMS race on network TV and a couple of F1 races, thats it. The Pink Elephant in the room that no one is talking about is that NASCAR has all but killed off the ability for those other series to get TV time.Without the right cable or satellite package, there's not much besides NASCAR on network tv, and even networks don't broadcast every race. If you follow the broadcast schedules, one can find (on average) four F1 races on Fox, two or three ALMS races on either CBS or NBC, and the perennial Indy 500 on ABC. Unfortunately, that's about it.
ya, the funny thing is with the ALMS races, they are tape-delayed with an hour taken off, and the commentators dont even know the drivers. I remember watching the US Grand Prix one year on ABC and that Bob Jenkins guy had no idea who was driving what... Well he doesnt really have a clue at anything...
I'm surprised nobody has yet mentioned the trouble of making an IRS work correctly on a 30 degree superspeedway banked turn. An IRS set up for good camber gain in compression on a flat track would have some issues when the downforce shifts around as much as it does on a superspeedway.
joe- sequential gear boxes came from motorcycles, not F1. And the dual clutch systems that are out bear no resemblance to an F1 box.
Also, outside of the vehicle layout and the areo, how would any of your chnages alter the racing in NASCAR? Besides making it more expensive for the most part?
Especially air jacks and center hubs- how would that make the racing better? The pit stops are still generally limited by how fast they can get the fuel in. Two cans = 12 seconds = the time it takes to change 4 tires. If they don't need that much fuel, change 2.
You are still left with a bunch of mutli colored cars going around in circles, and I'm sure you would bitch about that, still.
It's not for me, either, but I see no real reason for them to change the cars- that's not going to make it more appealing. Really- would you sit down and watch a cup race if they had air jacks and center lock hubs? Plus IRS, that you can't see, and EFI that you can't tell is there, and, and, and....
Eric
alfadriver wrote: I still want to know how NASCAR would transform into a better series if they went to IRS. I just don't see it.
Oh, I concur 100%.
Yep, so I've pretty much given up on watching racing on TV. I'll go out to the garage and queue up a bunch of Top Gear and work on the car so I can go racing on my own.
Every once in a while, I'll poke my head up and look around and see if anyone has figured out how to televise some of the races without a huge cable/satellite bill, otherwise I'm head down and trying to get back out to the track.
alfadriver wrote: joe- sequential gear boxes came from motorcycles, not F1. And the dual clutch systems that are out bear no resemblance to an F1 box. Also, outside of the vehicle layout and the areo, how would any of your chnages alter the racing in NASCAR? Besides making it more expensive for the most part? Especially air jacks and center hubs- how would that make the racing better? The pit stops are still generally limited by how fast they can get the fuel in. Two cans = 12 seconds = the time it takes to change 4 tires. If they don't need that much fuel, change 2. You are still left with a bunch of mutli colored cars going around in circles, and I'm sure you would bitch about that, still. It's not for me, either, but I see no real reason for them to change the cars- that's not going to make it more appealing. Really- would you sit down and watch a cup race if they had air jacks and center lock hubs? Plus IRS, that you can't see, and EFI that you can't tell is there, and, and, and.... Eric
I agree, the issue isn't the technology (though it is silly and reinforces the notion that they are all a bunch of red-necks going around in circles) it is the "show" mentality they've built into the racing. F1 and other series pull the same nonsense. The cars start going too fast so we have to make them slower to protect the drivers. Yeah, well the drivers could pay attention and slow down a little like their predecessors did if it got too hairy for them. Granted slowing down didn't save them all that much since so many still died from a general lack of safety.
They pimp out the show and the driver's personality's but then they stiffle the drivers and make them into PC spouting, marketing machines. I'd almost feel bad for them if they weren't making a ton of money and driving freaking race cars for a living!
The best is when the sanctioning bodies slow cars down to help another manufacturer. Yeah, well sorry you brought a knife to a nuke fight, but you lose. Go home, build a nuke and come back or try another series.
MadScientistMatt wrote: I'm surprised nobody has yet mentioned the trouble of making an IRS work correctly on a 30 degree superspeedway banked turn. An IRS set up for good camber gain in compression on a flat track would have some issues when the downforce shifts around as much as it does on a superspeedway.
As long as the road is smooth and the additional unsprung weight of the diff is not of concern to the chassis design then there are some real advantages to a live axle when it comes time to get on the power exiting a turn. You can get over 100% anti-squat out of it and only maybe 25% from IRS - not to mention that if you only turn one direction they are easy to set up with offset.
EDIT: in bold
I am about to /thread
NASCAR gave the world Bill Brodrick, a true marketing genius.
http://www.nascar.com/2007/news/features/03/28/bbrodrick.where.is/index.html
YEARS before anyone else had such a creature, NASCAR had a man there to change the hats on a driver so they could hold a Budweiser and a pack of smokes.
Tell me that isn't innovation and I will punch you in the fishin' hole.
/thread
You'll need to log in to post.
