Bingo. And the winner is jsharp. You hit the nail on the head!
NASCAR and Japanese brands
- Thread starter GT Mike
- Start date
- Status
It is nice to see someone with a grasp of reality post on this topic.
The only technology in Nascar is advertising technology. Toyota will do fine regardless if they are fast or not. The ONLY reason Nascar is letting Toyota in the game is because toyota will make Nascar richer than it already is.
Toyota would have fewer recalls if they adopted the GM method of "customer service." Just don't bother. Compare the number of sludged Toyotas to the number of GM vehicles built with known to be bad intake manifolds and gaskets. Then notice that Toyota recalled their problem vehicles while GM did nothing for a decade.
That just ain't true. What about them air brakes on the roof that keep'em from flippin' when they get turned around? Or them sippy bottles with straws that pass through the helmets?
Like Daimler?
I'd like for Nascar to return to it's roots, too.
I don't care anything about the tracks in Chicago, Michigan, Las Vegas, California, Kansas, or the ones being built in the Pacific NW, NYC, or Loudon, NH, Deleware, etc.
Brink back Rockingham, two races at Darlington, and North Wilkesboro.
I don't care anything about the tracks in Chicago, Michigan, Las Vegas, California, Kansas, or the ones being built in the Pacific NW, NYC, or Loudon, NH, Deleware, etc.
Brink back Rockingham, two races at Darlington, and North Wilkesboro.
For what its worth, the Ford Mustang's optional V-6 is a 4.0 liter overhead cam design, pretty old, used in the Ranger and the Explorer for many years. Known for being noisy and rough, but, at 4.0 liters, big enough to give the Mustang good enough power for a base engine even though it is only a 2-valve design.
Everyone that complains that the Nascar models are crude needs to go look at a current one closely some time. They're nothing like they were in years past. Yes, they have pushrods and live axles. But every part is purpose build to use in a racing car that competes on the tracks where they run. And even with "ancient engine technology" and a single small for the engine displacement carb they manage to make over 2hp per cu. on pump gas and could run 220+ mph at longer tracks if they were unrestricted.
If anything, they're a model of how fast you can go with so little freedom if you just develop it enough. The cars are durable too. Try banging any other form of pavement racing car around a place like Bristol for 500 laps and see how well it holds up.
The drivers get the short shrift too. Watch the "Tradin' Paint" replay the next time it's on Speed Channel. Jeff Gordon was running fast enough in Montoyas F1 car in about 15 minutes to qualify for the F1 race at Indy the previous year. In a car he'd never sat in before, with all sorts of things he'd never seen before.
Anyone who thinks the top 5 or so drivers in Nascar couldn't be competitive in a short time in about any kind of car they put them in just isn't paying attention IMO.
If anything, they're a model of how fast you can go with so little freedom if you just develop it enough. The cars are durable too. Try banging any other form of pavement racing car around a place like Bristol for 500 laps and see how well it holds up.
The drivers get the short shrift too. Watch the "Tradin' Paint" replay the next time it's on Speed Channel. Jeff Gordon was running fast enough in Montoyas F1 car in about 15 minutes to qualify for the F1 race at Indy the previous year. In a car he'd never sat in before, with all sorts of things he'd never seen before.
Anyone who thinks the top 5 or so drivers in Nascar couldn't be competitive in a short time in about any kind of car they put them in just isn't paying attention IMO.
Meh...
I am not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if more toyotas were made in here in the US than chevy. Regardless they certainly employee enough Americans. I don't see why Nascar has to be so called "american". But don't listen to me, I don't even watch or follow NASCAR.
What I really want to know is why we don't get any WRC races in the states, and why in the world did Speed channel stop showing WRC. The rest of the world gets to enjoy it. WRC is certainly more entertaining to me.
I am not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if more toyotas were made in here in the US than chevy. Regardless they certainly employee enough Americans. I don't see why Nascar has to be so called "american". But don't listen to me, I don't even watch or follow NASCAR.
What I really want to know is why we don't get any WRC races in the states, and why in the world did Speed channel stop showing WRC. The rest of the world gets to enjoy it. WRC is certainly more entertaining to me.
The 3.0 liter V6 Vulcan engine that Ford puts in the Ranger pickup is also a pushrod engine.
Drifting was not invented by the Japanese. I remember drifting on snow-covered streets with friends of mine in Minneapolis back in the late 50's.
I'm in favor of Toyota entering the NASCAR Nextel Cup series. The more competition the better.
Drifting was not invented by the Japanese. I remember drifting on snow-covered streets with friends of mine in Minneapolis back in the late 50's.
I'm in favor of Toyota entering the NASCAR Nextel Cup series. The more competition the better.
Compared to current F1 tech, NASCAR has to go through a few decades of evolution to get up to 'crude'.
Yeah, because those 3,200 miles at Le Mans are just a walk in the park.
'Qualifying' in F1 doesn't mean squat if you're P22. He also got the track to himself, which you don't get the pleasure of in real life F1Q. And 'last years' Indy had a whopping six cars due to the tire fiasco.
The average F1 pilot has to retire by his early 30's because his reflexes just can't keep up anymore. Half the NASCAR drivers don't even get going until then.
Most NASCAR drivers couldn't even cut it as F1 Friday test drivers.
NASCAR doesn't even run in the rain. What a bunch of Girl Scouts.
[ July 28, 2006, 12:07 PM: Message edited by: BlueWorld ]
BlueWorld - You may have missed my points. tmorris didn't. It wasn't that Nascar had better drivers or cars, it's that they're different for good reason. They run different tracks and the driver skill set required is also different. People always point to the same things while ignoring the obvious others -
The F1 cars run on 15" treaded tires. So much for state of the art tire technology. We saw a bit of that in that in last years USGP and I was unimpressed.
Close racing in F1.
The majority of the passing that happens only happens because one car is in the pit lane.
F1 cars are really fragile. Just a touch and it's quite possible they're done of the day. Endurance racing cars are tough. But look at the how the lower class GT cars are built. They aren't exactly models of high technology either. Plus you don't get 15 minutes to fix anything at a Nascar race. That works in endurance racing because all your other competitors have also had to spend 15 minutes fixing something on the same day so things even out.
If quick reflexes are the only thing that says you're a good driver then of course the F1 guys are on top. But there's obviously more to it than that or any of those guys would be able to drop into any other form of racing after retiring from F1 and dominate it. Yet we don't see that happen. Put Mikey in a winged sprint car and Steve Kinser in another on a dirt 1/2 mile and I know where I'll put my money. And I'm pretty sure Gordon, Stewart and maybe one or two others in Nascar could easily "cut it as as an F1 test driver" without problems. Montoya will be a good yardstick next year. My bet his "superior skill" learned in F1 won't propel him right to the front.
As far as racing in the rain, I've done it on multiple occasions. On a road course, on a motorcycle. The only difference between it and racing in the dry is that you go slower and get wet.
The F1 cars run on 15" treaded tires. So much for state of the art tire technology. We saw a bit of that in that in last years USGP and I was unimpressed.
Close racing in F1.
F1 cars are really fragile. Just a touch and it's quite possible they're done of the day. Endurance racing cars are tough. But look at the how the lower class GT cars are built. They aren't exactly models of high technology either. Plus you don't get 15 minutes to fix anything at a Nascar race. That works in endurance racing because all your other competitors have also had to spend 15 minutes fixing something on the same day so things even out.
If quick reflexes are the only thing that says you're a good driver then of course the F1 guys are on top. But there's obviously more to it than that or any of those guys would be able to drop into any other form of racing after retiring from F1 and dominate it. Yet we don't see that happen. Put Mikey in a winged sprint car and Steve Kinser in another on a dirt 1/2 mile and I know where I'll put my money. And I'm pretty sure Gordon, Stewart and maybe one or two others in Nascar could easily "cut it as as an F1 test driver" without problems. Montoya will be a good yardstick next year. My bet his "superior skill" learned in F1 won't propel him right to the front.
As far as racing in the rain, I've done it on multiple occasions. On a road course, on a motorcycle. The only difference between it and racing in the dry is that you go slower and get wet.
Have you seen the "tread" on a F1 tire? IIRC, it consists of 2-3 grooves running around the tire, all aout 1/2" wide. I thinkit's done sole to slow the cars down as they started getting too fast again a few years back. Rain tires might have real tread.
As I said on the other page the Japanese did not invent drifting but they did bring it to the level that it is today.
Vulcan engine is a pushrod, OHV. I forgot about that one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Vulcan
F1 > Nascar, but Nascar has way more crashes which is cool.
As I said on the other page the Japanese did not invent drifting but they did bring it to the level that it is today.
Vulcan engine is a pushrod, OHV. I forgot about that one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Vulcan
F1 > Nascar, but Nascar has way more crashes which is cool.
The "tread" on the dry tires is there to limit mechanical grip and slow the cars. There are a lot of ways to do this but that was the way they chose. The rains do have "real" tread.
What would that be? I guess I missed the irony. Unless it's the irony of being forced to work with limited tire choices like every other form of racing, all that don't claim to be the most advanced.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked