NASCAR Complaints

[thunderchicken]

1...there is on no level any comparison between the 2 series. 1 is bull riding and the other go kart racine albeit some very high tech go karts.

2.....the dash boards in NASCAR have actually come into the new age. All digital. Wow, go figure. There is no high tech traction controls or fuel management to deal with on a NASCAR. In the day these cars were built and raced out of peoples garages.

3.....there is nothing common place about the engines in that series. You or I will never see one just here or there. They make some very serious power with the push rod designs that us good-ole boy troglodytes like. North of 800 HP. It takes that to push them to near 190/200 MPH.

4...you try and hang one of those cans during a pit stop I dare you.

5....The 5 lug wheels are about as close as they get to being "Stock"

NASCAR "Was" a mans sport. Key word here is "Was".....It has been sissified, made political correct and is ran by a group of non-racer college kids that have no clue.

F-1 in all its high tech wonder is a snotty elitist series. Most of those drivers would not last 3 laps in a dirt sprinter. Jeff Gordan actually wheeled Juan P's F-1 car around the track with some modicum of cool.
F-1 in its hay day when those beautiful machines were hand built was a glorious series full of advancements and mechanical spender. Now, it too has been over sanctioned.

Pretty much took the words out of my mouth.

I will add that while F1 is impressive in its own right, its like comparing wine with whiskey. F1 engines still sound like a buncha pissed of bumble bees, while the NASCAR V8s still have that pure raw American muscle tone. Chatlie Daniels said it best in his song Stroker Ace... It's a down right joy to a country boy when he hears them engines moan, you gotta hang tough when it gets real rough and your out there all alone, they'll push you around they'll knock you down and they'll shove you up against the wall.....F1 not so much

 

[JettaKnight]

Yup, a 5.8L V8 versus a 1.6L V6 ... yet, if I'm not mistaken, the power output is very similar.



F1 is deceiving because it looks so smooth and sanitized.

Consider this - those cars can exert a tremendous amount of G forces on the driver.

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/...e-rises-in-g-force.vX8IhGjqmsaCoyy2uKKOi.html

 

[churchmouse]

Yup, a 5.8L V8 versus a 1.6L V6 ... yet, if I'm not mistaken, the power output is very similar.



F1 is deceiving because it looks so smooth and sanitized.

Consider this - those cars can exert a tremendous amount of G forces on the driver.

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/...e-rises-in-g-force.vX8IhGjqmsaCoyy2uKKOi.html

They do accelerate and turn like they are glued to the track. But the are also spinning them to low Mars orbit.

 

[thunderchicken]

Yup, a 5.8L V8 versus a 1.6L V6 ... yet, if I'm not mistaken, the power output is very similar.



F1 is deceiving because it looks so smooth and sanitized.

Consider this - those cars can exert a tremendous amount of G forces on the driver.

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/...e-rises-in-g-force.vX8IhGjqmsaCoyy2uKKOi.html

Let us not forget tire size and compounds plays a huge role in hugging the track. And lest we forget the weight difference between the two styles. Vehicle weight effects the G-forces exerted on the driver.

 

[JettaKnight]

Vehicle weight effects the G-forces exerted on the driver.

Well... a lighter car requires less force to accelerate faster: acceleration = force / mass

G-force is still strictly a unit of acceleration 9.8 m/s[SUP]2[/SUP].

 

[Hatin Since 87]

I think they should put more restrictor plates to use in every race. That way no one can pass or even race. The Liberals will love it. Every team gets a participation trophy and get taken out for ice cream after the race.

Arent they actually doing just that in 2019? Seems like I saw where they’re limiting the hp by using restrictor plates at more tracks. Anybody?

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Well... a lighter car requires less force to accelerate faster: acceleration = force / mass

G-force is still strictly a unit of acceleration 9.8 m/s[SUP]2[/SUP].

Nascar has an insane amount of g force on the driver also. YouTube sport science Denny Hamlin. They had him swallow a capsule to measure his temps heart rate and g force. Pretty good watch for 10 minutes. Also you said NASCAR drivers are fat. Can you name 1 fat one currently running?

 

[Trigger Time]

Barely...

Yep it's dead at a lot of nascar races. But they make their money off the broadcast and sponsors. Nascar is killing it every race they broadcast. They dont need fans to show up.
Its sad

 

[Gabriel]

If you want to see real racing, watch rally (or rally raid). This left turn crap on a track is about as lame as it gets, whether it's NASCAR or Indy Car.

 

[JettaKnight]

Nascar has an insane amount of g force on the driver also. YouTube sport science Denny Hamlin. They had him swallow a capsule to measure his temps heart rate and g force. Pretty good watch for 10 minutes.

Um, you don't need to swallow anything to get a heart rate or measure the acceleration of car... maybe NASCAR drivers are into that sort thing...

This is the NASCAR complaint thread. If you want to tell us how awesome NASCAR is, go to the other thread.

Also you said NASCAR drivers are fat. Can you name 1 fat one currently running?

Just looking at the line up - Kurt Busch, Ryan Newman, Ryan Preece, Chris Buescher...

 

[thunderchicken]

Well... a lighter car requires less force to accelerate faster: acceleration = force / mass

G-force is still strictly a unit of acceleration 9.8 m/s[SUP]2[/SUP].

Don't know how G forces are calculated but I have sat through many lectures that touch on G force and how it effects the driver as well as how to use it as a tuning tool. Every "instructor" factors in vehicle weight into the calculation. It usually includes HP, torque, weight, gearing etc to calculate. I could find the info fairly quick but I lack the motivation to worry about it.
I just know my 3030 lb car launches at 2.8G's and if she wiggles down track it ranges 2- 3 G's laterally. My Racepak's internal multi axis G meter measures all that for me.

As for fat drivers...NASCAR drivers are mostly pretty well fit. So much so we drag racers refer to them as jockeys. In drag racing we have some fat drivers (me included) but we know how to make gobs of HP & torque to overcome that little problem.

Just gotta ask have you ever really been around F1 drivers? Talk about uppity snobs

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Um, you don't need to swallow anything to get a heart rate or measure the acceleration of car... maybe NASCAR drivers are into that sort thing...

This is the NASCAR complaint thread. If you want to tell us how awesome NASCAR is, go to the other thread.


Just looking at the line up - Kurt Busch, Ryan Newman, Ryan Preece, Chris Buescher...

Lol I’m not talking about how great it is. I think it sucks now days. I still watch it, cause, well, tradition I guess? Just opening discussion about what you said.

Also, the only fat one in the bunch you mentioned is Ryan Newman. Kurt Busch is probably 160 pounds wet. And I don’t know who the hell ryan preece is lol

 

[churchmouse]

Don't know how G forces are calculated but I have sat through many lectures that touch on G force and how it effects the driver as well as how to use it as a tuning tool. Every "instructor" factors in vehicle weight into the calculation. It usually includes HP, torque, weight, gearing etc to calculate. I could find the info fairly quick but I lack the motivation to worry about it.
I just know my 3030 lb car launches at 2.8G's and if she wiggles down track it ranges 2- 3 G's laterally. My Racepak's internal multi axis G meter measures all that for me.

As for fat drivers...NASCAR drivers are mostly pretty well fit. So much so we drag racers refer to them as jockeys. In drag racing we have some fat drivers (me included) but we know how to make gobs of HP & torque to overcome that little problem.

Just gotta ask have you ever really been around F1 drivers? Talk about uppity snobs

And F-1 drivers are very small in stature. They have to be or they will not fit in this body condoms (cars) they wear.

 

[rhino]

Let us not forget tire size and compounds plays a huge role in hugging the track. And lest we forget the weight difference between the two styles. Vehicle weight effects the G-forces exerted on the driver.

Since when? Someone better call Isaac Newton and tell him he was wrong.

 

[rhino]

Don't know how G forces are calculated but I have sat through many lectures that touch on G force and how it effects the driver as well as how to use it as a tuning tool. Every "instructor" factors in vehicle weight into the calculation. It usually includes HP, torque, weight, gearing etc to calculate. I could find the info fairly quick but I lack the motivation to worry about it.
I just know my 3030 lb car launches at 2.8G's and if she wiggles down track it ranges 2- 3 G's laterally. My Racepak's internal multi axis G meter measures all that for me.

As for fat drivers...NASCAR drivers are mostly pretty well fit. So much so we drag racers refer to them as jockeys. In drag racing we have some fat drivers (me included) but we know how to make gobs of HP & torque to overcome that little problem.

Just gotta ask have you ever really been around F1 drivers? Talk about uppity snobs

G's are multiple of the value of the acceleration due to gravity and measures acceleration. The g's a driver experiences are independent of any mass, although the force the seat and belt exert on the driver to keep them from flying out are proportional to the driver's mass, not the mass of the vehicle.

 

[thunderchicken]

Since when? Someone better call Isaac Newton and tell him he was wrong.

Hey I openly admit that I never studied physics and am certainly not a mathematician. I am simply repeating what I was told in a couple racing chassis seminars by Dave Morgan. I would have to dig up paperwork from those seminars to get the math formula he used. But I do recall he specifically want to know the vehicle weight with driver. It had something to do with...the higher the vehicle weight the slower it will accelerate from a dead stop. Something about as force gets larger, acceleration is increased and they are directly proportional. Yet as weight increases, the acceleration decreases. Light cars are easier to accelerate than heavy cars. Weight and acceleration are inversely proportional.
Does that sound correct? Heck it has been 7 or 8 years since those seminars, and I could be mistaken. As I said before, I really don't worry about doing the math since my Data logger uses an internal multi axis G meter and graphs it out when downloaded to my laptop. Ultimately the point I was making is that weight effects how fast a car can accelerate. A light weight F1 car weighing 1550 lbs vs a cup car at 3300 lbs. The F1 car accelerates faster and thus should experience more G's from a dead stop. Right? So the driver being part of the car (strapped in) has to be subjected to more G's in the lighter faster accelerating car correct?
Seriously correct me if I am wrong.

 

[rhino]

Hey I openly admit that I never studied physics and am certainly not a mathematician. I am simply repeating what I was told in a couple racing chassis seminars by Dave Morgan. I would have to dig up paperwork from those seminars to get the math formula he used. But I do recall he specifically want to know the vehicle weight with driver. It had something to do with...the higher the vehicle weight the slower it will accelerate from a dead stop. Something about as force gets larger, acceleration is increased and they are directly proportional. Yet as weight increases, the acceleration decreases. Light cars are easier to accelerate than heavy cars. Weight and acceleration are inversely proportional.
Does that sound correct? Heck it has been 7 or 8 years since those seminars, and I could be mistaken. As I said before, I really don't worry about doing the math since my Data logger uses an internal multi axis G meter and graphs it out when downloaded to my laptop. Ultimately the point I was making is that weight effects how fast a car can accelerate. A light weight F1 car weighing 1550 lbs vs a cup car at 3300 lbs. The F1 car accelerates faster and thus should experience more G's from a dead stop. Right? So the driver being part of the car (strapped in) has to be subjected to more G's in the lighter faster accelerating car correct?
Seriously correct me if I am wrong.

You are correct this time, but it's fundamentally different than what you said before! Mass very much does affect acceleration just as you mentioned. Mathematically in physics and engineering, the simplest express of that is Force = mass*acceleration.

What you said was that the mass of the vehicle affects the gs the driver experiences. I see what you meant now, in that mass of the vehicle for a given force will affect the acceleration. However, what the driver feels is solely a manifestation of the acceleration itself. He could be in a NASCAR vehicle or a giant egg from the planet Ork and what he feels will be identical if the acceleration is the same. Also, don't forget that acceleration has both a linear (tangential) and radial component when a moving along a curve. The tighter the curved path followed, the higher the radial acceleration for a given speed. That's what cause most of what the driver feels during NASCAR.

 

[thunderchicken]

You are correct this time, but it's fundamentally different than what you said before! Mass very much does affect acceleration just as you mentioned. Mathematically in physics and engineering, the simplest express of that is Force = mass*acceleration.

What you said was that the mass of the vehicle affects the gs the driver experiences. I see what you meant now, in that mass of the vehicle for a given force will affect the acceleration. However, what the driver feels is solely a manifestation of the acceleration itself. He could be in a NASCAR vehicle or a giant egg from the planet Ork and what he feels will be identical if the acceleration is the same. Also, don't forget that acceleration has both a linear (tangential) and radial component when a moving along a curve. The tighter the curved path followed, the higher the radial acceleration for a given speed. That's what cause most of what the driver feels during NASCAR.

Fair enough. I may have worded it poorly the first time but we got there.
As for what a driver feels in a cup or F1 car while cornering, I get that lateral Gs are felt. But, I always felt like it was mostly just a result of centrifugal force. Basically just the result of the changing direction. Regardless of the physics involved they have been using padding to combat those forces in an effort to make the cars easier to drive under those loads.
The fastest I ever ran in a roundy round car was @170 mph up at Chicagoland speedway. To be honest about it, I can't recall really noticing the forces involved while cornering due to the headrests, shoulder rests, side bolsters on the seat holding me in place. Now, I would imagine by comparison the seat construction of the 80s with just an aluminum rib support and head support with very minimal cushion would have felt much different. But again it has been some time sine I did anything in a roundy round car and I only hot lapped the car at Chicagoland so wasn't like I had to endure it more than just a few laps.

 

[BugI02]

And F-1 drivers are very small in stature. They have to be or they will not fit in this body condoms (cars) they wear.

Plus, if your driver weighs ten kilos less, that's ten kilos of something else you can carry and still make weight

That said, in other endurance sports (cycling, running) the most efficient human proportions seem to fall around 2 lbs per inch of height. I wonder if that is also true of F1 drivers, who would also be height limited at some level for the same reason fighter pilots are

Drivers probably discouraged from putting on weight I would imagine

 

[thunderchicken]

Plus, if your driver weighs ten kilos less, that's ten kilos of something else you can carry and still make weight

That said, in other endurance sports (cycling, running) the most efficient human proportions seem to fall around 2 lbs per inch of height. I wonder if that is also true of F1 drivers, who would also be height limited at some level for the same reason fighter pilots are

Drivers probably discouraged from putting on weight I would imagine

Well yeah plus most professional drivers have custom molded seats.