THSCC Forums

Yeah, Ferrari and Renault can't afferd to have spensive stuff like building digital models of motors when they could spend their money on 22K rpm engines that don't explode and new fangled stuff like fuel injection, carbon fiber, ceramic brakes, wind tunnels, and genuine diamonds on the cars. Last time I checked NASCAR was still using chassis that were around when Banjo was building them, use old Ford truck rear ends, and 1960's tech.

Although I must admit, it is hard to change that FWD Monte Carlo to RWD, but other than that Jeff's is just like the one in your Chevy showroom. Come to think of it, the Ferraris in the showroom are probably higher tech than the NASCAR racer

I thought that your base model was Aguri? Now you're putting Ferrari in there? Come on now.

If NASCAR engineers wanted to put a diamond on *their* race car, they would have made damn sure not to lose it. They never found that diamond in Monaco either did they. Dumbasses.

_________________
Has no responsibility whatsoever.

I would bet even super aguri has better tech, they do use Honda motors. And the have launch control, paddle shifts etc.

Oh and the diamond was lost by the Ford team.

I assume that you mean Jaguar.

Face it, you want to rag on a sport that has much more technology and engineering than you are willing to admit. Ad hominem attacks against the vehicles without providing tech really weakens your argument.

_________________
Has no responsibility whatsoever.

Big deal. He was impressive for one race. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while. The rest of the time he is somewhere between 20-30th place. He can plan on that for quite a while. We know he is a good driver. He's proven that in road racing. It isn't his driving ability...

_________________
http://www.greywinds.com

Wes, I am not going to agree with all of Rob's arguments and examples (I would not have picked Super Aguri as the F1 poster child for money/time spent and resulting technical excellence). However, I will agree in that...

You really don't know what you are talking about when it comes to comparing NASCAR and F1 from a technology point of view.

I am not an expert, but I really don't think that NASCAR budgets for the top teams approaches what the top teams will spend in F1. I could go on and on, and I don’t want to write another novel of a post on this topic. Some quick points… Sure NASCAR is getting into computer modeling, heavy wind tunnel designs, etc. Top F1 teams own their own multi-million dollar wind tunnels that they run 24/7 is NASCAR teams doing that today? If I am wrong, please correct me. In F1, they are constantly changing aero packages. NASCAR is one step away from a spec aero package. Not to downplay NASCAR engine programs, I am sure those engines are extremely tuned and there is some impressive (even when compared to F1) science, but frankly they have been optimizing a spec engine package for a long time. F1 has the ability to explore areas that just are not an option in NASCAR. Compare NASCAR carb technology (no doubt impressive) to F1 variable trumpet intakes (recently outlawed), pneumatic valve trains, etc. Some F1 fans may be surpised to know that some tech might be flowing from NASCAR to F1, but the bulk of stuff is flowing out of F1 into other series.

This really should be obvious, but the same reason that NASCAR is nowhere close to F1 in the technology department is the same reason that NASCAR is so successful and F1 is having such problem. It is that the level of the sport is so high, that only a few can reach the top and be successful and the amount of money that is dumped down the F1 rat hole to keep the system working. NASCAR is nearly a spec series where big bucks and ultra high tech only goes so far and because of the nearly spec nature, the racing is very close and entertaining.

_________________
Richard Casto
1972 Porsche 914
2013 Honda Fit Sport
2015 Honda Fit EX
http://motorsport.zyyz.com
Money can't buy happiness, but somehow it's more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than a Kia.

So is Kyle Petty.

_________________
Todd Breakey
STS 42 - 1992 Sunburst Miata
Dammit!
"You souldn't play leap frog with a porcupine. You might get hurt." - Eliza

So what? What does he have to do with this. There are many backmarkers in every venue of racing. They're just cannon fodder. Petty is one in Nascar. Just because your daddy was a Nascar big deal doesn't mean you are. They spend a lot of money trying to make their kids hot shots. Some make it, some don't... Kyle is a good example. He should punt on driving and get himself a good driver and invest in the team. Junior will never be what his old man was regardless of how much money was left to him to buy it. He's good, but he isn't great.

Said has the talent. He's using it in the wrong arena. Maybe if he sticks with it for 3 or more years they'll learn to accept hiim and he'll figure out the game plan.

_________________
http://www.greywinds.com

A little testy today Graham?

I was just pointing out that even some of the NASCAR legacy ride around mid pack. Look at Bobby Labonte, Jeff Burton, Mark Martin, Rusty Wallace.

I wouldn't expect Said, or JPM for that matter to be at the front of the pack at every track. Just like I wouldn't expect Jeff Gordon or Valentino Rossi to lead the way at Monte Carlo.

_________________
Todd Breakey
STS 42 - 1992 Sunburst Miata
Dammit!
"You souldn't play leap frog with a porcupine. You might get hurt." - Eliza

Jeff Burton is fourth in points, and Mark Martin is sixth. Martin has been in the Chase ever since it's inception, and has finished fourth in the past two seasons. He also won the IROC championship last year, his fifth IROC victory. Rusty doesn't race anymore.

_________________
Has no responsibility whatsoever.

Rob et al, if I concede that F1 spends at least one American dollar more on technology, will you concede that NASCAR still spends a metric shit ton of money sorting out their racecars? And if not, please list the racing series that spend more than NASCAR does.

_________________
Has no responsibility whatsoever.

You and I probably agree more on the level of money spent on NASCAR than you think.

I think that the NASCAR series as a whole spends a lot of money. Maybe as a whole more than any other series next to F1. And I suspect that the number of well funded teams as a percentage of the total participating is very high. I also suspect that this percentage may be higher than most or all other top level series. Again, I think that helps to produce close racing and why teams near the bottom can sometimes win. That takes a miracle in other series as the bottom teams are just 100% backmarkers.

On a team by team basis, I suspect that there is other racing series that has teams that spend more than the top level NASCAR teams. I have no numbers to back this up, but I am guessing that factory backed endurance racing (how much did Audi spend to develop the new diesel engine and car) and WRC (Subaru, Ford, etc.) are examples of those. However, this is a bit of apples to oranges anyhow (factory backed vs. independent teams). As you don't have a single factory backed Ford, Chevy or Dodge team in NASCAR. The model is different in that you have them supporting the series, but they are not pushing all of their effort (and money) into a single team. And the series I mention above, have rough times because of the money brought in when factory teams battle each other and those that support the series during the dry years get the shaft. Because of this an many other reason it is hard to compare NASCAR to everyone else as it really is a unique beast.

Porsche is the closest to the NASCAR model in that they usually like to have a factory backed team to develop a new car (Penske in ALMS with the P2 car) and then eventually sell that same car (and factory development parts) to customers in a year or so. Usually with some type of promise that they may not be directly racing a factory team. I expect Porsche to move Penske and that basic car up to P1 spec as a factory backed team like they are now in P2 and then sella developed version of the current P2 as customer cars. Same deal with the 911 GT3RS, etc. That is a customer car.

_________________
Richard Casto
1972 Porsche 914
2013 Honda Fit Sport
2015 Honda Fit EX
http://motorsport.zyyz.com
Money can't buy happiness, but somehow it's more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than a Kia.

Let's settle this NASCAR style - behind the bus after the next event!

_________________
Rubbin' is Racin'

Nah! I'm just having fun with this. No harm meant Todd. These types of debates are humerous and too hard to pass up on.

As far as your current list. As much as this is really painful to say. I have to agree with Wes on the Mark Martin thing. He's been very good for a long time. He's constantly a contender for the points chase. He's the hope for all of us old farts that you can still race as a senior citizen...

_________________
http://www.greywinds.com

What he just said. (agreeing with Wes )

I agree also that NASCAR spends boatloads of money so all the Rednecks can buy a MonteCarlo, or a Charger, or a Tauri/Fusion and think they are getting the same car that Jeff, Kasey, or Matt drives, and if it wasn't fixed it would be good racin' not the same as F1 or Champ car, or ALMS, just different. I just don't think that the technology is anything near as expensive or up to date as the tech in any of the other major forms of racing. It may not even be as sophisticated as DTM.

Toyota is rumored to have spent $575M in F1. with no results to show for it.