New car ideas? What do you want to see race?

KTMLew01

KTMLew01

Team Owner
Joined
Jan 31, 2017
Messages
5,437
Points
643
Location
Wendell, North Carolina
Have a buddy that hates NASCAR...well to be fair if it isn't a Ducati he hates it. Used to be Honda motorcycles...he's definitely "all in" on his fandom. OK. Now the point. His big bitch is the cars aren't stock. He wants production cars with roll cages. I've tried to explain how, for oval tracks, that won't work. Struts/mounts, wheel bearings, FWD, unibody cars would have to be completely gutted and rebuilt. Much like rally cars are now. How much you suppose a rally car chassis goes for? What would be gained? Serious opinions please. I suppose they race Mustangs and Cameros in IMSA, so? How much chassis mods do they do/allow? Would you be comfortable seeing one of those pound the wall at Talledaga at 190mph?
 
I'm not comfortable seeing anyone in any car in any series hit the wall at 190. But we've seen IMSA cars do it at Daytona, and close to it at plenty of other tracks, with no more or less driver injury than we see in NASCAR. Cars in IMSA and other sports car series are significantly closer to stock than NASCAR's vehicles, including engine location, although I can't address the rest of your technical questions.

I don't know why specifications for a car capable of running a road course couldn't be applied to an oval too. Daytona's already a bastardization of oval and road course, and nobody stops to change struts or wheel bearing when they enter or leave the infield portion of the track.

But not all forms of racing satisfy all fans. Point biker-boy to a motocross series or one of the touring motorcycle series and don't worry about it. Or both of you take a look at sports car racing; you might find something you both like.

Gods, I feel like some kind of relationship counselor.
 
I am an Auto tech so very familiar with the failings of the parts i questioned. If you have to replaced/re-engineer every part of the suspension & drivetrain, do you still have a "stock" car? Guess it come down to definition of stock. What IS, IS?:confused:
 
KTMLew01 said:
I am an Auto tech so very familiar with the failings of the parts i questioned. If you have to replaced/re-engineer every part of the suspension & drivetrain, do you still have a "stock" car? Guess it come down to definition of stock. What IS, IS?:confused:
Click to expand...
Oh, I agree completely with your friend that NASCAR doesn't field stock cars. If what your buddy honestly, truly, really wants is something that rolled off an assembly line and had a minimum of safety equipment added, he needs to be at his local short track. Or check these out; $500-car racing is a serious hoot.

http://www.24hoursoflemons.com/

https://www.chumpcar.com/
 
Charlie Spencer said:
I'm not comfortable seeing anyone in any car in any series hit the wall at 190. But we've seen IMSA cars do it at Daytona, and close to it at plenty of other tracks, with no more or less driver injury than we see in NASCAR. Cars in IMSA and other sports car series are significantly closer to stock than NASCAR's vehicles, including engine location, although I can't address the rest of your technical questions.

I don't know why specifications for a car capable of running a road course couldn't be applied to an oval too. Daytona's already a bastardization of oval and road course, and nobody stops to change struts or wheel bearing when they enter or leave the infield portion of the track.

But not all forms of racing satisfy all fans. Point biker-boy to a motocross series or one of the touring motorcycle series and don't worry about it. Or both of you take a look at sports car racing; you might find something you both like.

Gods, I feel like some kind of relationship counselor.
Click to expand...

This was intended to be an off-shoot of the what was better about back-in-the-day thread. Some want to turn back time. I like the mid-eighties cars. Still looked like cars even though there was almost nothing under the body that was "stock". I mentioned buddies disdain for series as an example of what I've heard from 100's of other people. So what do they "fix"?

Here is the 2017 IMSA Camero specs. Not. Much. Stock. Left.
https://www.imsa.com/news/022017/chevrolet-unveils-camaro-gt4r-racer-2017-competition
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Oh, I agree completely with your friend that NASCAR doesn't field stock cars. If what your buddy honestly, truly, really wants is something that rolled off an assembly line and had a minimum of safety equipment added, he needs to be at his local short track. Or check these out; $500-car racing is a serious hoot.

http://www.24hoursoflemons.com/

https://www.chumpcar.com/
Click to expand...
Short tracks are no different than NASCAR. When they started using double-decker enclosed trailer rigs and had two cars to run 1/4" mile bullrings it was over for me.
 
Production vehicles lack stiffness sufficient to bear the chassis and aero loads imposed by this kind of racing.

You can fix that but it's actually easier and less expensive to build a tube chassis and mount bodies in white on those.

I'm surprised nobody's ever done that. :rolleyes:
 
aunty dive said:
Production vehicles lack stiffness sufficient to bear the chassis and aero loads imposed by this kind of racing.

You can fix that but it's actually easier and less expensive to build a tube chassis and mount bodies in white on those.

I'm surprised nobody's ever done that. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Exactly. Only people that have never built anything want a "stock car". There is a reason we got here. Fix what broke. Fix what broke. Fix what broke. Starting to see a pattern?
 
People say the racing isnt great now, just imagine how it would be if showroom stock cars were used.

Luckily, there are plenty of racing series that use production based vehicles, the tour car series like WTCC/BTCC, Rally/Cross/Gymkana , Sport cars in the various series( IMSA,WEC,Blancpain) DTM/V8 Supercars are now production bodies on purpose built chassis, Japan Super GT Series is about the same with 500 class, I think the 300 glass is a lot more closer to using production based.

Like what has already been pointed out, even if NASCAR were to go back to using production based cars, they would be heavily modified and would no longer be "stock"
 
If God wanted four cylinder turbocharged FWD sedans buzzing around Darlington, he would have built the racetrack England, not South Carolina. That's what I know about that deal. :D
 
I like the new rules with introducing future car models in NASCAR before they hit the showroom like the 2018 Toyota's. Personally I'm fine with the cars now as I think they look close enough to their stock counterpart and are the best looking car NASCAR has had in the last 20 years.
 
LewTheShoe said:
If God wanted four cylinder turbocharged FWD sedans buzzing around Darlington, he would have built the racetrack England, not South Carolina. That's what I know about that deal. :D
Click to expand...
I'm in favor of any form of racing running at Darlington, SC, that will give the track additional race weekends and income. :p
 
The only racing stock cars do is the guy trying to run 10 mph faster than everyone else on the freeway.
 
I'm not sure what engine size has to do with being able to put on an entertaining race.

I've never seen FWD cars with tiny motors and stock suspension compete against each other. It might be fun.
 
If the main objection to making the cars more "stock" (whatever that means) is that the cars wouldn't be cool enough, then maybe it's time to consider running different cars. Why should the cup series be beholden to mid-size 4 door economy cars?

Guess what, Chevy, Ford, and Toyota (and Dodge) still make high-powered, RWD, badass cars:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_(sixth_generation)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Camaro_(sixth_generation)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Supra#A80_.281993.E2.80.932002.29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Challenger

So what, they have two doors instead of 4, so did Dale's Monte Carlo. At the very least switching to these cars would eliminate a good amount of the farce in "stock" cars with drivetrains nothing like their road counterparts. Plus, people actually aspire to own these cars. That's kinda a big deal when you're trying to portray the sport as badass.
 
Acs said:
If the main objection to making the cars more "stock" (whatever that means) is that the cars wouldn't be cool enough, then maybe it's time to consider running different cars. Why should the cup series be beholden to mid-size 4 door economy cars?

Guess what, Chevy, Ford, and Toyota (and Dodge) still make high-powered, RWD, badass cars:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_(sixth_generation)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Camaro_(sixth_generation)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Supra#A80_.281993.E2.80.932002.29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Challenger

So what, they have two doors instead of 4, so did Dale's Monte Carlo. At the very least switching to these cars would eliminate a good amount of the farce in "stock" cars with drivetrains nothing like their road counterparts. Plus, people actually aspire to own these cars. That's kinda a big deal when you're trying to portray the sport as badass.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what my buddy wants. How many of those have strut front suspension? Then someone has to decide on tire width which has huge effects on suspension, steering, wheel bearings and suspension mounting. As mentioned previously, they would likely be bought as an empty chassis and completely re-worked.
 
I used to joke NASCAR should have an SUV series
 
No splitters, less side force, and give them back their horsepower.

Give these guys a car they can actually drive. Let driving skill dictate terms rather than the engineers.
 
aunty dive said:
Production vehicles lack stiffness sufficient to bear the chassis and aero loads imposed by this kind of racing.

You can fix that but it's actually easier and less expensive to build a tube chassis and mount bodies in white on those.

I'm surprised nobody's ever done that. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Stiffness is one reason I like Toyota vehicles so well as a 20 year old Camry Door will still close with a nice dull thud like it did when it was new.
 
One thing I thought about watching last night's plate races and seeing people complain about not being able to pass the leader; what about letting the drivers vary the air/fuel mixture on the fly like they can do in F1?

Need a boost to be able to push hard and get to the front, but you don't have any help behind you? Set the ECU to rich and get a few HP boost. Of course, you could only do this for so long because your fuel mileage would go to crap. Then you'd either have to pit or turn the dial the opposite way, and lean it out for several laps while you make do with far less HP. ****, most "stock" cars have these multiple driving modes already even on economy cars nowadays. I'm sure Ford for instance would love to promote their ecoboost mode on the track.
 
Acs said:
One thing I thought about watching last night's plate races and seeing people complain about not being able to pass the leader; what about letting the drivers vary the air/fuel mixture on the fly like they can do in F1?

Need a boost to be able to push hard and get to the front, but you don't have any help behind you? Set the ECU to rich and get a few HP boost. Of course, you could only do this for so long because your fuel mileage would go to crap. Then you'd either have to pit or turn the dial the opposite way, and lean it out for several laps while you make do with far less HP. sh!t, most "stock" cars have these multiple driving modes already even on economy cars nowadays. I'm sure Ford for instance would love to promote their ecoboost mode on the track.
Click to expand...
You have to add air & fuel to an engine to make more power. Turbos (ecoboost) and superchargers add artificial pressure (air) to intake tract. THEN you add fuel as needed to make stoichiometric or slightly richer for race purposes. DEI had it figured-out...air leak? Nah...that was a mistake when the carb studs were drilled...
 
It was intake bolts. But I've seen carb hollow carb studs that were rotated to align with a hole that did same thing.

From Jayski
Ex-employee's lawsuit claims improprieties in engine shop at RCR UPDATE Statement by Childress: .A lawsuit filed by a former Richard Childress Racing employee includes specific allegations that engines the team used in events at 2006 Speedweeks at Daytona were designed to defeat NASCAR rules. The team denies the allegations. Anthony Corrente, who lost his job as assistant manager for engine research and development for RCR earlier this year, filed his suit Wednesday in Mecklenburg County superior court. It alleges wrongful termination, defamation and breach of contract against the team, which fields Nextel Cup cars for #29-Kevin Harvick, #31-Jeff Burton and #07-Clint Bowyer. Corrente said he inspected an engine from Harvick's #29 Chevy after the Budweiser Shootout and found it had been altered to allow more air to enter, which would be contrary to the purpose of carburetor restrictor plates used at the Daytona track. "Inserts were placed in the four outside corners of the cylinder head where the manifold is attached," the lawsuit says. When tightened, the bottom of the bolts hit these inserts, leaving room for air to get in between the intake manifold and the cylinder head. Such air would get to the engine beneath the restrictor plate, which is designed specifically to limit the flow of air. More air means more power, at least in theory. The suit also says that Burton won the pole for this year's Daytona 500 with another engine that had the same modifications. Burton's engine passed NASCAR inspection following the qualifying session. David Hart, a spokesman for Richard Childress Racing, said Thursday that Corrente's allegations are untrue. "We will deal with them in the courts," Hart said. Corrente left Joe Gibbs Racing in July 2005, signing a three-year contract with a two-year renewal option at RCR. He said he was fired after a conversation with Harvick in May during a test at Lowe's Motor Speedway, where Harvick's team had tested an engine built to Corrente's specifications that differed from what the team had been doing. See full story by David Poole at ThatsRacin.(9-21-2006)
UPDATE Statement by Richard Childress: The following is a statement from Richard Childress, president and CEO of Richard Childress Racing (RCR), regarding allegations made in a lawsuit filed by a former employee: "The allegations made about RCR in a lawsuit filed by a disgruntled former employee are absolutely untrue. Specifically, our cars passed NASCAR inspection both before and after qualifying for the 2006 Daytona 500. Additional allegations made are also untrue. We will make no further comments until after the issue is resolved in a court of law."(RCR PR)(9-22-2006)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom