Comon Engines

They may as well. Common templates, common engines the only shamefull thing about it would be that they still call this STOCK car racing.
 
I think that would kinda suck!!! But yet you hardly hear about one engine brand having the most power. The big diffrence today is who makes the motors like Yates,Hendricks,DEI, etc
 
I think this is one of the ways they think will keep the costs from going up more. There are many series that use spec engines and are doing fine. I'm sure that with the economy as it is, NASCAR is trying to find a way that will allow smaller sponsors to come into the sport. There's one thing about racing that will never change. You can put two different people in the same car and it will drive different for both of them. If all the cars on the track were the same model and had the same engine, there would still be back markers and champs out there. I'd much rather see close racing than a run-away boring race any day.
 
Originally posted by buckaroo@Feb 5 2003, 05:52 PM
I think this is one of the ways they think will keep the costs from going up more.  There are many series that use spec engines and are doing fine.  I'm sure that with the economy as it is, NASCAR is trying to find a way that will allow smaller sponsors to come into the sport. 
Click to expand...
Buckaroo,

I know that's the company line...or will be, but that is just flat out...argh!!!!! If I can build a flat out purpose built engine that can smoke any Cup engine on my own dime, then these highly sponsored team can. I don't buy it. Just like I don't buy the ASA since they adapted the same philosophy. Unforgivable sin.
 
If they are going to run the same cars (common templates) and same engines, what's the point of having the Manufacturer's Award? No Chevy, Ford, Pontiac, Dodge nothing. Go ahead and let Toyota in...the only difference will be a sticker.

What has gotten into NASCAR?
 
just as long as they don't get any smaller...that would be bad. what does common mean anyway? to me they are allready common, about the only thing a guy can do now is adjust the timing and the spring ratio. I say convert back to the 427 days and take away aero :D
 
Originally posted by Windsor377@Feb 5 2003, 08:11 PM
I know that's the company line...or will be, but that is just flat out...argh!!!!!  If I can build a flat out purpose built engine that can smoke any Cup engine on my own dime, then these highly sponsored team can.  I don't buy it.  Just like I don't buy the ASA since they adapted the same philosophy.  Unforgivable sin.
Click to expand...


Hmmm, I've got one question for you Windsor, if you can build an engine that will smoke any of the Cup engines, why aren't you working for Roush or Hendricks or any other teams? Spec engines are cheaper and everyone would know what they are working with. It's the big money teams that are pushing it this way. Exotic metals and R&D are only done by the teams that can afford it. As it is now, there are only a few scant good engine builders and they build for many teams. It certainly would be nice if they went back to the really old ways of pure stock, but the sport wouldn't be what it is today. On the other hand, if they went the other direction, allowing for anything, it would then go the direction of pure technology and would become much like the F1 circuit. Now that would be wonderful, but the cost would be so enormous that they probably wouldn't have half the teams they have today.

Fergy, it's all for the bottom line and NASCAR is trying to keep that as high as possible. We all know that these cars aren't stock and it's only the hood, roof and trunk that follow the stock cars, but look at how many people root for a certain car because of the name plate on it. Keeping that name plate on it means money from the various manufacturers. Take it off and why would Toyota want to join the group? Why would Ford continue to pour in money? Why would any of them? They would soon tell NASCAR, take your series and do with it what you may, but we're not going to get anything out of it, so we'll be gone.
 
I can only see this common engine rule working for the plate races where way too much money is spent on R&D. Having a common engine for the rest of the races to me would spoil the sport and put a lot of engine guys out of business.
 
Originally posted by buckaroo@Feb 5 2003, 08:55 PM
Hmmm, I've got one question for you Windsor, if you can build an engine that will smoke any of the Cup engines, why aren't you working for Roush or Hendricks or any other teams? Spec engines are cheaper and everyone would know what they are working with. It's the big money teams that are pushing it this way. Exotic metals and R&D are only done by the teams that can afford it. As it is now, there are only a few scant good engine builders and they build for many teams....On the other hand, if they went the other direction, allowing for anything, it would then go the direction of pure technology and would become much like the F1 circuit.
Click to expand...
Buckaroo,

You pose that as if it's a measure of success. Here's my measure of success:

Take any winning cup engine from the past season, drop it in any car with one of my engines and I guarantee it will back up. Better yet, replace the rods with any Drag Race rod, put in any big roller cam, call Tim Hogan or Greg Davis, etc and get any Tunnel ram intake, put it the biggest CR pistons you want, drop it in any car with one of my engines, re-gear and I still guarantee it will back up...and I'm just me.

Since the fall of the iron curtain, exotic metals have come way down. And I whole heartedly disagree that there are only a few scant good engine builders. I could name 4, including myself, right now that could compete. For various reasons we've all got other things to do, but don't confuse that with not being able to do.

Also, how does continuing separate and distinct engines for each manufacturer equate to F1?...by the way, are you aware that the most powerfull engine in F1 has failed to win more often than not since the thankfull demise of the turbo formula?
 
Originally posted by Windsor377@Feb 5 2003, 11:22 PM
You pose that as if it's a measure of success. Here's my measure of success:

Take any winning cup engine from the past season, drop it in any car with one of my engines and I guarantee it will back up. Better yet, replace the rods with any Drag Race rod, put in any big roller cam, call Tim Hogan or Greg Davis, etc and get any Tunnel ram intake, put it the biggest CR pistons you want, drop it in any car with one of my engines, re-gear and I still guarantee it will back up...and I'm just me.

Since the fall of the iron curtain, exotic metals have come way down. And I whole heartedly disagree that there are only a few scant good engine builders. I could name 4, including myself, right now that could compete. For various reasons we've all got other things to do, but don't confuse that with not being able to do.

Also, how does continuing separate and distinct engines for each manufacturer equate to F1?...by the way, are you aware that the most powerfull engine in F1 has failed to win more often than not since the thankfull demise of the turbo formula?
Click to expand...
Okay Windsor, I'll take it that you are a great engine builder. It could be that you guys have to be in the right place at the right time to get the best jobs. Sort of like the drivers. When I said there are a scant few engine builders, I was referring to those who are at this moment building them for NASCAR's Winston Cup. Hey, I don't like the idea of NASCAR making everything equal any more than you or the rest of the fan base. I'd love for it to be like the old days, race what you brung. But the money end is what is making the sport what it is today and that equates to technology. They are making the engines to good that they have to slow them down at two tracks and have thought about doing it at two other. Also, the F1 comparison was meant to say what might happen if they just let everyone go as far as they want or are able to go. In stead of having a car on the track that might cost in the neighborhood of $100,000, they might find one that is worth over a million dollars. That's where this sport is heading and it's not the direction I'd like to see it go, but I'm not the one making the rules or putting out money as a sponsor. One thing is for certain though, if I did have a company that had enough money to sponsor a car, I damned sure want my money to go towards a winning car. If not, I'd take my money elsewhere.
 
Windsor, No doubt you can build a drag motor that would smoke a cup motor, but they are not built to the same spec's. Nor do I think a big horsepower drag motor has the capability of making 2000 quarter mile runs without being wrenched on. Comparing the motors of the two sports is like apples and oranges. The biggest trick the cup engine builders face is how to get the most without going outside the rules and at the same time making it last all weeked (practice, qualifying and racing). To do this takes a lot of research which is money that a lot of the smaller teams don't have. Common motors, I dont like the ideal either but they need to find a way that the smaller guys can compete.
 
Buckaroo,

My point is, little ol'e me, all by myself can put together an engine just as and more exotic than a Cup engine. That can smoke a cup engine. There is no argument on this earth that can make me think a multi millon dollar per year operation can't do the same thing. The minute they try to pull that wool over my eyes will be the last time I ever pay attention to the sport.
 
Originally posted by #84 NVRA@Feb 6 2003, 07:22 PM
Comparing the motors of the two sports is like apples and oranges. The biggest trick the cup engine builders face is how to get the most without going outside the rules and at the same time making it last all weeked (practice, qualifying and racing). To do this takes a lot of research which is money that a lot of the smaller teams don't have. Common motors, I dont like the ideal either but they need to find a way that the smaller guys can compete.
Click to expand...
Gotta disagree with that first sentence I left in the quote there #84 NVRA. An engine is an engine is an engine. What is important to understand are the dynamics of the environment each must face. Then engineer and build to those dynamics.

Like I told Buckaroo, my point is that I. me all by myself, can and have done this. No body on Gods green earth can tell me a multi million dollar a year organization can't as well.
No body. I know better.

The WWE moniker is beginning to fit here...this truely makes it a show and not a race.
 
An engine is an engine, but they are not all the same. If it were as simple as that then us racer's would be using nothing but stock parts. But you know for a fact that we spend a lot of money trying to squeeze every bit of horsepower out of it that we can. In some cases horsepower is sacrificed for reliably and in other case, like a drag motor where we can work on it after a quarter mile run, we don't worry that much about reliably. This is what I meant by "Apples and Oranges" they are both fruit but not the same.

I don't think any of Our (B&B Motorsports) oval track cars would be worth a plug nickle on a Drag Strip (maybe Bracket racing, but that's not the drag racing I grew up on and I don't consider it racing). I also don't think a high horsepower drag enging would be able to hook up on an oval track or make it through a feature race. Again they are both engines, but not built the same.
 
I can support common templates on cars because the bodies are so similar anyway, it's the motor that reallly counts.

Hence why I strongly dissapprove of common motors. If the motors are all the same, what is the point of them being a car brand at all??????? The motor isn't stock, but it is built by that car company.

I think Nascar wants to make NasCARS and push out the car makers. That seems to be what they are aiming for.
 
Originally posted by #84 NVRA@Feb 8 2003, 11:23 AM
In some cases horsepower is sacrificed for reliably and in other case, like a drag motor where we can work on it after a quarter mile run, we don't worry that much about reliably.
Click to expand...
Re-post from my earlier: "An engine is an engine is an engine. What is important to understand are the dynamics of the environment each must face. "

#84 NVRA, It is my opinion we just stated the same thing, but I am not sure we both get the exact same meaning from the 2 statements.

My statement: "an engine is an engine is an engine" is based on this (please bare with me on this):

1. All internal combustion engines have oly one purpose; convert a fuel source into power.

2. All 4 cycle internal combustion engines depend upon and use the exact same set of principles.

3. All 4 cycle internal combustion engines are confined by the exact same set of constraints imposed by nature.

4. All internal combustion engines have a specific application.

5. All successful race engines do 1 through 4 better than their competition.

Please don't think for one minute that I think reaching number 5 is easy. What I'm stating is, understanding 1 through 4 makes 5 achievable. If you don't have a good handle on any one of 1 through 4, then 5 becomes a mysterious black box.

Conversly, if you have a real good handle on all of 1 through 4, then 5 is no longer mysterious. I'm not saying for one minute that it is easy, but it is achievable.

So back to the fruit analogy, it is my opinion all internal combustion engines are fruit, however all 4 cycle internal combustion engines are the same fruit served up differently.

Now, returning to the original intent of my first post on this thread I need to ask: what about those first 4 parameters have the NASCAR teams and Manufacturers lost sight of, so that they need this aspect of racing taken out of their hands? There are plenty of folks that can handle similar challanges on no budget at all. I am on the verge of feeling distain for any organization with a multi million dollar per year budget claiming they can't.
 
You're right Windsor, I guess we were along the same lines just stating differently. And by the way from your name am I right to assume you perfer to run FoMoCo? I admire that in this day when everyone thinks only a Chevy is worth racing. Don't let my Avatar mislead you, yes I run a 55 Chevy (with a 6 cylinder) but we also race a 55 Ford with a 390 FE. All our tow vehicles are Fords and we wouldn't have it any other way.
 
Yep! True Blue all the way! I spend most of my time with the Windsor engine, but don't think I'd pass up the opportunity to so a 500CID BBC....or Mopar for that matter!

Hope you all have a good season coming up. I'll be in re-engineering mode for my own stuff most of this season, but look for a blue 86 LX from central Maryland to grab the national Real Street record this year...if he can get hat thing to hook up. If that happens, 'Ill put that engine up as an avatar.
 
boy, if you are going for a record with a forn, imagine what you could do with a little power plant from the general :) haha, no seriously, go get that record man! My cousin had 2 irha records (B/ED, B/D) now he is down to 1, records are meant to be broken, might as well be you, Hook em up windsor :D
 
Originally posted by NateDogg@Feb 9 2003, 10:35 PM
boy, if you are going for a record with a forn, imagine what you could do with a little power plant from the general :)
Click to expand...
Gotta be a wise guy in every bunch!!!!

Yeah I think we should get it (should, woulda coulda). I know pretty well what's bolted up in front of the bell housing of the current record holder and I've got that part covered...there's just a few other pieces we've got to make sure work...if you know what I mean.

By the way, is your cousin Brian Seward?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom