Gary Nelson says:

S

steveluvs3

Guest
He made a comment in USA today that he would like to get rid of the restictor plates but has'nt found yet an alternetive solution to slow down the speeds. He also said that the plates create a conspiracy theory that some teams get special plates which could be farther than the truth.

Like I said before If you would cut the rear spoiler in half and knock it down a few degrees and open up the front nose, no tape allowed on the front nose , you would lose a ton of downforce and thus you would slow down, those cars would be so loose they could'nt run over 200-205.
Personally I would really like to know what gary nelson has tried to get rid of the plates.
 
I've thought for a while now, that both BGN and cup should run trucks at the RP tracks.
 
Whatever it takes to get rid of restrictor plates, I am in favor of it ;)
 
I seriously doubt much of anything has actually been done to address it. There have been no on track test conducted and you can't even begin to address the problem until you define the problem.

Exactly how much do they need to slow the cars down? No one knows because they haven't conducted a tested to determine how fast the cars would be without plates on them.

They probably need to trim 40 - 50 mph off the unrestricted cars, but they'll never know even where to begin until they establish the baseline to work from.
 
Since reducing intake is what the plate does,pretty much making it a smaller carb,would it be better to use a smaller carb that actually works at full capacity,vs strangling the the larger one ?
 
I've had this discussion with Windsor before.........he pretty much shot me down with most of my ideas (that took place about a year and a half ago on this very forum). But what you just said makes sense to me. But, then I keep coming back to the small intake plate (restrictor plate) and a smaller carburator.........pretty much the same thing. In my mind (as feeble as it is) a bigger carb can be tuned for the smaller intake.....thus it is a smaller carburetor. If that is so, then a smaller carburetor would not solve the problem. I still say (and my good friend Windsor has not convince me otherwise) that's it a matter of air getting under the cars at speeds over about 210 mph that causes them to get "light" and any upset makes them prone to becoming airborne......and that ain't good.

I think it's the banking at to two tracks.......it makes the drivers hesitate to lift and slow going into the corners because they know the high banks will aid in making the car stick. That would be true if there was not an turbulence created by the other cars......but you have anywhere from 10 to 30 cars in a group there's going to be a huge amount of turbulence created and someone is going to have a problem and get side ways and then we all know what happens after that. You ain't never gonna convince a competitive driver to lift when he thinks he can make it through a corner...............that banking makes him think he can (and he can if nothing upsets the car........like a little turbulence). I say take about 10 degrees out of each plate track and unrestrict the cars. Probably will never happen so I'm afraid we are stuck with plates for a while.
 
LOL...man , I love irony! Gary the cheat---one of the single most corrupt individuals ever involved in Nascar---doesn't want 'conspiracy theories' created. Considering the opinion that he is responsible for people having about 90% of those same 'theories, I would guess not.
Hey Gary---go back to selling your snake doctor crap to someone else, man. Most folks know what a devious cheat you are by now.
 
I remember Benny Parsons saying years ago to lower the banking.

But, ISC would have to pull some of that moldy money out of their pockets to make it happen --- and I can't see that happening anytime soon. LOL
 
O K lower the banking theory, that would mean they would have to slow down in the corners, get rid of some of that downforce they are so dependant on and they will have to slow down in the corners, then you would not have to tear up the track.
 
It would have been better to fix the tracks than spend the millions on the cars. Would have eliminated the problems with restrictor plates and some of the aero dependence. The sponsors wouldn't have had to spend so much on just 4 races either which would have kept the costs down for the teams. Nascar would rather have the teams and sponsors spend the money than take it out of their own pocket.
 
Originally posted by Oldgoat@Feb 8 2004, 11:12 AM
It would have been better to fix the tracks than spend the millions on the cars. Would have eliminated the problems with restrictor plates and some of the aero dependence. The sponsors wouldn't have had to spend so much on just 4 races either which would have kept the costs down for the teams. Nascar would rather have the teams and sponsors spend the money than take it out of their own pocket.
Click to expand...
AMEN to that!!!! :wacko:
 
Originally posted by DE_Wrangler_2@Feb 7 2004, 10:58 PM
I've had this discussion with Windsor before.........he pretty much shot me down with most of my ideas (that took place about a year and a half ago on this very forum). But what you just said makes sense to me. But, then I keep coming back to the small intake plate (restrictor plate) and a smaller carburator.........pretty much the same thing. In my mind (as feeble as it is) a bigger carb can be tuned for the smaller intake.....thus it is a smaller carburetor. If that is so, then a smaller carburetor would not solve the problem. I still say (and my good friend Windsor has not convince me otherwise) that's it a matter of air getting under the cars at speeds over about 210 mph that causes them to get "light" and any upset makes them prone to becoming airborne......and that ain't good.

I think it's the banking at to two tracks.......it makes the drivers hesitate to lift and slow going into the corners because they know the high banks will aid in making the car stick. That would be true if there was not an turbulence created by the other cars......but you have anywhere from 10 to 30 cars in a group there's going to be a huge amount of turbulence created and someone is going to have a problem and get side ways and then we all know what happens after that. You ain't never gonna convince a competitive driver to lift when he thinks he can make it through a corner...............that banking makes him think he can (and he can if nothing upsets the car........like a little turbulence). I say take about 10 degrees out of each plate track and unrestrict the cars. Probably will never happen so I'm afraid we are stuck with plates for a while.
Click to expand...
....man, I got to go back the the "archives" on this...if the cob webs haven't hidden them compelety!...mind if I start with a cleana slate, since I think this is a little bit different than what we discussed before? I think before we talked about a small carb in conjunction with the plate. I think that would create more turbulence and have a negative result.

The thought of using a tiny carburetor vs a plate with the conventional carb, could most likely result in the same torque & power curve de-capitations. The tiny carb could probably give better throttle response. It would need some very unique set of air bleeds and other unique air and fuel circuit work. But you could probably make it work.

I might even like the small carb better than the plate, but it would still de-capitate the torque curve...I just hate that. Everyone will still have pretty much the same shape and area under the curve. Now THAT'S BORING!

An un-restricted engine allows the engine builder and team tune for the charateristics of their approach/car/driver/setup, etc. Make a small un-restriced engine AND drop CR and bingo! You get less hp, BUT everyone shows up with "their solution". Not the same generic Brand-X everyone else has.

Does that get the thinking started?

Running truck bodies would allow the same thing, but with more conventional engine displacements. As for cars getting air born and stuff. I don't know if I have a comment on that. I think that value can go up or down based on a bunch of stuff (how scientific is that!).
 
Some of you mention flattening out the tracks, but wouldn't that just be doing the reverse of what they did at Homestead? I am not in favor of changing the tracks. I like the history of these 2 tracks. Compare changing the tracks to the changes in the points system, any similarities??


I saw an interview with Kyle petty. His view on the subject is that the plate is not so much to slow the cars down, but to keep them together on such a big track. He feels that cars would get so spread out on the big track that there wouldn't be much action.
 
Originally posted by 97forever@Feb 7 2004, 11:07 PM
LOL...man , I love irony! Gary the cheat---one of the single most corrupt individuals ever involved in Nascar


Hey Gary---go back to selling your snake doctor crap to someone else, man. Most folks know what a devious cheat you are by now.
Click to expand...
Well said, with the appropriate amount of eloquacy and candor.

Gary Nelson in charge of competition was (is?) like putting Pete Rose on the ethics committee. Like making Janet Jackson in charge of the dress code. Like giving Jimmy Spencer the keys to the refreshment center store room. Like...

OK, you get the idea.

Gary Nelson, one of Chevy's most distinguished yesmen, hands out those plates too. Just some FYI.
 
Originally posted by EatMorePossum@Feb 9 2004, 02:27 PM
Gary Nelson, one of Chevy's most distinguished yesmen, hands out those plates too. Just some FYI.
Click to expand...
I see you're a conspiracy theorist too. :p
 
I made no accusations. It's all true. Nelson is a career suck up. He hands out the plates. Now just because I can put 2 and 2 together and come up with 4, that doesn't make me Oliver Stone.

:D
 
Originally posted by EatMorePossum@Feb 9 2004, 03:14 PM
I made no accusations. It's all true. Nelson is a career suck up. He hands out the plates. Now just because I can put 2 and 2 together and come up with 4, that doesn't make me Oliver Stone.

:D
Click to expand...
:D :D :D :ph34r:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom