Gen 7 Cup Car

KTMLew01

KTMLew01

Team Owner
Joined
Jan 31, 2017
Messages
6,249
Points
643
Location
Wendell, North Carolina
What do the critics of the current car want/see as an improvement? They are running 205 MPH into the turns at Texas & Michigan. We sure don't need more speed. I know some of you will say speed = racing. Do we need to start killing drivers again? I've seen a few complain about the cars being too safe. Just baffles me. How do you "unlearn" what you know? Lower is faster. Aero mods = speed. The cas aren't going to get raised off the ground like they were 25 years ago. Only way they get slower is by cutting HP to 400-450 and then they will just run flat-out all day. No passing unless to Earnhardt SR them.

I am serious about this topic. Specific ideas please. Do they go back 50 years and use ONLY production based cars with minimal mods. Cage, belts, fuel cell. How do you police engine management then? They are building 700+ HP production cars now. In a season & a half they would be running 200 mph again.
 
Higher speed doesn't mean good racing but I think the hosepower reduction they did in 2015 (?) has hurt the racing. The cars are too equal in the corners now.

They need to lose the splitter so NASCAR can become a contact sport again. I'd like to see the cars raise off the ground, but that won't happen as long as they race at the Brobdingnagians.
 
Something closer to the 2014 package wouldn't hurt.

Big rear spoiler, no tapered spacer...the racing was great that season. Cars could race beside each other without spinning. Plenty of power to catch people. The Gen 6 was fine.
 
A lot more horsepower and way less handling. Put the the car in the driver’s hands and end this ‘unloading fast’ bull crap, if the drivers are truly talented, they’ll figure out how much throttle the car can take before heading for the wall in reverse.
 
the biggest thing if you ask me is to try and stop repaving these tracks. I watched the race at texas and I thought the cup car package was a terrible fit for the track. the guys were pretty much flat footing it through 3 and 4. that makes it pretty much impossible to pass on at least half the track. The old package had much more drag to it. they hesitated taking that away because as you said corner entry speeds would go up so much. The thinking was the faster the corner entry the more they have to let off the gas in the corner. but the problem as I see it is the cars have just gone faster. The lesser downforce has made these cars as fast as ever. They tried taking horsepower away. at this point I don't know what the heck you do to the car. Maybe the track surface should be the major concern. STOP REPAVING TRACKS. I think they should just patch the tracks where they need fixing and no more total repaves. michigan has never been the same. if the drivers have to come out of the throttle more in the turns that is what is needed. worn out racing surfaces promote this.

I remember the last darlington race before they repaved it. They had to run shaker screens to keep the radiators from plugging. it was a crazy race. I would love to see more like it.
 
joe h said:
A lot more horsepower and way less handling. Put the the car in the driver’s hands and end this ‘unloading fast’ bull crap, if the drivers are truly talented, they’ll figure out how much throttle the car can take before heading for the wall in reverse.
Click to expand...


They do that now
 
They need to slow the cars down 35-40 MPH at every oval track except Martinsville. None of the above has addressed that. Try harder. It's going to take radical changes. Much smaller engines, narrower tires and what else? Put them in minivans? Nope...i've seen a pinto station wagon dominate at a small oval in Stock engine class. Aero. Big old sides worked like that late model i posted. This isn't easy.
 
Create more drag. Throw away the tapered spacer. Bow the front splitter to disallow sealing. Disallow coil binding. Shape the side panels of the car evenly to eliminate so much sideforce.

Also, none of this works if Goodyear brings tires with no falloff. Softer tires that degrade will promote better racing.
 
The difference between 190 and 200 MPH - not really noticeable. 170 and 200? Much different deal there. Like watching an F2 versus an F1 car or a prototype versus a GT. This idea where we want cars to top out around 170 is obscene, IMO. That hasn't been done in, what, half a century?

Smaller engine displacement - probably has to happen at some point. It's already something that was wanted by OEMs a few years ago. Keep working on getting the splitter to become a less crucial component of total downforce so that it isn't affected by dirty air as much. The X-3 models had splitters that produced 20% and then 10% of the car's total downforce, versus 25% from the 2014-2016 cars. And then the problem of asymmetry towards the rear of the car needs to be addressed; you hear way too much about sideforce now and how tough it is to race side-by-side at high speeds.

I don't think the intermediate tracks are as bad as they're made out to be sometimes but they can certainly be improved upon.
 
FLRacingFan said:
The difference between 190 and 200 MPH - not really noticeable. 170 and 200? Much different deal there. Like watching an F2 versus an F1 car or a prototype versus a GT. This idea where we want cars to top out around 170 is obscene, IMO. That hasn't been done in, what, half a century?

Smaller engine displacement - probably has to happen at some point. It's already something that was wanted by OEMs a few years ago. Keep working on getting the splitter to become a less crucial component of total downforce so that it isn't affected by dirty air as much. The X-3 models had splitters that produced 20% and then 10% of the car's total downforce, versus 25% from the 2014-2016 cars. And then the problem of asymmetry towards the rear of the car needs to be addressed; you hear way too much about sideforce now and how tough it is to race side-by-side at high speeds.

I don't think the intermediate tracks are as bad as they're made out to be sometimes but they can certainly be improved upon.
Click to expand...

It wasn't wanted, it was discussed in regards to engine durability. But it opened up a can of worms about how that would affect everything else and it was shelved. BTW there are enough cry babies whining about even small changes made to almost anything.
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
Every time we have that though, the drivers bitch and rock tires come back.
Click to expand...
Several drivers, including Gordon, were adamant at the time the “low downforce package” came out that it was a moot effort unless a softer tire was introduced. I believe Edwards and Keselowski had the same sentiment.
 
StandOnIt said:
It wasn't wanted, it was discussed in regards to engine durability. But it opened up a can of worms about how that would affect everything else and it was shelved. BTW there are enough cry babies whining about even small changes made to almost anything.
Click to expand...
It was about reducing horsepower back in 2014, not about durability. Pat Suhy said if it helped with reliability on the back end, great, but it was mainly to reduce horsepower because they were in the 850-900 range at that point.
 
FLRacingFan said:
It was about reducing horsepower back in 2014, not about durability. Pat Suhy said if it helped with reliability on the back end, great, but it was mainly to reduce horsepower because they were in the 850-900 range at that point.
Click to expand...
here is what Pat Suhy said:

"If it truly does potentially help the racing and then help durability on the back end, I think it’s not a bad thing to do," said Pat Suhy, NASCAR Group Manager for Chevrolet Racing
 
ChexOrWrex said:
Several drivers, including Gordon, were adamant at the time the “low downforce package” came out that it was a moot effort unless a softer tire was introduced. I believe Edwards and Keselowski had the same sentiment.
Click to expand...

But every time a softer tire comes to the track, most of the drivers bitch about it and we go back to rock tires.

I remember one time, after practice at one of the bigger tracks, Mark Martin said something to the effect of he thinks you could realistically run the entire 500 mile race on one single set of tires and have no problems. That was around the same time Tony Stewart said after a race that the tires were so hard, you couldn't actually race on them.

Just seems to be a cycle. When we do get softer tires, we end up going back to rock tires after a couple years and have them for way too long.
 
- Lose the splitter
- Lose the tapered spacer
- Bigger spoiler for more drag
- semtrical side panels, smaller quarter panels, and reduction in side skirt
- disallow coil binding, bring back mechanical grip
- compostite bodies intrigue me
- softer tire
 
I'll go a little radical. GT4 cars, maybe GT3 spec if costs can be controlled. Much closer to showroom stock but still purpose built race cars. Add safety features specific to oval racing like roof flaps. Models I'd like to see compete: Ford Mustang, Chevy Camaro, Dodge Charger, Toyota Supra/86, VW Arteon. Keep NASCAR-specific features like 5 lug nuts and floor jacks and prohibit telemetry in race.

Yes, keep the different body designs, different engine specs, chassis. IMSA proves they can be all balanced competitively through aero and weight changes. These cars would cost a LOT less, be substantially slower, create more drag, probably be less aero dependent, be easier to maintain, and best of all look bad ass.
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
But every time a softer tire comes to the track, most of the drivers bitch about it and we go back to rock tires.

I remember one time, after practice at one of the bigger tracks, Mark Martin said something to the effect of he thinks you could realistically run the entire 500 mile race on one single set of tires and have no problems. That was around the same time Tony Stewart said after a race that the tires were so hard, you couldn't actually race on them.

Just seems to be a cycle. When we do get softer tires, we end up going back to rock tires after a couple years and have them for way too long.
Click to expand...
If NASCAR made rule changes on everything drivers bitched about the series would turn into nonsense.
 
In regards to tires, there was a really good interview with Shannon Baker from Goodyear on Happy Hours the other night. If anyone has access to Sirius XM it's definitely worth listening to on demand or if you can find it. Not sure if I am able to post it here from within the app or not.
 
Acs said:
I'll go a little radical. GT4 cars, maybe GT3 spec if costs can be controlled. Much closer to showroom stock but still purpose built race cars. Add safety features specific to oval racing like roof flaps. Models I'd like to see compete: Ford Mustang, Chevy Camaro, Dodge Charger, Toyota Supra/86, VW Arteon. Keep NASCAR-specific features like 5 lug nuts and floor jacks and prohibit telemetry in race.

Yes, keep the different body designs, different engine specs, chassis. IMSA proves they can be all balanced competitively through aero and weight changes. These cars would cost a LOT less, be substantially slower, create more drag, probably be less aero dependent, be easier to maintain, and best of all look bad ass.
Click to expand...
This is what my buddy and I just discussed. Anybody watch Miata racing? Slow but crazy competitive racing. I am a big fan of road course stuff though. Kinda over the oval stuff. Even Martinsville couldn't keep me awake. BAF.
 
BobbyFord said:
Stronger rear window bracing.
Click to expand...
paulie.gif
 
most people want to see the best drivers in the fastest cars competing on the track. The Xfinity or the Trucks on any weekend can have a better spectator event than the cup race, but most of the herd doesn't watch. I happen to like the 4 banger races at the local dirt track, but alone the track would go broke without the sprints.
 
StandOnIt said:
most people want to see the best drivers in the fastest cars competing on the track. The Xfinity or the Trucks on any weekend can have a better spectator event than the cup race, but most of the herd doesn't watch. I happen to like the 4 banger races at the local dirt track, but alone the track would go broke without the sprints.
Click to expand...

Dirt track i used to go to had one of these running 4 cyl stock 11-13 year olds. Cleaned house. Like running a wing car in a non-wing race.

pinto-station-wagon.png
 
KTMLew01 said:
Dirt track i used to go to had one of these running 4 cyl stock 11-13 year olds. Cleaned house. Like running a wing car in a non-wing race.

pinto-station-wagon.png
Click to expand...
I tried to buy one exactly like that but the title was screwed up so I bought a 78 Ranchero GT. I thought they were super cool if nobody else did.
 
I honestly love the current configuration and the rapid speeds, it’s what separates the best from the best. I will say I love what Andy said, get rid of the splitter so it can become a contact sport again. You’re dead right, with the exception of short tracks and road courses, contact is downright crippling to your handling making the racing almost Indycar like
 
Mispeedway15 said:
I honestly love the current configuration and the rapid speeds, it’s what separates the best from the best. I will say I love what Andy said, get rid of the splitter so it can become a contact sport again. You’re dead right, with the exception of short tracks and road courses, contact is downright crippling to your handling making the racing almost Indycar like
Click to expand...

for sure except IndyCar has a quick change front end that takes only seconds to change out and they are good to go again. Knock down a fender in Nascar and you are virtually out of the race. The Splitter removal, go to the valance style like they have in ARCA and K&N and the strength of the composite body could really toughen up the cars.
 
MRM said:
The problem is most everything on the cars are spec parts, everything from rear gears to shocks. Hard to do much passing when everybody is basically running the same stuff.
Click to expand...
they had 16 passes for the lead at Indy with the xfinity aero package compared to two the year before. Everybody was running the same stuff.
 
StandOnIt said:
for sure except IndyCar has a quick change front end that takes only seconds to change out and they are good to go again. Knock down a fender in Nascar and you are virtually out of the race. The Splitter removal, go to the valance style like they have in ARCA and K&N and the strength of the composite body could really toughen up the cars.
Click to expand...

You’re not kidding. Every year we go to the Menards 200 at Toledo Speedway and the racing is incredible because these guys can hit so much. It’s what made NASCAR popular after all
 
One thing I want no matter the type of car is more adjustments able to be made on pit road. I think they should be able to adjust spoiler angle and add/remove the dogears that xfinity used to run, all in race. Also let them replace brake pads like they do in v8 supercars that would be cool to see. If they ever move away from the archaic panhard bar/solid rear axle setup I'd love to see adjustable front and rear anti-roll bars too. I just love pit crews busting ass lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom