The Aero Push is Back in Full Effect

RowdyBusch

RowdyBusch

Team Owner
Joined
Jun 3, 2016
Messages
320
Points
223
If you haven't noticed as the season has progressed drivers are having a harder and harder time making passes in dirty air. I think it was Jimmie Johnson that said they would gain back 75% of the downforce lost by the rule changes before the season was over, and it's showing. We'll see if Michigan shows any signs of promise when they test the even lower downforce package, but based on Indy and Pocono I don't expect the second half of the season to be nearly as fun as the first. Track position racing has returned!

POCONO
RACE RECAP: PENNSYLVANIA 400

BUSCH DISCUSSES THE PENNSYLVANIA 400 AT POCONO:
“Our M&M’S 75th Anniversary Camry was okay today. We were really, really fast when we were by ourselves, but anytime we got to within five lengths of the guys in front of us, we just couldn’t do anything with it. Just got really aero tight this time. We weren’t that bad when we were here last time. I’m not sure what’s different for us. We just didn’t quite figure it out.”
 
RowdyBusch said:
If you haven't noticed as the season has progressed drivers are having a harder and harder time making passes in dirty air. I think it was Jimmie Johnson that said they would gain back 75% of the downforce lost by the rule changes before the season was over, and it's showing. We'll see if Michigan shows any signs of promise when they test the even lower downforce package, but based on Indy and Pocono I don't expect the second half of the season to be nearly as fun as the first. Track position racing has returned!
Click to expand...
I disagree with your premise. I think the gains of the lost downforce have been moderate, but nowhere near 75%. Not even half of that. I think there is enhanced ability for a trailing car to run in close proximity to the leading car, and thus passing is much more possible than it was last year. There will always be some benefit from clean air, I believe. Further downforce reductions will be beneficial, IMO, but the improvement in racing with 2016 rules has not be wiped out.
 
They found half of the downforce back just in the off-season alone. Revised floorpan shapes, changing the exhaust, placing fans strategically, and I'm sure a whole host of other mysterious actions have been taken to increase downforce. It's all about the gray areas and exploiting whatever you can. These engineers are so good at that.

So yes they've found a ton of the downforce back, and yes NASCAR needs to work to reduce it again.
 
cheesepuffs said:
They found half of the downforce back just in the off-season alone. Revised floorpan shapes, changing the exhaust, placing fans strategically, and I'm sure a whole host of other mysterious actions have been taken to increase downforce. It's all about the gray areas and exploiting whatever you can. These engineers are so good at that.

So yes they've found a ton of the downforce back, and yes NASCAR needs to work to reduce it again.
Click to expand...
Assuming you're correct, what can be done to reduce it?
 
aunty dive said:
Assuming you're correct, what can be done to reduce it?
Click to expand...
It's not so much about reducing downforce as it is about reducing restrictions on setups. Both are great, but opening up the opportunity to be innovative with setups is what will increase competition and passing opportunities. A driver like Buescher, in such a scenario, would have a chance at winning a non-rainout race if they "hit" on a "crazy" setup just like back markers did in the good ol' days.
 
cheesepuffs said:
They found half of the downforce back just in the off-season alone. Revised floorpan shapes, changing the exhaust, placing fans strategically, and I'm sure a whole host of other mysterious actions have been taken to increase downforce. It's all about the gray areas and exploiting whatever you can. These engineers are so good at that.
Click to expand...

I said when they announced this that the racing would suck by midseason because the teams will have had enough testing, practice and races to perfect the cars again.
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
I said when they announced this that the racing would suck by midseason because the teams will have had enough testing, practice and races to perfect the cars again.
Click to expand...
You and Mr. Puffs must know the same little bird in Charlotte.
 
If teams are getting their down force back NASCAR will find ways to remove more or determine how they regained it and establish more rules. It's just the cat & mouse game they play.
 
aunty dive said:
You and Mr. Puffs must know the same little bird in Charlotte.
Click to expand...
Jeff Gluck (USA Today) has more access to the little birdies that actually know what they are talking about than anyone on here. He reported some numbers at the end of May...

"Well, the cars with last year’s rules package generated 2,700 pounds of downforce. This year’s package removed 900 pounds, but teams have gained another 100 back through their own ingenuity."

Gluck also reports the 2017 rules are designed to remove another 500 pounds, so "NASCAR will have figured out how to remove nearly half the downforce in just two years." [2700 - 900 +100 - 500 = 1400] Link to Gluck's article.
 
The average Joe tuning in does not care about aero and its effects he just wants to put his brain in neutral and be entertained. The negative impact aero has on the on track product can be discussed ad nauseum but if it has a pronounced effect more people will tune out as in their opinion it makes the races seem like snooze fests.
 
This relentless pursuit of "great racing" will never bear fruit because a operational definition simply does not exist. You couldn't get two people to agree on what the hell this is, but NASCAR appears to want to find it. Good luck with that.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
The average Joe tuning in does not care about aero and its effects he just wants to put his brain in neutral and be entertained. The negative impact aero has on the on track product can be discussed ad nauseum but if it has a pronounced effect more people will tune out as in their opinion it makes the races seem like snooze fests.
Click to expand...

Could it be that a substantial part of a race event is boring if all that average Joe wants is entertainment? I do believe that it always has been from this perspective. NASCAR is chasing something they will never catch.
 
4tires17gals said:
If the problem is the speeds reduce the speeds to 120 mph
Click to expand...

Nope. The other problem besides dirty air is that these cars run at the same speed through the corners...making passing difficult. That's why they're removing downforce, to get cars loose/unstable and make the speed differential between two cars greater=passing.

If they added back that extra 50hp they got rid of two years ago the racing would be much better. More speed down the straights would mean more braking in the turns. More braking means more opportunities to out-brake someone and PASS. More speed also means more tire management, which is already awesome at some tracks as Goodyear realizes tires shouldn't be hard.
 
Revman said:
This relentless pursuit of "great racing" will never bear fruit because a operational definition simply does not exist. You couldn't get two people to agree on what the hell this is, but NASCAR appears to want to find it. Good luck with that.
Click to expand...




Kyle busch whipasss is great racing :D
 
Speedbowl14 said:
If they added back that extra 50hp they got rid of two years ago the racing would be much better.
Click to expand...
This right here, except it was unfortunately more than 50 bhp.

The right amount of power and torque is ... more than the driver can use until the steering angle is zero degrees. JMO of course.
 
aunty dive said:
This right here, except it was unfortunately more than 50 bhp.

The right amount of power and torque is ... more than the driver can use until the steering angle is zero degrees. JMO of course.
Click to expand...

Why'd they do that Aunty? The reason was never disclosed, correct? Phase 1 of many in trying to get these engines to a point where they can run two races?
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
I said when they announced this that the racing would suck by midseason because the teams will have had enough testing, practice and races to perfect the cars again.
Click to expand...

The racing hasn't been that bad, but if you look at where we have run for the past month its no wonder there is a lull in the action. After Daytona which is mid season, we went Kentucky, New Hampshire, Indy, Pocono. Kentucky has always had boring racing, NHMS, Indy and Pocono are the flatest tracks that are not short tracks. I thought Pocono wasn't too bad, better than what we normally get.

The next 5 races should be much better. Watkins Glen, Bristol, Michigan, Darlington, Richmond. And now we have a 31st place car to cheer for to try to get in the chase. I'm looking forward to it all personally!
 
Revman said:
Could it be that a substantial part of a race event is boring if all that average Joe wants is entertainment? I do believe that it always has been from this perspective. NASCAR is chasing something they will never catch.
Click to expand...

IMO, Nascar needs to focus on entertaining fans on a continual basis without long lapses of non entertaining on track product.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Acs
At some point, there is a safety need to control corner entry speeds, and the reduction in power and RPM's plays to that, and I believe cost is also a factor. With the lower downforce of 2016 and even lower in 2017, if the HP was still 850 rather than 725 I think corner entry speeds would be pushing the limits or beyond the limits. It is relevant to note that throttle response and acceleration are (partially) restored by lower drag, even with the power reduction.

I don't know if the engine rules implemented in 2015 have any impact on costs, but I suspect very little or none. However, we know Nascar wants smaller motors, and the 358 with tapered spacer seems like a stopgap measure. If motor mileage requirements can be implemented, there are some serious cost savings to be had. This has been proven over and over in other racing series. So maybe the end game is to introduce new motors that will last two or three races between rebuilds.
 
LewTheShoe said:
At some point, there is a safety need to control corner entry speeds, and the reduction in power and RPM's plays to that, and I believe cost is also a factor. With the lower downforce of 2016 and even lower in 2017, if the HP was still 850 rather than 725 I think corner entry speeds would be pushing the limits or beyond the limits. It is relevant to note that throttle response and acceleration are (partially) restored by lower drag, even with the power reduction.

I don't know if the engine rules implemented in 2015 have any impact on costs, but I suspect very little or none. However, we know Nascar wants smaller motors, and the 358 with tapered spacer seems like a stopgap measure. If motor mileage requirements can be implemented, there are some serious cost savings to be had. This has been proven over and over in other racing series. So maybe the end game is to introduce new motors that will last two or three races between rebuilds.
Click to expand...


I agree that corner speeds were getting ridiculous. That year they repaved Michigan and were heading into turn 1 at 215+mph was eye-opening. But with the lower downforce midcorner speeds have dropped. So would the extra hp be enough to get them up to 210mph at the end of the straights even with a lower midcorner speed? I'd think not...but to be honest I'm not really sure.
 
LewTheShoe said:
I don't know if the engine rules implemented in 2015 have any impact on costs, but I suspect very little or none.
Click to expand...
A month after the word came down, every camshaft and lifter combination, every set of cylinder heads / intake manifold combination, all the valve springs and every set of headers in every shop that had been in use up to that point was no longer in use. And you can add hundreds of thousands of dollars of development costs to the bill.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
IMO, Nascar needs to focus on entertaining fans on a continual basis without long lapses of non entertaining on track product.
Click to expand...

By its very nature, racing has long lapses of "non entertaining on track product." This will never change unless we have 10 lap sprint races....which is what many of the finishes these races have....and then, these tend to be considered "good races." Imagine that.
 
LewTheShoe said:
Jeff Gluck (USA Today) has more access to the little birdies that actually know what they are talking about than anyone on here. He reported some numbers at the end of May...

"Well, the cars with last year’s rules package generated 2,700 pounds of downforce. This year’s package removed 900 pounds, but teams have gained another 100 back through their own ingenuity."

Gluck also reports the 2017 rules are designed to remove another 500 pounds, so "NASCAR will have figured out how to remove nearly half the downforce in just two years." [2700 - 900 +100 - 500 = 1400] Link to Gluck's article.
Click to expand...

If you honestly believe the teams have only found 100 pounds of downforce back then you're nuts and a complete sheep. Jeff Gluck isn't in the windtunnel or building the cars. Jimmie Johnson's statement was way more accurate than Jeff Gluck's, and I think Jimmie is a little more of an insider than any journalist will ever be. HMS or Penske isn't going to just tell Jeff Gluck, "yeah here's the cD and downforce numbers and here's how we did it. Please pass this around at your discretion". The media are laymen like us when it comes down to it. Just laymen that follow the circuit with a recorder and a book of questions.
 
^ It isn't possible to make the kind of gains you claim or Jimmie Johnson alluded to solely by working under the car.

I expect Mr. Johnson's was an off the cuff remark, if he made it at all.
 
aunty dive said:
Dirty air never went away. At these racing speeds, it never will.

The science behind those statements is irrefutable.
Click to expand...
This is correct. But the disadvantage of dirty air can be reduced by reducing the advantage of clean air that accrues to the leading car. This has happened this year to a certain extent, and more is planned for 2017. I'm in favor of that. From the "test races" at Michigan and Kentucky, we saw the interesting by product of the trailing car tucking in behind the leader, thus robbing his spoiler of air and making him loose. Delicious. Looking forward to Michigan II and to 2017.

As for the remaining 2016 races, IMO the low downforce rules package has been a success and the racing remains a big upgrade over last year. It hasn't made passing the leader easy, and it's not supposed to make it easy, But it has made it much more possible to pass the leader, which is all we should ask.

One thing I'm still not clear about is, who benefits most and who is harmed by reducing reliance on downforce. I'm biased, but I think Kez looks great with low downforce. So do Kyle Busch and also Carl Edwards I think, plus Truex. Tony likes it for sure, and really surprised to see how JJ has struggled. Any thoughts on comers and goers among the driving corps?
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
I said when they announced this that the racing would suck by midseason because the teams will have had enough testing, practice and races to perfect the cars again.
Click to expand...
It's not like the summer tracks are shining examples of the sport in the first place. Many of the low-rated tracks in that other discussion are run between Memorial Day and Labor Day.
 
Revman said:
By its very nature, racing has long lapses of "non entertaining on track product." This will never change unless we have 10 lap sprint races....which is what many of the finishes these races have....and then, these tend to be considered "good races." Imagine that.
Click to expand...

I am not sure if long lapses of non entertaining product will get it done in this day and age. Expectations for what we use our discretionary time for are at an all time high and we continue to demand more and more.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
I am not sure if long lapses of non entertaining product will get it done in this day and age. Expectations for what we use our discretionary time for are at an all time high and we continue to demand more and more.
Click to expand...
Of course not, right? I mean, if somebody wants to watch marvelous modern engineered cars ride around- and who cares if they pass or not!? - just watch em pass by your house in the street. Nobody watches racing for that or there wouldn't be racing.
 
blanston said:
Of course not, right? I mean, if somebody wants to watch marvelous modern engineered cars ride around- and who cares if they pass or not!? - just watch em pass by your house in the street. Nobody watches racing for that or there wouldn't be racing.
Click to expand...

LOL, I saw one of the neighbor kids get mad and take his peddle car home as he kept getting caught up in dirty air and couldn't make a move forward despite new axles, bearings and a grease job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom