What situation causes the most danger to a driver?

Which situation puts drivers in the most danger?

  • Restricter plate racing.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Racing back to the caution.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Green White Checkered.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
R

racerx11

Guest
Just curious to see what everyone thinks.

I think the answer would be restricter plate racing and if GWC is to dangerous to do, as Rusty woul have you think, then something needs to be done with the plate tracks.
 
Racing back to the caution. And it sure makes sense to me that GWC would be a close second. Plates may be dangerous, but I don't buy into it that it's the most dangerous situation. Not nearly as dangerous as the two plate tracks were before NASCAR restricted the engines.

Let's face though.........racing automobiles is not what most would consider a real safe occupation. But, really with all the safety equipment and rules, there are not that many injuries and fatalities. The potential is always there, though.
 
I think the danger comes on restarts with the cars bunched so closely together. On restrictor plate tracks they are bunch that closely together every lap not just on the restrats.
 
You should have added a fourth option: Being directly in front of Tony Stewart, Kurt Busch, Johnny Sauter, or Kevin Harvick. :lol:

I voted plate racing. The entire notion and concept are ludicrous and deplorable. That no one has been killed yet is remarkable.
 
Rusty is right !!!!! Racing to a G/W/C is dangerous. Racing to the caution has been addressed by NASCAR, but racing under conditions of a G/W/C with a restrictor plate engine is tantamount to a demolition derby and a personal invitation to disaster.

That said, the question is, "what situation causes the most danger to a driver" and in my opinion it is taking a hit in the driver door while stopped in front of racing traffic, before the caution is thrown.
 
Well I went with the majority on RP racing but I have to agree with EMP as well. Tho Sauter seems to have calmed down some but Tony is more than taking up his slack...
 
:lol: emp!

I voted restrictor plate...just because it's the most predictable. You can almost guarantee a big wreck on a r.p. race.

But I think racing back under caution has the potential for the worse case scenario accident:
Two guys racing back end up in the guy who has already wrecked...

I'm glad they changed that.
 
Plate racing with out a doubt is the most dangerous, it puts those 20 or so pack of cars or more is serious jeopardy if some one commits the slightest miscue. Plate tracks don't need the GWC, but there is no reason why it work on other tracks, however, like i said in another thread it works with the trucks at Daytona and they draft at 190 or better. Hopefully the engine configuration that Nascar is looking into will mean the end of plates, one can only hope! B)
 
No question it's got to be plate racing and I think the drivers would even agree.
 
I think it's almost a toss up between RP and
Racin back to the caution.
GWC on a RP track could be just as dangerous though.
JMHO
icecs4.gif
 
Okay something to think about. You have a pack of cars racing at 180 to 190 mph and someone gets their car out of shape and gets into a car next to him. Drivers behind this action start slowing down and they get tapped from behind. Now you have 6 to 8 cars spinning, slapping the wall and banging into each other and 10 cars behind that mess start swerving and dodging the wrecking cars in front of them.......they also loose control and wind up wrecking with the original 2 cars. That's pretty much the classic "big one" (at least a generic big one at Dega or Daytona). You can have 15 to 20 cars wrecking in very short period of time. Remember though all those cars were going almost the same speed when they wrecked.......the impact one to each car is really only the equivalent of the difference in speed between any two or dozen cars involved. Even hitting the wall, unless they drive straight into it at a perpendicular angle, is way less than the speed of the car. That is way so many of the "big ones" almost never produce serious injuries or fatalities......everything is relative to the speed of the impact.

Now lets take those 20 cars that were ahead of the wreck. By the time they come around to where the wreck occurred the wrecked cars are stopped.......zero mph. The 20 cars are racing back to the caution and they are going 180 to 185 just like the lap before. They come up on the wadded up bunch of cars stopped dead on the track. Now tell me which is more dangerous. A bunch of spinning cars going approximately the same speed while wrecking or a car going 180 mph coming up on a dead stopped car? A car hitting a stopped car has one hell of a lot more impact that a car spinning at 160 mph and being hit by a car going 180.

Racing back the the caution is the most dangerous situation a driver could be put in.........HANDS DOWN!!!
 
Valid point, DE. But without the plates, how often do we see 20 cars in a knot where they can't avoid one another? In an unrestricted scenario, the faster cars can get away from the rest. The slower cars drift backward through the field. Ususally no more than half a dozen guys find themselves in a situation where they have to avoid a given car. That gives each of those half dozen guys that much more space to maneuver, brake, whatever needs to happen. There's that much less likelihood of being tapped from behind in the first place.

I certainly understand the physics of the situation you describe, and can't disagree with the thinking that went into stopping the practice of racing to the yellow. I just think that a driver, any driver, has a much better chance of missing another car if he has four other drivers around him than he does with thirty-four others around him all travelling at the same speed.
 
I agree with the physics behind DE's argument...but in reality what have we seen more of? RP- wrecks takes the cake...

Plus you would "hope" that if someone were in the situation of racing back to the yellow with an accident ahead that drivers, spotters, etc would show a little caution and enough common sense not drive into an accident at full speed.

They are both dangerous, but RP races don't take such a 'perfect set' of events to cause serious danger. A cut tire will do just fine....

:cheers:
 
I'm sure most of you know I don't hate restrictor plates. They are not my favorite type of races....but they are far from my least favorite. Personally, I'd like to see them go away (the plates...........not the tracks) but I'm intelligent enough to know that they are here for the immediate future. So I choose to find a way to live with them. I'm in no position to make the changes that would make Daytona and Talladega tracks that could be raced on without restrictor plates.......I've heard all the arguments against them. And every argument comes down to one theme.........NASCAR does not want to solve the problem. NASCAR keeps the plates because NASCAR likes them. NASCAR invented the plates so they could control who would win. NASCAR, NASCAR, NASCAR..........it's all NASCAR's fault. We have number of people on this and other boards who seem to know how to fix the problem............they have the answers and NASCAR just won't listen. I say that's all hogwash. I say better experts than anyone here have addressed the problem and have not come up with a feasible way to take the plates off the cars. If it were feasible, I know we would not have restrictor plates on the cars at Daytona and Talladega. Everyone has answers........those answer are mainly opinions and have no validity in the real world. If you don't like plate tracks, don't watch...........but don't try to fool me that you have the answers. You don't. That's the facts as I see them. End of my impromptu rant.

Now back to the question at hand. Regardless of the whys or way fors about plate racing, racing back the the caution, or GWC. The question was what puts a driver in a more dangerous situation. Racing back to the flag.............plain and simple...........HANDS DOWN.
 
Think about it the same situations involving racing back to the caution, and gwc can easily happen in the big one plus so much more. HELLO a big one happens up front or in middle of pack, a guy in the back going 190 mph comes up to a car sitting sidways in the middle of the track. When you have less then a few seconds to respond, freezing the field or any other rule wont matter or help much.
 
Moot point..........we don't race back to the caution anymore. We don't have GWC yet. Y'all just don't like plate races so everything has to be "it's the plates that are the worse thing in NASCAR". So jump on the band wagon.....have fun. I voted racing back and I have stated my reasons for doing so.....as requested in the initial post. Plate racing is not as dangerous (no matter what scenarios you might dream up) as the racing back the flag before the rule last season. Dead stopped car t-boned (or any other way) by a car going 180 mph is instant death........big one is a mess, but by no means automatic death. If the question was about what would cause more torn up cars, then plates would probably take the cake.......but the question was about danger to driver. Danger meaning potential for serious injury or death.
 
Hmm strange I didnt think we have been racing back to caution this whole season, it didnt stop drivers from plowing into the back of other drivers. When you have no time to respond it does not matter. A guy can get turned in lessthen a second, and someone can nail him while he is siting sideways just as quickly Especially at a rp race because they run so close together at such high speeds.

Everyone here is saying rp tracks are the most dangerous because we hate rp tracks? I dont know about everyone else, but for me its the other way around. Also we could say the opposite about you, I mean its pretty coincidental that most of the people who didnt vote RP tracks, like rp track racing.
 
Originally posted by DE_Wrangler_2@Jun 30 2004, 06:22 PM
I'm sure most of you know I don't hate restrictor plates. They are not my favorite type of races....but they are far from my least favorite. Personally, I'd like to see them go away (the plates...........not the tracks) but I'm intelligent enough to know that they are here for the immediate future. So I choose to find a way to live with them.
Guess you did not see this.
 
No, I saw it. I didnt say it was your favorite I said you liked it which is what your qoute pretty much says as well.

__

They are not my favorite type of races....but they are far from my least favorite.
 
Originally posted by DE_Wrangler_2@Jun 30 2004, 06:22 PM
I'm sure most of you know I don't hate restrictor plates. They are not my favorite type of races....but they are far from my least favorite. Personally, I'd like to see them go away (the plates...........not the tracks) but I'm intelligent enough to know that they are here for the immediate future. So I choose to find a way to live with them.
Since I'm quoting myself I think I'm allowed to do this. :D I'm going to ask that you read all that I quoted. Your selective emphasis by bolding a portion of my quote is a very popular tactic used by many (especially in the political arena). What you selectively quoted altered what I said (sort of remind you of another thread going on in the Podium? :) ). This time I'm going to bold the portion you chose to leave out.

"Personally, I'd like to see them go away (the plates...........not the tracks) but I'm intelligent enough to know that they are here for the immediate future. So I choose to find a way to live with them."

End of argument.........I'm done.
 
Im to tired and confused to respond tonite, Ill respond in the morning lol . good night good debating as always DE :cheers:
 
Originally posted by DE_Wrangler_2@Jun 30 2004, 05:47 PM


Now lets take those 20 cars that were ahead of the wreck. By the time they come around to where the wreck occurred the wrecked cars are stopped.......zero mph. The 20 cars are racing back to the caution and they are going 180 to 185 just like the lap before. They come up on the wadded up bunch of cars stopped dead on the track. Now tell me which is more dangerous. A bunch of spinning cars going approximately the same speed while wrecking or a car going 180 mph coming up on a dead stopped car? A car hitting a stopped car has one hell of a lot more impact that a car spinning at 160 mph and being hit by a car going 180.

Racing back the the caution is the most dangerous situation a driver could be put in.........HANDS DOWN!!!
This is an unrealistic argument. For this to happen, the leaders would have to race back to the caution and one additional lap. Unless of course the wreck happened at the start finish line but you know as well as everyone on here that they are not going to race full speed into a 20 car pile up when they have a whole lap to slow down.
 
Originally posted by turtle3539@Jul 1 2004, 03:14 PM
Maybe it's Tony Stewart... :lol:


081800.jpg
:XXROFL:

At least ya'll anit calling Robby dangerus anymore! :lol: :p

Hey Steph, you heard the new Cltus T Judd song "I love nascar" O' Ken Schrader's name is in there!! :XXROFL: would tell ya but i'll let ya find out yourself! ^_^
 
Back
Top Bottom