[vincesanity82]

Indy car racing or Nascar racing, which one is more dangerous?

[Bob Tanner]

Indy. Faster speeds and less car body surrounding the driver.

Example: A "t-bone" wreck recently broke Franchitti's ankle. A similar wreck in CART cost Alex Zanardi both his legs at the knees.

[Racer Duck]

from what point of view: drivers? fans? crew?

from a driver's perspective, they're both about the same - injuries happen, but it's been a long time since there's been a fatality in either.

from a crew's perspective, it's NASCAR - hardly a race goes by that a crewman doesn't get knocked down by a car.

from a fan's perspective, it's probably Indy cars - they disintegrate when crashed so it always looks worse; but then when was the last time an Indy car slid down the track on it's roof/top?

that's my take.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

from a fan's perspective, it's probably Indy cars - they disintegrate when crashed so it always looks worse; but then when was the last time an Indy car slid down the track on it's roof/top?

.

Aug 7, 2007. Dario Franchitti at Michigan.

As you correctly say, it looked a lot wose than it ended up being, which speaks well for the INDY car's safety.

[vincesanity82]

I dont know about any one else, but if I had to choose between a high speed wreck in Indy or nascar, I would choose nascar everytime..

[simple simon]

time for me to disagree with people that know more about racing then i ever will

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

from a driver's perspective, they're both about the same

i doubt that .... i think the drivers respect speed ..... and Indycar is where the speed is

Texas Qualifying Speeds: NASCAR .. Jr 190.907 -- Indycar .. Scott Sharp 215.260

Indianapolis Qualifying Speds: NASCAR .. Reed Sorenson 184.207 -- Indycar .. Helio Castroneves 225.817

from a crew's perspective, it's NASCAR - hardly a race goes by that a crewman doesn't get knocked down by a car.

again i disagree .... about a week and a half ago Danica Patrick sent a crew-member to the hospital during Indy practice

from a fan's perspective, it's probably Indy cars - they disintegrate when crashed so it always looks worse[/quote]ok .. here we agree .... Indycars can just touch and one can be busted into 1,000 little pieces

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Aug 7, 2007. Dario Franchitti at Michigan.

As you correctly say, it looked a lot wose than it ended up being, which speaks well for the INDY car's safety.

while i dont disagree with you Bob .... the latest real bad looking wreck i recall i believe happened at practice for Indy last year ..... Mario had a terrible wreck in a Team Green car

and i believe Mario basically walked away from that

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by simple simon

while i dont disagree with you Bob .... the latest real bad looking wreck i recall i believe happened at practice for Indy last year ..... Mario had a terrible wreck in a Team Green car

and i believe Mario basically walked away from that

I forgot about that one.

[clutch]

Getting the pole at Indy depends on how much downforce you are willing to give up for speed......which is a chance taken by the brave

225mph into the wall in that tiny car is disaster

[DOF_power]

With the COT NASCAR is safer.

[Racer Duck]

OK, let's take your points one at a time:

Originally Posted by simple simon

time for me to disagree with people that know more about racing then i ever will
i doubt that .... i think the drivers respect speed ..... and Indycar is where the speed is

Texas Qualifying Speeds: NASCAR .. Jr 190.907 -- Indycar .. Scott Sharp 215.260

Indianapolis Qualifying Speds: NASCAR .. Reed Sorenson 184.207 -- Indycar .. Helio Castroneves 225.817

Instead of getting bogged down in a lot of math, I'm just going to use the Texas speeds you have cited.

If you convert the MPH into FPS (feet per second), it comes to NASCAR 280 and IndyCar 315, or about 2 car lengths (the difference in actual speed is 12.5%). I don't think many drivers can tell the difference at that speed, though they will know they are going very fast and one seems faster than the other.

But, speed alone doesn't impart danger. The danger comes from the combination of momentum (speed times weight) and available traction (downforce times contact patch size.) In this situation the NASCAR is more dangerous because of the higher weight and less down force (assuming the contact patch and speeds are similar.) The saving grace for the COT is it seems to exhibit a stability in a near spin situation that the IndyCar does not.

Originally Posted by simple simon

again i disagree .... about a week and a half ago Danica Patrick sent a crew-member to the hospital during Indy practice

My statement was not which had the most serious, recent crew member accident, but which has the most accidents in a given period during a race. Danica's was during a practice session and she ran down a guy from behind who walking thru the pits in conversation with another person. If that same thing had happened with a COT the guy may well have not survived being run over with a vehicle twice the weight of the IndyCar.

All pit roads are hazardous and require alertness from drivers and the people in the pits.

Anyone who's ever worked the flight deck of an aircraft carrier is familiar with the problems of limited space and dangerous vehicles moving around; the same is true in car racing. The IndyCar pits are generally more "spacious" than the NASCAR pits, mainly because there's fewer IndyCars at an event than NASCARs.

That's why I believe NASCAR is more dangerous to crew members. Arrogant swimsuit models in drivers suits not withstanding.

[DOF_power]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

OK, let's take your points one at a time:


Instead of getting bogged down in a lot of math, I'm just going to use the Texas speeds you have cited.

If you convert the MPH into FPS (feet per second), it comes to NASCAR 280 and IndyCar 315, or about 2 car lengths (the difference in actual speed is 12.5%). I don't think many drivers can tell the difference at that speed, though they will know they are going very fast and one seems faster than the other.

But, speed alone doesn't impart danger. The danger comes from the combination of momentum (speed times weight) and available traction (downforce times contact patch size.) In this situation the NASCAR is more dangerous because of the higher weight and less down force (assuming the contact patch and speeds are similar.) The saving grace for the COT is it seems to exhibit a stability in a near spin situation that the IndyCar does not.

Sorry Duck but things are not so simple

changing the perspective another perspective you get something like:

- higher weight/mass = bigger force pushing it to the ground (some of the lighter single-seaters of the past were quite "flyers").
- big-downforce = big downforce loss when things go wrong = no more stability
Ultimately what IMO makes the difference is the open cockpit nature of single seater compared to the tought roll-cage tin tops.
Somehow a suspensions breaking on impact with the wall with pieces of it penetrate the driver's head like in Senna's case or a Moore splasher or a "close shave" is something I can't imagine with the COT.

My statement was not which had the most serious, recent crew member accident, but which has the most accidents in a given period during a race. Danica's was during a practice session and she ran down a guy from behind who walking thru the pits in conversation with another person. If that same thing had happened with a COT the guy may well have not survived being run over with a vehicle twice the weight of the IndyCar.

All pit roads are hazardous and require alertness from drivers and the people in the pits.

Anyone who's ever worked the flight deck of an aircraft carrier is familiar with the problems of limited space and dangerous vehicles moving around; the same is true in car racing. The IndyCar pits are generally more "spacious" than the NASCAR pits, mainly because there's fewer IndyCars at an event than NASCARs.

That's why I believe NASCAR is more dangerous to crew members. Arrogant swimsuit models in drivers suits not withstanding.

But does it mean that NASCAR pits are more dangerous or worse at dealing with the danger ?!
I think NASCAR pits should definately change as they're behind times.

[simple simon]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

I think NASCAR pits should definately change as they're behind times.

but im not so sure they can change DOF

let's stick with the Texas Motor Speedway example

NASCAR starts the race with 43 on the grid ...... Indycar starts with 20 cars on the grid

now someone correct me if im wrong please because i dont know exactly how the pits are set up ... but it seems obvious that Indycars have twice as much room on pit road

i suppose it is possible that there can be larger pits can be made at the Super Speedways ... but i wouldnt think that would be so at tracks like Bristol

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

Sorry Duck but things are not so simple

changing the perspective another perspective you get something like:

- higher weight/mass = bigger force pushing it to the ground (some of the lighter single-seaters of the past were quite "flyers").
- big-downforce = big downforce loss when things go wrong = no more stability
Ultimately what IMO makes the difference is the open cockpit nature of single seater compared to the tought roll-cage tin tops.
Somehow a suspensions breaking on impact with the wall with pieces of it penetrate the driver's head like in Senna's case or a Moore splasher or a "close shave" is something I can't imagine with the COT.






But does it mean that NASCAR pits are more dangerous or worse at dealing with the danger ?!
I think NASCAR pits should definately change as they're behind times.

I quite agree about the dangers of the open cockpit. And, I've never been a fan of the "explosion" method of absorbing impact force.

But the driver "box" does a pretty good job of protecting said driver in the open cockpit cars. Still, short of remote control, I don't know how to protect a driver from every conceivable circumstance...

re: the pit dangers - NASCAR is definitely behind the times in dealing with pit dangers. the cars are faster, the driver has less visibility, and the crews are much more skilled and athletic than in years past (thus more "confident" they can elude mishaps.) still, hardly a race goes by when a crewman isn't knocked to the ground by a car in the pits. larger pits, wider pit roads, stiffer penalties for pit road infractions, and pneumatic jacks would all help.

[DOF_power]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

I quite agree about the dangers of the open cockpit. And, I've never been a fan of the "explosion" method of absorbing impact force.

But the driver "box" does a pretty good job of protecting said driver in the open cockpit cars.

The box carbon fibre survival cell system with the more enclosed cockpits has its advantages and but disadvantages.
In case of an impact the driver is in a less dangerous situation but with lower visibility and lower stability he's more likely to get in such a situation.

Still, short of remote control, I don't know how to protect a driver from every conceivable circumstance...

Motorsport might be safer but it will never be safe.
Fatalities and/or serious injuries will still occur but a much more reduced rate.
Racedrivers will never be like ball/stick&ball athletes.

Those old saying like "... racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports. . . all others are games" or "This isn't a thousand to one shot. This is a professional bloodsport. And it can happen to you. And then it can happen to you again" will still hold their weight, not so cruel as in the past but.

re: the pit dangers - NASCAR is definitely behind the times in dealing with pit dangers. the cars are faster, the driver has less visibility, and the crews are much more skilled and athletic than in years past (thus more "confident" they can elude mishaps.) still, hardly a race goes by when a crewman isn't knocked to the ground by a car in the pits. larger pits, wider pit roads, stiffer penalties for pit road infractions, and pneumatic jacks would all help.

My thoughts exactly.