[wingkey1]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

I watched the Aussie V8's on SPEED Friday night

V8 Supercars (Aussie V8's) is an all road course series. Much easier to maintain the stock/close to stock form factor. A good number of SCCA classes continue to demonstrate very competitive events with very close to stock appearance.

As for the V8 Supercars - "project blueprint" is their "COT-like" initiative. Common suspensions, transmission, and more. One of the driving elements for this is an increasing desire for international competition in the series. Problem is vehicles from other venues are so notably different that some form of commonality must be introduced.

Indeed there is some really good racing to be seen with the V8 Supercars. Would not mind seeing a bit more coverage. Their season is just underway.

[Quality88]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

No, in the case of the NASCARmobile, the change doesn't especially bother me. It's the "meddling" by the sanctioning body in areas I feel they have no real business in, that spins me out into orbit.

I second that Bob, they should let things alone and step in at other times, very less that is.

[trollmc08]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

Another issue is many do not like change and posting messages against change is our only outlet.

I am not against change. I just don't like stupid changes. If you try something new then that is cool. If it works then fine if it don't then say oops! back up and try something different, don't try and shove crap down everyones throat and call it a stake.

[clutch]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

I watched the Aussie V8's on SPEED Friday night, Mate. They put on a great show. Ironically, that race pointed out the exact reason why I believe you misunderstand my position.

Everyone of those cars were basically stock-appearing. The bodies were similiar, but not indentical, because the manufacturers designed them that way.

The NASCARmobile has, OTOH, had its body almost entirely redesigned by NASCAR. Then these almost identical plans (noses and rear deck configuration excepted) were given to the teams with instructions to "Make it happen."



But, to me, this NASCARmobile goes against the founding principle of NASCAR, i.e.; S-T-O-C-K C-A-R-S. I realize that it is impossible today to safely race a "stock car." But, darn it, they could at least make them appear "Stock," as you Aussies do in your V8 Series.

The V8 Supercars are another can of worms, I like them of course but some crazy things are done by that organization too!

Now you point is that Nascar should stay out of Car design and leave it to the manufacturers?
Personally I dont give a rats a## whether they look like Stock Cars or NOT. I'd be more than happy if the only identification on them was the badge. It has abeen a long , long time since they looked STOCK.

I guess this is a fundamental point of difference that seems to reverberate throughout this forum.

[BringBackWilkesboro]

Originally Posted by clutch

The V8 Supercars are another can of worms, I like them of course but some crazy things are done by that organization too!

Now you point is that Nascar should stay out of Car design and leave it to the manufacturers?
Personally I dont give a rats a## whether they look like Stock Cars or NOT. I'd be more than happy if the only identification on them was the badge. It has abeen a long , long time since they looked STOCK.

I guess this is a fundamental point of difference that seems to reverberate throughout this forum.

No big issue here, but if the cars dont look even remotely like there street legal counterpart, there is really no point to calling the sport stock car racing. I'm heard the term "NASCAR Racing" alot more now and see why. It is'nt just because the racing is sanctioned by NASCAR anymore. They are no longer racing Chevys Fords and Dodges, they're racing "NASCARs" with a few parts from the manufacture in the engine.

[BringBackWilkesboro]

Originally Posted by clutch

No new revelations in there, he just sounds like another person who doesnt want to see any change

The fact is COT is coming, I'll be watching with interest all of the races, and then I shall form an opinion

it the logical thing to do

No, there aren't any new revalations, but (if you're speaking of Michael Daly), there is certainly more to it than not wanting to see change. Daly's article says A basic of stock car aerodynamics is that any serious indentation in the front airdam will make the car push, and everyone knows this is true. If you punch a hole in the grille at Daytona, that's pretty much it for you, and I see is a pre punched hole about 4 and a half feet long on the COT. One more point about the splitter, as Daly said, it is alot like the '88-'92 Grand Prix that drivers complained about, which also had a "splitter" like design. The second issue in Daly's article is the wing. NASCAR says "the wing enables trail car to race in "cleaner" air and promotes more passing." How does a bigger hunk of metal on the back of the car give the guy behind you cleaner air? All I see it doing is getting a car aero loose further back, which is what happens to Indy cars (which also have huge rear wings). That explains where Daly got the phrase "unraceable in dirty air". I do however agree with Richard Petty's take on getting the COT the full competition now. I don't see any point to the 4 year introducion plan.

[Bob Tanner]

They had some interesting interviews on SIRIUS this week.

Robin Pemberton was interviewed on the subject of the NASCARmobile. Some of the things he said brought up more questions. For example:

He said the NASCARmobile was concieved to meet safety issues. This sounds good but... What "safety issues" did the COT address that couldn't be addressed with the current vehicle models?

He said that it was a cost-cutting measure because now teams can run a season with four or five vehicles in their stable. This sounds good BUT, IF NASCAR really wants to reduce the number of cars in a stable, then why not set a limit? AS it stands a team "could" get by with four or five chassis but what do you thing the chances are of Hendrick or Roush NOT having the same number of cars in their stable which they have now? Do I hear zero to none?

Now, (SURPRISE!!!) the positive aspects of the NASCARmobile:

Apparently about the only body changes a team can affect is the position of the front splitter and positioning the rear wing. IF this proves out then money and time spent in the wind tunnels will be drastically deduced to practically nothing.

The above will make it easier to make changes that really alter the cars performance during the race.

The higher "greenhouse" makes the car look less aerodynamic and more like a "stock car."

Even though this entire NASCARmobile project reminds me of the tongue-in-cheek definition of a camel (A cow designed by a committee), and it makes me feel uncomfortably as though it's someone's "project" that is being rammed down the fan's throats, Clutch has the best outlook. "Let's wait and see." Sounds like a plan to me.

[BringBackWilkesboro]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

"Let's wait and see." Sounds like a plan to me.

I third that clutch and Bob. Im tired of trying to figure this thing out. My only worry is waiting and seeing might distract us from racing come Food City 500 weekend.

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

"Let's wait and see." Sounds like a plan to me.

After the wait and see period I suspect all of our suspicions will become harsh realities.

[Quality88]

Originally Posted by BringBackWilkesboro

My only worry is waiting and seeing might distract us from racing come Food City 500 weekend.

Yeah BBW I think that will be a good race to be hammered as to not be distracted by the 3-ring circus.

[clutch]

Originally Posted by BringBackWilkesboro

No, there aren't any new revalations, but (if you're speaking of Michael Daly), there is certainly more to it than not wanting to see change. Daly's article says A basic of stock car aerodynamics is that any serious indentation in the front airdam will make the car push, and everyone knows this is true. If you punch a hole in the grille at Daytona, that's pretty much it for you, and I see is a pre punched hole about 4 and a half feet long on the COT. One more point about the splitter, as Daly said, it is alot like the '88-'92 Grand Prix that drivers complained about, which also had a "splitter" like design. The second issue in Daly's article is the wing. NASCAR says "the wing enables trail car to race in "cleaner" air and promotes more passing." How does a bigger hunk of metal on the back of the car give the guy behind you cleaner air? All I see it doing is getting a car aero loose further back, which is what happens to Indy cars (which also have huge rear wings). That explains where Daly got the phrase "unraceable in dirty air". I do however agree with Richard Petty's take on getting the COT the full competition now. I don't see any point to the 4 year introducion plan.

BBW, all sounds reasonable but why not wait and see what happens........it'll be here before you know it

I agree with you on the introduction plan

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by clutch

BBW, all sounds reasonable but why not wait and see what happens........it'll be here before you know it

I agree with you on the introduction plan

We agree, Clutch. NASCAR's gonna race it and it is what it is. As I previously noted the darn thing even has some pluses.

My whole problem isn't with the NASCARmobile, it's with NASCAR. NASCAR is a sanctioning body and, IMNOVHO, it could concern itself with normal race admin duties; safety, purses, rule making and rule enforcement. NA$CAR needs to concern itself with the RACES, not the RACING. Leave that up to the teams and the drivers ONLY.

Just one fan's opinion...

[LSC9901]

Another way to put that is to say that Ford, Chevy, Dodge and Toyota are MANUFACTURERS and NA$CAR should be a sanctioning body. The two should never become mixed together.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

Another way to put that is to say that Ford, Chevy, Dodge and Toyota are MANUFACTURERS and NA$CAR should be a sanctioning body. The two should never become mixed together.

Yep. A parable might be the mixing of fine scotch and coke; it's a total waste of fine scotch and does nothing for the coke, either.

[Quality88]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Yep. A parable might be the mixing of fine scotch and coke; it's a total waste of fine scotch and does nothing for the coke, either.

Keep the scotch and I'll use the coke for the Makers, or Turkey.... I hear/see what you all are saying and agree totally.