[Souporscotty]

Originally Posted by NASCAR Gnome

The reason why I like fuel mileage races is precisely because it forces the teams to think! The drivers are not just stampeding the track trying to go the fastest - heck if you want that then go watch drag racing!

Those of you complaining that fuel mileage races are not for the fast cars, you are 100% wrong! Look at the finishing time of the winning car. Did the winning car cover the required distance? If the answer is yes, then the winning car crossed the finish line first making him the fastest since he crossed the stripe before anyone else! How can you then say that the fastest car didn't win?

Welcome to GTG Gnome. I like your logic.

[Racer Duck]

yep ... and nope.

a AA Fuel dragster would definitely be the fastest (highest top speed) car on the track (assuming the track was long enough for it to slow down for the turns), but the pit stops would be murder: basically one a lap with a complete engine rebuild each time.

many's the time a race was won by a slower car (lower lap speed) who had faster pit stops.

then there's the "unplaned excursions" that occasionally hamper the "best" car getting to the finish line ahead of the others...

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

yep ... and nope.

a AA Fuel dragster would definitely be the fastest (highest top speed) car on the track (assuming the track was long enough for it to slow down for the turns), but the pit stops would be murder: basically one a lap with a complete engine rebuild each time.

many's the time a race was won by a slower car (lower lap speed) who had faster pit stops.

then there's the "unplaned excursions" that occasionally hamper the "best" car getting to the finish line ahead of the others...

Ducky ... you're kinda sliding around the corner on the logic of fastest this time. Correct me if I'm wrong but the fastest car does win. At any given point the 43rd place car can have the fastest lap. The race is won by the overall fastest car not the one who had 25 of the fastest laps or who had the fastest pit stops.

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

Ducky ... you're kinda sliding around the corner on the logic of fastest this time. Correct me if I'm wrong but the fastest car does win. At any given point the 43rd place car can have the fastest lap. The race is won by the overall fastest car not the one who had 25 of the fastest laps or who had the fastest pit stops.

arghhh, the limits of the King's English

in Aesop's fable "the Tortoise and the Hare" the Tortoise wins the race. no doubt, one could argue the Tortoise is the "fastest." BUT if that were so, where would the lesson be that "slow and steady win the race"? "slow" implies lesser speed, slower than fast, much slower than fastest.

I grant that the car that finishes first is, by definition, the quickest to complete the course. I'll even grant that the total average speed of the first car to complete the race is the highest of all the cars in the race. but the car with the fastest lap is the fastest car because no other car was able to surpass the mark set by that car. said another way: the car with the quickest lap is the quickest car. ("quickest" and "fastest" being approximately equal in definition.)

so what do we do? we're stuck with the limits of the language and the double meaning of words.

that said, I prefer to think of the "fastest" car in the race being the car with the quickest lap time, while the winner of the race need not be the "fastest" car in the race but needs only to complete the course first.

you, of course, are welcome to your own opinion.

here's a point to ponder: if we put the fastest qualifier in the front and the slowest in the rear, then we are automatically giving the faster car an advantage because it doesn't have to travel as far to win the race as the slowest car. is that fair?

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

here's a point to ponder: if we put the fastest qualifier in the front and the slowest in the rear, then we are automatically giving the faster car an advantage because it doesn't have to travel as far to win the race as the slowest car. is that fair?

Quite the contrary my friend. You are just standing on the wrong side of the fence and viewing the situation from the incorrect view.

The fastest doesn't get an advantage ... the slowest is DIS-advantaged !!!

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

Quite the contrary my friend. You are just standing on the wrong side of the fence and viewing the situation from the incorrect view.

The fastest doesn't get an advantage ... the slowest is DIS-advantaged !!!

the story of my life...