RichardJensen Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) Nope my proposition is that drivers in both series can experience the same level of crash forces and therefore NASCAR could use modified production vehicles just like WRC if they wanted to and it is absolutely defendable. Your proposition is that a vague statement that can't be conclusively tested should be accepted as fact. Edited February 14, 2011 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 There was also no end of bellyaching when the '83-'89 T-birds were racing against Chevrolet's overstyled bricks: ] That assumes that Chevrolet should have been building production cars with the intent of being able to beat everyone on the track at NASCAR races Which they shouldn't. None of these manufacturers should. They should all be building cars the people want to buy. You may not win at the track but you may well win at the sales lot. Its kind of like being a fan of the the Tampa Bay Bucs. You know they aren't going to the super bowl, but their fans show and cheer them on anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Your proposition is that a vague statement that can't be conclusively tested should be accepted as fact. Sort of like applying a single algorithm to all car crashes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Wait. What? So your argument now is that Chevy should have continued to race in Nascar, and continued to lose because their product was uncompetitive in that venue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Sort of like applying a single algorithm to all car crashes? Who did that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Your proposition is "Because Nascar and WRC both have unpredictable crashes, they are functionally equivalent. Therefore, Nascar could use modified production vehicles just like WRC." And that's just not defensible reasoning. Does anyone honestly think a production based WRC car would survive this type of wreck at almost 200 mph where the driver walks away uninjured? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLdvjpFYcIs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) Wait. What? So your argument now is that Chevy should have continued to race in Nascar, and continued to lose because their product was uncompetitive in that venue? Nope, what I'm saying is that if Chevrolet decided that beating Ford on the race track was that important then by all means they should make changes to their production cars so that their race cars would have a chance to win on the track. However, if their current production car, while a loser on the race track, is still a winner on the sales lot then who cares. Selling cars on the lot pays for race cars, not the other way around. I personally don't think that NASCAR races ever had a significant influence on car sales myself. Most of the guys that watch NASCAR aren't driving Ford Fusions for instances. Similarly, back in the day, they weren't driving Thunderbirds or Luminas either. In other words, it just isn't that important. As an example, I don't personally care if the Fiesta wins the WRC championship, only that they run. I'm a Ford fan and therefore I enjoy seeing my preferred brand represented on the track. But I'm not foolish enough to think that the WRC Fiesta has anything in common with the Fiestas on the lot at my dealer. Nor would I buy a Fiesta with the illusion that I'm some sort of work-a-day WRC driver. It's a commuter car that happens to be fun to drive. Edited February 14, 2011 by BlackHorse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 I'm foolish enough to think that the WRC Fiesta has anything in common with the Fiestas on the lot at my dealer. So your suggestion is that Nascar go from being obviously not production based to obviously not production based? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) So your suggestion is that Nascar go from being obviously not production based to obviously not production based? No I'm not suggesting that. You guys really do have a comprehension problem. What I'm saying is, put the factory cars on the track. Put safety cage tech in them, tweak the motors or whatever, but in the end they should be factory cars, not purpose built race cars. Otherwise, don't call it "stock" car racing. If Ford wins, great, they win. If they don't, so what. For some people their brand devotion is so strong that regardless of whether their favored brand wins or loses on the race track, they still aren't going to buy the other brands. For most of the population, however, there is no such devotion. They'll buy from numerous brands over the course of their lives. It's not the I have a problem with purpose built race cars. I love Forumla 1 racing for instance and the Daytona prototype cars as well. But they make no illusions about being a "stock" car. In those series the competition is between the power plants, i.e. Ford or Chevy or Honda, etc etc. NASCAR has its origins in GM vs Ford vs Chrysler. They took stock factory cars and raced them and whoever won, won. So be it. But over the years it has been preverted into something that it never was orginally intended to be. They shouldn't call it NASCAR anymore. There's been nothing stock about those cars for nearly 30 years. Now the question is, why do they even bother making the powerplants equal? At this point, its just like Daytona prototype racing. The bodies are identical so you might as well let the different manufacturers tweak their engines and at least compete in that regard. But they don't. So its the same body and the same engine with different stickers but they still call it "stock" car racing. Yawn. Edited February 14, 2011 by BlackHorse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 put the factory cars on the track Why? You just said that, as far as your concerned, WRC product has 'nothing in common' with street product. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MGallun Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 i watch all racing.. i like it all, so this argument is funny... different strokes for different folks, not going to argue which is better or not, i just have 1 comment on engines and tech.. nascar low tech? ya right.. you find me somewhere else, that can make a normal pushrod small block V8 make 900hp without any force induction, and make them run 500 miles on a track like atlanta or texas having the rpms hang around 9000k all day... now, ya, thats high tech dude.. these are pushrod engines, with alot of shit that can break. also, these cars at daytona and tall run about 350-400hp, and still can get to 200+ mph, ya, on banked tracks but thats still nuts... unrestricted they could be doing 230 plus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Why? You just said that, as far as your concerned, WRC product has 'nothing in common' with street product. WRC does at least use a factory body and a seriously tweaked 4 cylinder engine that is mounted the same way as the factory car (FWD style). So it has a good deal in common with the factory car in that regard. But factory Fiestas are not AWD with 600 hp. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Besides, consider the two series most similar to Nascar globally, DTM and Australian V8 Supercars. DTM is shockingly similar to Nascar in its formula: All DTM race cars have RWD and 4.0 L V8 engines which are air-restricted to 470 hp, no matter if similar layouts or engines are available in the road cars. Instead of the road car bodies, unrelated purpose-built chassis are used, which are closer to prototype racing. And, while Australian V8 Supercars is production based, significant changes are required the vehicles, including things that will be familiar to any Nascar fan, such as fixed gear ratios and a fixed final drive ratio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 WRC does at least use a factory body and a seriously tweaked 4 cylinder engine that is mounted the same way as the factory car (FWD style). So it has a good deal in common with the factory car in that regard. But factory Fiestas are not AWD with 600 hp. lol A seriously tweaked factory body. WRC is like Australian V8 Supercars, and is just one step removed from being silhouette over tube frame.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 A seriously tweaked factory body. WRC is like Australian V8 Supercars, and is just one step removed from being silhouette over tube frame.... Its pretty much just body cladding. Front air damn and side cladding to allow for wider tires and a spoiler on the back. You could probably find some aftermarket company selling one for a street Fiesta. Although I have never looked for one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue II Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 That assumes that Chevrolet should have been building production cars with the intent of being able to beat everyone on the track at NASCAR races Which they shouldn't. None of these manufacturers should. They should all be building cars the people want to buy. You may not win at the track but you may well win at the sales lot. Its kind of like being a fan of the the Tampa Bay Bucs. You know they aren't going to the super bowl, but their fans show and cheer them on anyway. The product you see today as lame as it is goes back to the 1970's when Ford pulled out of all organized racing. Up until then GM was not competitive. After Ford left GM came in and did their tribute $$$$ to the Frances empire and that's how it's been ever since. If anyone believes that Jimmy Johnson is a true 5 time champion they must still believe that wrestling is real. Ford will not do the tribute thing and that's why they get stuck with a severe disadvantage when they had to race up until recently an engine that dated to the 1960's. The Yota, Dodge and GM engine are all replicas of a 351. If Farley had a better alternative to market Ford Racing he would jump at it in a Heartbeat. Sorry for the pun. We're stuck with it. An awfull lot of fans think it is real. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Its pretty much just body cladding. Front air damn and side cladding to allow for wider tires and a spoiler on the back. You could probably find some aftermarket company selling one for a street Fiesta. Although I have never looked for one. Well, underneath, you'll also have additional reinforcements, wheel wells will be significantly altered to allow more wheel travel, the whole back end will be modified to take a differential and driveshafts (including new rear suspension). There's probably not a single aspect of the car that isn't significantly modified. And, as I said, the next step is tube frame & silhouette. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Of course, the FR500 was engineered for the Grand Am Cup not the SCCA World Challenge, but who's counting, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 well, there were a couple mustang fr500s cars in the last scca world challenge season, and they were completely decimated by acura tsx and honda civic LOL I'm sure they were weight handicapped so that the Acura's and Honda's would have a chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Of course, the FR500 was engineered for the Grand Am Cup not the SCCA World Challenge, but who's counting, right? Apparently FIA GT3, as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 FWD cars with 2.4 liter engine are running circles around mustangs in road racing heh In one tightly regulated and handicapped corner of it, yes. Pretty much the only place Honda's seeing success in racing these days-----and this from a company that used to be right up there with Porsche, Ferarri and Ford in commitment to racing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 the point is that FWD cars with 2.4 liter engine are running circles around mustangs in road racing heh Those same FR500s were running circles around BMWs before they handicapped them with additional weight. You're a moron if you really believe the FR500 isn't a great race car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) http://www.world-challenge.com/files/competitors/Appendix_A_Ver_14_1.pdf they do have base weight of 3350 lbs, which is heavier than the tsx's 2750 lbs, but they are allowed a 4600 cc engine while the tsx is only allowed a 2408 cc engine. So the mustang is allowed 1.37 cc of displacement / lb weight, while the tsx is only allowed 0.89 cc / lb. Oh yeah, the TSX weighs anywhere from 3,500 (I4) to 3,800 (V6) in stock form. Why is it allowed to drop 750 pounds? Wait for it... Wait for it.... So it can compete. Face it, the Mustang is penalized for being "too good". Edited February 14, 2011 by TomServo92 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 1.37 cc of displacement / lb weight, while the tsx is only allowed 0.89 cc / lb. And this is meaningful how? Max HP is capped in this series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.