Go to a short track or a road course instead.

Chernaudi - 02 November 2009 07:28 PM

How about taking a page from the ALMS and Grand Am by changing the position of the restrictor plate from under the carb to the front of an air intake system-basically place the restrictor in the cowling unstead of under the carb. ALMS and GA cars run air restrictors to slow the cars and equalize competition, but those cars don't have the throttle response problems that the NASCAR cars have.

Or how about setting the cars up to use tall rear gears like in the old days, because the COT's configuration makes these cars turn too many RPMs for a plate engine-Nationwide and ARCA cars still turn 7000-7400 RPM. Why? The COT makes more power with the higher revs and larger restrictor, and horsepower = torque times RPM divided by 5252 in the most basic form of that equation, as well as variables like air flow into/out of the engine, etc.

But I doubt that NASCAR will take banking out of Daytona or Talledga, nor make the cars slow enough on their own to get rid of the plates like the CWTS vehicles, which are draggy enough to not use them.

the trucks ARE restricted.. but they use a tapered spacer block which restricts HP while allowing better throttle response..

red376 - 02 November 2009 07:38 PM

Go to a short track or a road course instead.

There ya go! that's the Cheep fix for this place. don't race there.

I doesn't matter how you try to slow the cars down plates small carbs different gears . It only addresses part of the problem. The fact they run in packs and have random leaders is because there running flat out without handling to separate them.

The cure for that is the track configuration if they can't afford or won't fix the track race somewhere else.

NatureBoyNC - 02 November 2009 03:17 PM

I agree...Cut the banking down to 24-26 degrees. I believe Jimmy Johnson said the same thing in yesterday's post-race press conference.

That's still way too high. Michigan is already averaging 189mph right now on a 2.0 mile, 18 degree layout.

I think you got to go virtually flat on the bottom (around 3 degrees) and use progress banking up to about 12 degrees up against the wall.

How about injecting a little real world into the mix: 87 Octane w/dash of ethanol like we all use in our every day rides?

That might slow things down a bit. And actually add something almost resembling 'stock', as in the real world, to the cars.

NASCAR likes packs because of lead changes? The record for lead changes is 74 or 75 set at Talladega in 1984. Yep, before plates.

As I've said elsewhere around here, if you knock the banks down you get a supersized Chicago, Kansas, Vegas, Texas, ya know the dreaded cookie cutters. Dega is D shaped right? So are the above tracks right? What would be the difference? The only thing I could see different is they'd still fly like heck because of the overall diameter of the turns compared to those others ones, but other than that, Dega with lower banking is a cookie cutter.

RobsanX - 02 November 2009 12:09 PM

Shorten the race. Weaken the front bumper to the point that bump drafting will negatively affect the aerodynamics of the car. Beef up the rear bumper so that it doesn't get bent.

+1

Make the fuel cell smaller

Thorstar - 02 November 2009 10:04 PM

NASCAR likes packs because of lead changes? The record for lead changes is 74 or 75 set at Talladega in 1984. Yep, before plates.

As I've said elsewhere around here, if you knock the banks down you get a supersized Chicago, Kansas, Vegas, Texas, ya know the dreaded cookie cutters. Dega is D shaped right? So are the above tracks right? What would be the difference? The only thing I could see different is they'd still fly like heck because of the overall diameter of the turns compared to those others ones, but other than that, Dega with lower banking is a cookie cutter.

Which may not be as good as Bristol or Richmond, but at least we´d get real racing instead of pathetic WWE show that is advertised as racing for people who cannot see the difference.

the trucks ARE restricted.. but they use a tapered spacer block which restricts HP while allowing better throttle response..

He's talking about the days when the compression ratio was 9.5:1 in Truck, and they ran the old shoebox truck styles. They didn't need plates then. And they had some very good racing.

Dropping the CR in a Cup engine probably wouldn't solve the whole problem though, you still have better aero in the COT than with the old trucks...



Using the old CTS engine specs might slow the cars down to a safe speed and bring back real racing. But the COT may not be boxy enough for either.

Spin - 03 November 2009 12:47 PM

the trucks ARE restricted.. but they use a tapered spacer block which restricts HP while allowing better throttle response..

He's talking about the days when the compression ratio was 9.5:1 in Truck, and they ran the old shoebox truck styles. They didn't need plates then. And they had some very good racing.

Dropping the CR in a Cup engine probably wouldn't solve the whole problem though, you still have better aero in the COT than with the old trucks...



Using the old CTS engine specs might slow the cars down to a safe speed and bring back real racing. But the COT may not be boxy enough for either.

how in the world would you know that from reading his/her post? is that your alter ego?