O/T The V8s are coming!

[Alfa Fan]

The V8 Supercar series is to race at the new GP track, Austin, Texas

AUTO RACING - V8: Supercars Headed To Texas In 2013 (http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/v8-supercars-headed-to-texas-in-2013)

I'm fascinated to see how this goes down with the NASCAR crowds. I think it will open a few eyes as to how this sort of racing should be done on road courses. I can't wait to see what sort of reception it gets.

[call_me_andrew]

And why are you posting here?

[Lee Roy]

Good question.

[harvick#1]

Good question.

because the nascar forum has been dead

[00steven]

because the nascar forum has been dead

True that.

[slorydn1]

I say bring 'em on. I have been watching the taped replays of the Aussie V8's on Speed the last year or so and they do put on a decent show. I wish our "stock" cars were more like theirs (you know, actually looking like "stock" car one might see on the street). I don't like the fact that the slightest bit of contact brings a penalty, but,, hey, each series has its rules. I wonder how the Aussie V8's would do on an oval? No plans to do that as of yet, but I think it would be pretty cool.

Since there is no Aussie V8 in the USA forum, and the Nascar forum covers stock car racing in the US, it seems like the perfect place for this thread to be posted....

[call_me_andrew]

Since there is no Aussie V8 in the USA forum, and the Nascar forum covers stock car racing in the US, it seems like the perfect place for this thread to be posted....

There are forums for touring cars and something called "national racing" take your pick.

[wedge]

Marcus Ambrose a previous champ in V8SC in case anyone needs a need a reminder....


I don't like the fact that the slightest bit of contact brings a penalty, but,, hey, each series has its rules.

It's fine. A rubbing/contact is allowed but punting is more likely to get you a penalty.

[Lee Roy]

There are forums for touring cars and something called "national racing" take your pick.

Yep. Wanna see how fast a NASCAR thread on the IRL forum would get booted?

[Mark]

Nothing wrong with this thread apart that it's now been ruined.

[Bob Riebe]

The V8 Supercar series is to race at the new GP track, Austin, Texas

AUTO RACING - V8: Supercars Headed To Texas In 2013 (http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/v8-supercars-headed-to-texas-in-2013)

I'm fascinated to see how this goes down with the NASCAR crowds. I think it will open a few eyes as to how this sort of racing should be done on road courses. I can't wait to see what sort of reception it gets.
No we had the Trans-Am till rules, that are slowly creeping into the Aussie series, ruined.
Been there, done that, but I am surprised no one has tried to bring back something close to identical to the original Trans-Am, or that NASCAR does get off of the tube frame crap bandwagon for a minute, and bring back something similar to the original Grand American Sedan series.

[wedge]

No we had the Trans-Am till rules, that are slowly creeping into the Aussie series, ruined.
Been there, done that, but I am surprised no one has tried to bring back something close to identical to the original Trans-Am, or that NASCAR does get off of the tube frame crap bandwagon for a minute, and bring back something similar to the original Grand American Sedan series.

Problem with V8SC and pretty much any major series is parity and cost cutting so if you have a stock based series how do you ensure the former and latter and not rankle the diehard fans?

[Bob Riebe]

Problem with V8SC and pretty much any major series is parity and cost cutting so if you have a stock based series how do you ensure the former and latter and not rankle the diehard fans?Screw parity.
Do as they used to do, build a car that can run with the competition, or keep trying till you do.
Till the fwd crap-wagon farce, even NASCAR said, if you want to run, you sell it.

In a true stock based series, race only special items such as rear-ends, trannies etc. cannot be used, saving thousands of dollars.
The lack of this is what screwed the IMSA GT series.

[Mark in Oshawa]

For those not paying attention, Bob don't care about the quality of the show, or the economics for the manufacturers, he just believes in build it and race it.

That business model died for a reason..but I am not sure I can put my finger on why that reason came about except things happen because economic factors more often than not...

[Bob Riebe]

For those not paying attention, Bob don't care about the quality of the show, or the economics for the manufacturers, he just believes in build it and race it.

That business model died for a reason..but I am not sure I can put my finger on why that reason came about except things happen because economic factors more often than not...
Oh yes, the IMSA, which was based on ACO PARITY based rules, is doing SOOOO well.

Indy cars which are based on PARITY is doing SOOOO well.

Try sticking with the facts.

[call_me_andrew]

You don't need technological parity when you have reward weight.

[slorydn1]

Oh yes, the IMSA, which was based on ACO PARITY based rules, is doing SOOOO well.

Indy cars which are based on PARITY is doing SOOOO well.

Try sticking with the facts.

Ok. NASCAR, which is based on parity, is kicking everyone's butt in the dirt except for F1.

Is that factual enough?

[slorydn1]

And why are you posting here?


Since there is no Aussie V8 in the USA forum, and the Nascar forum covers stock car racing in the US, it seems like the perfect place for this thread to be posted....


There are forums for touring cars and something called "national racing" take your pick.

Ok, since you obviously didn't care too much for my nicely put PC answer so let's try this one on for size:

Its here because I said it could stay here. :D

[slorydn1]

Yep. Wanna see how fast a NASCAR thread on the IRL forum would get booted?

Oh I dunno Lee Roy, I talk about Nascar all the time in the Indy car forum, and my posts never got pulled (and I'm not just talking about the ones made since I became a mod).

I usually try to be respectful of the other forms of racing and try to understand their sensitivities to certain issues when comparing one form to the other. That seems to have gone a long way for me, anyway

[Mark in Oshawa]

Oh I dunno Lee Roy, I talk about Nascar all the time in the Indy car forum, and my posts never got pulled (and I'm not just talking about the ones made since I became a mod).

I usually try to be respectful of the other forms of racing and try to understand their sensitivities to certain issues when comparing one form to the other. That seems to have gone a long way for me, anyway

Lee Roy is on an anti IRL screed and it is obvious when he tries to post over there and he wonders why he gets a hot reception?

I float between the two, and I love both forms of racing pretty much equally. I have never been told I couldn't post what I posted on either...and I more or less respect the basic idea of two separate threads....

And I don't mind dragging in the Aussie v8's....because once people see them live in Texas, They are going to have fans over here that haven't completely bought in from watching them on TV.

[slorydn1]

Lee Roy is on an anti IRL screed and it is obvious when he tries to post over there and he wonders why he gets a hot reception?

I know that, I just have to pick at him when he gives me a chance...He does the same to me... It's all good.


I float between the two, and I love both forms of racing pretty much equally. I have never been told I couldn't post what I posted on either...and I more or less respect the basic idea of two separate threads....

Me too. Yeah, I'm a bigger Nascar fan than an Indy car fan, but you can really blame the split for that. I didn't watch it (Indy Car) for many years after 1994. But I am coming back around, and I rarely (if ever) miss a race any more.


And I don't mind dragging in the Aussie v8's....because once people see them live in Texas, They are going to have fans over here that haven't completely bought in from watching them on TV.

Amen to that. I hope Darby, Pemberton and co. have a chance to watch the race as well. They may learn something.

[Bob Riebe]

Ok. NASCAR, which is based on parity, is kicking everyone's butt in the dirt except for F1.

Is that factual enough?
NASCAR success has zero to do with parity, and at that both fans and drivers have loudly criticized what parity attempts have done to the racing, to the point NASCAR redid the cot vehicles.
NASCAR was going to do parity with generic engines and Detroit told them you do we leave.
So much for parity having any positive impact on racing.

[Lee Roy]

NASCAR success has zero to do with parity, and at that both fans and drivers have loudly criticized what parity attempts have done to the racing, to the point NASCAR redid the cot vehicles.
NASCAR was going to do parity with generic engines and Detroit told them you do we leave.
So much for parity having any positive impact on racing.

Don't confuse 'em with facts.

[call_me_andrew]

Changing a nose and replacing a wing with a spoiler does not qualify as redoing a car.

[Bob Riebe]

Changing a nose and replacing a wing with a spoiler does not qualify as redoing a car.
Amazing how you figure that one.

OK, they are the same, only totally different/

[Mark in Oshawa]

NASCAR success has zero to do with parity, and at that both fans and drivers have loudly criticized what parity attempts have done to the racing, to the point NASCAR redid the cot vehicles.
NASCAR was going to do parity with generic engines and Detroit told them you do we leave.
So much for parity having any positive impact on racing.

We have parity. All the engines are dyno'ed and come up within 5hp of each other. On 800 hp plus motors, that aint much. The cars are for all intensive purposes identical. I haven't seen really a massive loss of interest in the racing the COT provides. Hell, everyone bitched about aeropush with old cars, but the new ones seem to be a little better for it...not a whole lot mind you.

[Lee Roy]

For a series that is supposed to have cars that are all the same, the selection of a chasis for a race wouldn't mean anything to a team, would it.

Oh but it does seem to.

Jayski's® NASCAR Silly Season Site - Race Info Page (http://www.jayski.com/news/races/2011/story?id=6457460)

Maybe somebody at the race teams should tell the engineers and team managers that a bunch of "google geniuses" on an internet racing forum says their cars are all the same and to quit wasting time and money trying to build cars for certain tracks.

[Bob Riebe]

We have parity. All the engines are dyno'ed and come up within 5hp of each other. On 800 hp plus motors, that aint much. The cars are for all intensive purposes identical. I haven't seen really a massive loss of interest in the racing the COT provides. Hell, everyone bitched about aeropush with old cars, but the new ones seem to be a little better for it...not a whole lot mind you.Where did you get that idea from?
Gee, if they are all the same, then how come Ford has a new engine?
Chevy brought out its RO7, only four years ago, its first purpose built push-rod racing engine, because why?
I know they want to spend a huge amount of money to get the same horse power they had.
How come Toyota did now win right out of the box, after all you say they are all the same?

[Lee Roy]

Where did you get that idea from?
Gee, if they are all the same, then how come Ford has a new engine?
Chevy brought out its RO7, only four years ago, its first purpose built push-rod racing engine, because why?
I know they want to spend a huge amount of money to get the same horse power they had.
How come Toyota did now win right out of the box, after all you say they are all the same?

IRL fans try to make themselves feel better about their de-tuned crate motors by trying to make silly claims about NASCAR engines being all the same. If there were no gains to be made why do the top teams have huge engine programs?

[call_me_andrew]

Amazing how you figure that one.

OK, they are the same, only totally different/

This is a car.

http://www.stockcarscience.com/images/PON_Chassis.gif

What was changed? Two body parts that had no major effect on downforce. By your definition, painting a pink clown on the hood completly changes a car.

[call_me_andrew]

For a series that is supposed to have cars that are all the same, the selection of a chasis for a race wouldn't mean anything to a team, would it.

Oh but it does seem to.

Jayski's® NASCAR Silly Season Site - Race Info Page (http://www.jayski.com/news/races/2011/story?id=6457460)

Maybe somebody at the race teams should tell the engineers and team managers that a bunch of "google geniuses" on an internet racing forum says their cars are all the same and to quit wasting time and money trying to build cars for certain tracks.

They aren't building cars for specific tracks in the post-COT era. Fleet sizes are only half as big as they were 5 years ago.


If there were no gains to be made why do the top teams have huge engine programs?

Because they make their money by selling engines to small teams. Do you think Tommy Baldwin, Joe Nemechek, JTG, and Robby Gordon build their own engines?

[Lee Roy]

They aren't building cars for specific tracks in the post-COT era. Fleet sizes are only half as big as they were 5 years ago.

I guess not. For some reason the selection of the chasis seems to be an big enough deal for it to be announced and Jayski to have a page on it. But hey, what do the team engineers and mangers know.


Because they make their money by selling engines to small teams. Do you think Tommy Baldwin, Joe Nemechek, JTG, and Robby Gordon build their own engines?

Yes they do. But if their engines aren't better than any of the others offered, they lose sales. If NASCAR teams were building spec engines, the NASCAR teams would have one engine builder in the Charlotte area and save a ton of money. And I'm certain that Hendrick's motivation for his engine room has more to do with winning races and championships than it does "sales" . . . . . as it does for Rousch/Yates, JGR, TRD, ECGR and Penske.

[call_me_andrew]

Is Jayski a measure of great importance now? According to Jayski, July 20 is Rose Mattioli's birthday. Do you think this will cause NASCAR to change the size of the restrictor plate at Talladega?

[Lee Roy]

Is Jayski a measure of great importance now? According to Jayski, July 20 is Rose Mattioli's birthday. Do you think this will cause NASCAR to change the size of the restrictor plate at Talladega?

For some reason the NASCAR teams feel that the different chasis are significant. Not sure why you feel that just because it is discussed on Jayski that it doesn't matter?

[Bob Riebe]

This is a car.

http://www.stockcarscience.com/images/PON_Chassis.gif

What was changed? Two body parts that had no major effect on downforce. By your definition, painting a pink clown on the hood completly changes a car.Let's see, hmm, rear spoiler vs. wing and front air-dam vs. splitter. No major effect, or difference, in how they affect the aerodynamics.
I hope you are not an engineer.

[Bob Riebe]

Is Jayski a measure of great importance now? According to Jayski, July 20 is Rose Mattioli's birthday. Do you think this will cause NASCAR to change the size of the restrictor plate at Talladega?Jayski is owned and served by ESPN, and they probably have more inside info on NASCAR than anyone on this board.

[Bob Riebe]

For some reason the NASCAR teams feel that the different chasis are significant. Not sure why you feel that just because it is discussed on Jayski that it doesn't matter?Because he does not want it to?
Remember he said switching from wing and splitter to spoiler and air-dam will have no affect on how the car handles.

[call_me_andrew]

My point is that Jayski publishing something does not prove it is relevant to racing.

They didn't get rid of the splitter. As you can see in this shot, the splitter (white strip) is still alive and kicking. All that's changed is the struts are now concealed behind bodywork. There's no gain or loss of front downforce so it's purely a cosmetic change. It's no longer adjustable, but unless it's a plate track, stock cars are always set up for maximum downforce anyway.

http://www.eons.com/images/members/2010/10/15/6/3/63053178214412563729_610w.jpeg

The spoiler provides as much downforce as that wing did, but with more drag. This has lead to more aero push in turns (particularly at the 1.5 mile tracks), but it has brought a little slingshot passing to Michigan, Fontana, Pocono, and Indy which neither I nor anyone else expected. I'm not convinced that it'll keep tires on the ground at Talladega.

Let's look at the performance difference in pole speeds between the last Texas race with a wing, and the first Texas COT race with a spoiler.

Fall 2009, Kurt Busch was on pole at 191.117 mph. In Spring 2010 (just the third spoiler race), Denny Hamlin went 191.327 mph. If there was a real difference in single car performance, these speeds wouldn't have been so close.

[Bob Riebe]

My point is that Jayski publishing something does not prove it is relevant to racing.

They didn't get rid of the splitter. As you can see in this shot, the splitter (white strip) is still alive and kicking. All that's changed is the struts are now concealed behind bodywork. There's no gain or loss of front downforce so it's purely a cosmetic change. It's no longer adjustable, but unless it's a plate track, stock cars are always set up for maximum downforce anyway.

http://www.eons.com/images/members/2010/10/15/6/3/63053178214412563729_610w.jpeg

The spoiler provides as much downforce as that wing did, but with more drag. This has lead to more aero push in turns (particularly at the 1.5 mile tracks), but it has brought a little slingshot passing to Michigan, Fontana, Pocono, and Indy which neither I nor anyone else expected. I'm not convinced that it'll keep tires on the ground at Talladega.

Let's look at the performance difference in pole speeds between the last Texas race with a wing, and the first Texas COT race with a spoiler.

Fall 2009, Kurt Busch was on pole at 191.117 mph. In Spring 2010 (just the third spoiler race), Denny Hamlin went 191.327 mph. If there was a real difference in single car performance, these speeds wouldn't have been so close.
IF you have been reading the NASCAR reports, the changes to the front and rear, have changed how the car handles.

[Rollo]

To derail this thread again, my fear is that the Impala will be seen by GM as a viable replacement for the Commodore. Come 2014 both the Impala and the Commodore will be up for renewal, and if the Commodore's experience being sold under the G8 nameplate at Pontiac is anything to go by, Detroit won't see the point in developing the next gen-Commodore when they can just fully import the Impala on the "Super Epsilon" II platform.

The 2013 and 2014 races just might be the final death-knells for the RWD Commodore. Detroit already killed Monaro, they can do it again.

[Lee Roy]

Fall 2009, Kurt Busch was on pole at 191.117 mph. In Spring 2010 (just the third spoiler race), Denny Hamlin went 191.327 mph. If there was a real difference in single car performance, these speeds wouldn't have been so close.

Where'd you get this from, Jayski?

[Bob Riebe]

To derail this thread again, my fear is that the Impala will be seen by GM as a viable replacement for the Commodore. Come 2014 both the Impala and the Commodore will be up for renewal, and if the Commodore's experience being sold under the G8 nameplate at Pontiac is anything to go by, Detroit won't see the point in developing the next gen-Commodore when they can just fully import the Impala on the "Super Epsilon" II platform.

The 2013 and 2014 races just might be the final death-knells for the RWD Commodore. Detroit already killed Monaro, they can do it again.But they are selling the rwd, fleet order only, Caprice in the U.S.

[call_me_andrew]

Where'd you get this from, Jayski?

Race Results at Texas Motor Speedway - Racing-Reference.info (http://www.racing-reference.info/tracks/Texas_Motor_Speedway)

[slorydn1]

There are a select few, myself included, that are interested to know which chassis their driver is running at the next race. Is it a new car? Are his teammates running a new car? If it's an older chassis, does it have a winning pedigree? In the end it really doesn't mean anything-Harv ran #332 at Loudon, his Martinsville winner and was out to lunch this week, for example, but it was still cool to know, at least for me.

But Andrew is right. They not only would have a specialized car for say, a restrictor plate race, but they would even go so far as to build one car especially for Daytona with a little downforce added in, and another especially for Talladega which would be as clean as possible-and many teams might run that 'dega car in the Bud Shootout at Daytona due to its shorter tire runs and then go with the specifically built "500" car for the 500.

It wasn't that long ago (I think it was 08(?)) when Jr won the Bud Shootout in a car that had been run at BRISTOL the year before because he and his Hendrick teammates wrecked their primary cars in Shootout practice- That never could have happened with the "twisted sister" they were running previously.

Now they build cars in basically 3 categories- restrictor plate, road course, and downforce cars.

And yes, the larger teams are building a lot of cars still as they search for the latest and greatest in weight savings and chassis mounting points (etc) but they don't necessarily build an Atlanta car, or a Martinsville car any more. All one needs to do is look at, yes I'm about to say it, Jayski, and look at the cars that have been run in other races and see the diversity of tracks those cars have been run at.

It seems that 288, for example, is Harvs favorite chassis. He won Michigan with it last year, was p2 California (last year) Indy (last year) P3 at Homestead (2009) and has run it to top 10's at Texas, Pocono (3 times) and has run it at Charlotte, Kentucky and Darlington and Bristol- a nice mix of high banked and flat race tracks of varying lengths. You never would have seen that with the old car (most of these listed are from my notes that I keep, not all were found as jayski as he didn't seem to get into the chassis listing until last year, and I didn't notice them until this year).

I'm just using Harv as an example-go find your favorite driver and look to see where his cars have been run at.

Just looking at this past race alone, the 1 was run at Martinsville and Richmond, the 2 was run at Darlington, the 5 and 6 ran at Richmond, the 9 at Phoenix and Richmond, the 14 Martinsville and at Loudon last year, the 17 in the Allstar race at Charlotte (etc etc etc). Now you won’t find any Daytona or Talladega cars on this list, but it is a pretty diverse list.

[Lee Roy]

Good analysis slorydn1. It is true that the COT narrowed the envelope of advantages from building different cars, but there is still an envelope where advantges can be gained in building your own car.

[slorydn1]

Good analysis slorydn1. It is true that the COT narrowed the envelope of advantages from building different cars, but there is still an envelope where advantges can be gained in building your own car.

Oh sure, I totally agree with that. As they say, practice makes perfect-the more cars you build, the better you should get at it.

There can be a downside though-and a lack of on track testing really magnifies that.

It is possible to go down the wrong road in your cars (RCR 2009, Roush 2010) and spend the better part of a season trying to get back to the right road. And it gets to be almost impossible to build your way out of it. I don't know how Roush fixed their problem, but RCR ended up dragging their first generation COT's out of mothballs and started running them again, and performance stated to pick up again. Then late summer they started building new cars patterned after the 2007 models. 281 was the first of those "new-old" cars that Harvick got a hold of and he took it to Atlanta labor day of 09....That was the car where he went from p18-p1 and then a 4 second lead on a single fuel run in the mid point of the race. The car was terrible the first few laps after a restart, then would take off, being almost a half a second a lap faster than anyone else near the end of a fuel run. Of course, Nascar threw the typical late race caution for a single car spin (THANKS BOYAY) and Kasey Kahne ate Harvick's lunch on the final restart....288 that I referenced earlier was another of those nextgen cot's based directly on the 2007 models.


In my own convoluted way I only brought that up to illustrate your point as to the advantages of building your own cars. RCR was able to go back and look at what they had done, undo it, then get back to moving ahead again. Had RCR been buying cars from someone else, they may not have been able to do that, and where might that have them now?

[The Phantom]

V8 Supercars kick NASCAR to the kerb ;)

[rasprodaga-odegdi.ru]

I do not think so.