What a bunch of wusses...

I believe they claim that unlike formula one with open wheels and are lighter, the heavy stock cars can’t shed the water. I’m not a race fan, but watching it put me to sleep by the 3rd lap. :-)
 
yeah, nascar would be so much better if it was hockey. they never cancel a hockey game because of rain.
 
MooneyDriver78 said:
I believe they claim that unlike formula one with open wheels and are lighter, the heavy stock cars can’t shed the water. I’m not a race fan, but watching it put me to sleep by the 3rd lap. :)
Click to expand...


Baloney. Heavy sports cars race in the rain. Even at Daytona. And at higher speeds than restrictor plate stockers.
 
Half Fast said:
Baloney. Heavy sports cars race in the rain. Even at Daytona. And at higher speeds than restrictor plate stockers.
Click to expand...

+1

Should be less of an issue on the banked track compared to to the race courses F1 runs on. :fingerwag:
 
People around here can't drive 45 mph in the rain. I would hate to be around them when the speed gets to 200.

Pretty cool that Trump led one lap though. I bet he's glad it got cancelled so he could go home with Melania.
 
Half Fast said:
Because they're a bunch of wusses.
Click to expand...
Their official stance is that the sport is for the spectators and that most spectators don't want to sit in the rain to watch a race that you could barely see through all the water being kicked up. I think I would watch it on TV but I certainly wouldn't sit in a grandstand in the rain. Then again I haven't watched Nascar since they started all these rule changes anyway.
 
I thought the air force one flyby was pretty freaking cool. I would have like to been there to see that
 
Grum.Man said:
Their official stance is that the sport is for the spectators and that most spectators don't want to sit in the rain to watch a race that you could barely see through all the water being kicked up. I think I would watch it on TV but I certainly wouldn't sit in a grandstand in the rain. Then again I haven't watched Nascar since they started all these rule changes anyway.
Click to expand...

That's most of it. No one would want to sit in the grandstands to watch. The racetrack would develop a single groove where the least water had collected, and pulling out of it to pass would be nearly impossible. Every time the pack came by the fans would be doused with whatever water and grit was on the track surface.

Indycar experimented with this a number of years ago, they came to the conclusion that no one would want watch cars lap an oval in the rain. If @Half Fast wants to call them names, I suppose he can, but he might want to try going down the front straight at 235 mph and making a hard left into turn 1 before doing so.

I have watched sports car races in the rain many times, and they can be interesting, but I wouldn't watch a wet oval race.
 
FormerHangie said:
... No one would want to sit in the grandstands to watch. The racetrack would develop a single groove where the least water had collected, and pulling out of it to pass would be nearly impossible. Every time the pack came by the fans would be doused with whatever water and grit was on the track surface. ...
Click to expand...
Actually, not. At least from my experience racing sports cars on road tracks for 15 years. A properly designed track does not collect water in any broad sense. The track is crowned and banked (for the roundy-round cars, mostly banked) so that it drains. To the extent there is garbage and grit, it is off the racing line and will be kicked up, wet or dry, if a car gets up there. There is also the risk of losing control off-line due to dirt/marginal traction; I hit a guy once who had gotten well off-line trying an impossible pass and lost control. We weren't going real fast; maybe a little north of 100MPH. Fortunately nobody got hurt.

That said, there are places from time to time where some water collects. There is a spot about 80% down the front straight at Road America just wide enough to catch one side wheels and just long enough to risk acquaplaning. In a light weight formula car it is kind of a thrill to hit if you don't know to avoid it. A NASCAR behemoth probably wouldn't even notice.

But racing in the rain IMO is not a lot of fun and is le$$ fun for spectators. So I understand completely why the roundy-round guys don't do it. It may be, too, that the car setups/left turn bias would have to change due to the slower speeds they would run on rain tires. I don't know.
 
As Grun.man said this is for the spectators. All car racing is a spectator sport, except for the SCCA crowd. They just go around the race track playing follow the leader.

NASCAR brings in millions to the local economy. Sports cars, not so much. They race around the racers work schedules. I actually detested having to go to sports car races because of the massive whining and complaining, but I was contracted to be there and made the best of it. The worst of the complainers was the Unser family. They seemed to think rules were for the other folks, which actually made things more interesting.
 
MooneyDriver78 said:
I believe they claim that unlike formula one with open wheels and are lighter, the heavy stock cars can’t shed the water. I’m not a race fan, but watching it put me to sleep by the 3rd lap. :)
Click to expand...
They would simply have to drive more slowly. I'd love to see them run in the rain.
 
FormerHangie said:
That's most of it. No one would want to sit in the grandstands to watch. The racetrack would develop a single groove where the least water had collected, and pulling out of it to pass would be nearly impossible. Every time the pack came by the fans would be doused with whatever water and grit was on the track surface.

Indycar experimented with this a number of years ago, they came to the conclusion that no one would want watch cars lap an oval in the rain. If @Half Fast wants to call them names, I suppose he can, but he might want to try going down the front straight at 235 mph and making a hard left into turn 1 before doing so.

I have watched sports car races in the rain many times, and they can be interesting, but I wouldn't watch a wet oval race.
Click to expand...


I have personally sat through a 2-hour rain delay at the Daytona 500. People might not enjoy it, but they do it. Fans get more PO'd at delaying the race to the following day, a Monday, when they might not be able to attend. Plus they have to deal with traffic and parking all over again, which is a MUCH bigger hassle at Daytona than you might realize.
 
airdale said:
Actually, not. At least from my experience racing sports cars on road tracks for 15 years. A properly designed track does not collect water in any broad sense. The track is crowned and banked (for the roundy-round cars, mostly banked) so that it drains. To the extent there is garbage and grit, it is off the racing line and will be kicked up, wet or dry, if a car gets up there. There is also the risk of losing control off-line due to dirt/marginal traction; I hit a guy once who had gotten well off-line trying an impossible pass and lost control. We weren't going real fast; maybe a little north of 100MPH. Fortunately nobody got hurt.

That said, there are places from time to time where some water collects. There is a spot about 80% down the front straight at Road America just wide enough to catch one side wheels and just long enough to risk acquaplaning. In a light weight formula car it is kind of a thrill to hit if you don't know to avoid it. A NASCAR behemoth probably wouldn't even notice.

But racing in the rain IMO is not a lot of fun and is le$$ fun for spectators. So I understand completely why the roundy-round guys don't do it. It may be, too, that the car setups/left turn bias would have to change due to the slower speeds they would run on rain tires. I don't know.
Click to expand...

I've never seen a track where there wasn't at least one spot where the water got deep enough to cause any car to hydroplane, provided the rain is coming down hard enough. If you look at the history of the 24 hour race at Daytona, there are multiple times where they went full course yellow or stopped the race because of ponding, mostly on the infield portion of the track. I sat in the rain at the Petit LeMans a few years ago, until the rain came down so hard the race had to be stopped.

Since most ovals are banked, they won't see much ponding, but the cars driving will, under all but the heaviest rain, will create a groove on the track where there's the least amount of water, a "dry line". On an oval, the "marbles" (bits of tire rubber" will all get thrown above this groove, unless the rain really gets going at which time they will wash down the track and make things diabolical. Below this dry line, the water will be thicker and any car trying to run down there will be slower, and you'll get @Zeldman 's follow the leader situation, unless someone tries to pass either low or high, at which time you'll get a crash and one of those yellow flags that oval racers hold so dear.
 
airdale said:
Actually, not. At least from my experience racing sports cars on road tracks for 15 years. A properly designed track does not collect water in any broad sense. The track is crowned and banked (for the roundy-round cars, mostly banked) so that it drains. To the extent there is garbage and grit, it is off the racing line and will be kicked up, wet or dry, if a car gets up there. There is also the risk of losing control off-line due to dirt/marginal traction; I hit a guy once who had gotten well off-line trying an impossible pass and lost control. We weren't going real fast; maybe a little north of 100MPH. Fortunately nobody got hurt.

That said, there are places from time to time where some water collects. There is a spot about 80% down the front straight at Road America just wide enough to catch one side wheels and just long enough to risk acquaplaning. In a light weight formula car it is kind of a thrill to hit if you don't know to avoid it. A NASCAR behemoth probably wouldn't even notice.

But racing in the rain IMO is not a lot of fun and is le$$ fun for spectators. So I understand completely why the roundy-round guys don't do it. It may be, too, that the car setups/left turn bias would have to change due to the slower speeds they would run on rain tires. I don't know.
Click to expand...


Sebring is interesting in the rain because of surface changes, and there are also spots where water collects. The track has some concrete patches, and the concrete is much slipperier in the wet than the asphalt, which changes the line and preferred passing areas.

I always hated rain races, but they were often where I did the best. Wet tracks take away HP advantages and reward driver finesse. My biggest dislike was that visibility went to crap, especially on the start with all the tire spray.
 
FormerHangie said:
If @Half Fast wants to call them names, I suppose he can, but he might want to try going down the front straight at 235 mph and making a hard left into turn 1 before doing so.
Click to expand...


Haven't had a chance to try it, but I've gone into the Sebring hairpin at 140 in the rain, and made a hard right turn, many times. Try it.
 
Zeldman has not sen my son drive in the rain. When it rains, he brings home the trophy, snow? even more certain, some times with a lead measured in laps. He prefers to race in Wisconsin, but has been to many other tracks.

I do prefer to ride with my other son, though.
 
FormerHangie said:
What car/turn, and which Sebring layout?
Click to expand...


12-hour long course, also the green-park short course, both of which include the hairpin.

This is me leading the pack at Sebring.

upload_2020-2-17_16-45-59.png


And this was a rain race in Savannah, as you can tell by the wipers (don't have any rain pics from Sebring):

upload_2020-2-17_16-47-40.png


That wrinkled fender stems from a minor on-track disagreement about who was supposed to be in front. I won the argument.
 
Half Fast said:
The SCCA crowd prefers to do their spectating through the glass of a windshield rather than the glass of a TV screen. :)
Click to expand...

Used to race SCCA Solo II in E-Class Stock when John Rogers Field was still Barber's Point NAS. Had a '68 MG Midget with the 4" wide OEM wire-spoke wheels. Not at ALL competitive but I had a LOT of fun...
 
Half Fast said:
The SCCA crowd prefers to do their spectating through the glass of a windshield rather than the glass of a TV screen. :)
Click to expand...

The SCCA crowd was a different bunch of people. They just wanted a place to drive fast and have fun, competition was not the main part of the event except to those of us that were paid to be there. When ever someone came to us looking for help or advice we were always willing to help. It was always fun to see someone come off the track with a huge grin and then tell us what we did or suggested worked for them.
 
Zeldman said:
The SCCA crowd was a different bunch of people. They just wanted a place to drive fast and have fun, competition was not the main part of the event except to those of us that were paid to be there. When ever someone came to us looking for help or advice we were always willing to help. It was always fun to see someone come off the track with a huge grin and then tell us what we did or suggested worked for them.
Click to expand...


Very true, especially at the regional level. National competition can get more intense, but it's still friendly.

It depends on the class, though. I raced in IT, and that's regional only so competition for SARRC points (South Atlantic Road Racing Championship), for example, could get heavy. Where there's a national level available (like the formula cars, GT, etc.) the more serious competitors went to the national events and regional races were more laid back.

The philosophy was always that we wanted to beat a competitor on the track, not in the paddock, so we'd do everything we could to make sure everyone got out there. We'd lend tools, parts, labor, anything we could to help another racer get on the track.

The SCCA crowd tends to be similar to the GA crowd. Everyone knows it's tough to do the activity at all, so they tend to help and encourage each other.
 
Around black Friday I got a 20 lap package at a local short track for %70 off.

I fully expect them to notice my talent and for NASCAR teams to be beating down my door to sign me up. I'll be in the 500 next season, without a doubt. I'd bet both my arms I would wreck less cars than Logano, so I got that going for me.

Actually, my true expectations are that the cars will be tightened down so much you couldn't possibly loop one around, and not possibly put down a good lap time. I just got a good deal on it and it will either sate my desire to own a fast car again, or make that desire so much worse. We'll see.
 
When I was doing one of my SCCA license schools, my instructor was named "Rex." My racing career sorta went downhill from there......
 
Fiveslide said:
Around black Friday I got a 20 lap package at a local short track for %70 off.

I fully expect them to notice my talent and for NASCAR teams to be beating down my door to sign me up. I'll be in the 500 next season, without a doubt. I'd bet both my arms I would wreck less cars than Logano, so I got that going for me.

Actually, my true expectations are that the cars will be tightened down so much you couldn't possibly loop one around, and not possibly put down a good lap time. I just got a good deal on it and it will either sate my desire to own a fast car again, or make that desire so much worse. We'll see.
Click to expand...

There's only so much they can do to make the car easier to drive. If you make it too tight, it won't turn very well and if you get going too fast, you'll get a lot of push and may get to meet Mr. Wall. If they make it too loose, if you get going too fast you may find the back end coming around. It's just like flying, you're in the adult world and actions have consequences, so work you way up from slower to faster. There's no shame and no harm in going slower than you could, I can't say the same about going faster than you're capable of. You can always come back at another time and do it again, especially if you don't hit anything, since that gets expensive quick.
 
Half Fast said:
When I was doing one of my SCCA license schools, my instructor was named "Rex." My racing career sorta went downhill from there......
Click to expand...
\

It took very little time in SCCA before I realized I didn't have much latent talent as a race car driver but it was fun! Just did club track days and autocross in the 16V Scirrocco and then the Alfa after that. Wouldn't mind doing it again at all but my time and money curve intersection only has so much space under it right now.
 
Pugs said:
\

It took very little time in SCCA before I realized I didn't have much latent talent as a race car driver but it was fun! Just did club track days and autocross in the 16V Scirrocco and then the Alfa after that. Wouldn't mind doing it again at all but my time and money curve intersection only has so much space under it right now.
Click to expand...


Yeah, time and money was my big limitation. I usually ran well, regularly finished in the top half and often in the top 5; my best finish was a 2nd at Sebring. But the time & cost increase is exponential, not linear. The commitment necessary to move from, say 4th, to 1st is huge. The guys who were regularly finishing in the top 3 were doing test days ahead of a race weekend, always on fresh tires, had all the latest trick mods and parts, etc.

I could afford to race and finish well, but I couldn't afford to win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top