All "Dega Fever" joking aside.....

Peter · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:49 pm

I believe this is where IRL gets it right, you are not allowed to pass under the yellow line, but if you're forced there you can.

SBan83 · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:57 pm

Peter wrote:

I believe this is where IRL gets it right, you are not allowed to pass under the yellow line, but if you're forced there you can.

IRL don't have a yellow line.

ChrisTRD · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 1:31 pm

Peter wrote:

I believe this is where IRL gets it right, you are not allowed to pass under the yellow line, but if you're forced there you can.

That is pretty much NASCAR's rule. You can't pass below the yellow line, only if you are forced. But it was all BS.

a3017 · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 3:47 pm

Quote:

Taking the gloom and doom stance, looking solemn and saying all the right things about "fan safety" and "NASCAR was fortunate this time" and "changes need to be made" -- that's what you expect from those pundits and analysts who have taken it upon themselves to be the voice of the fan. Rare is the one who will come back to this safety feature: The catch fence did its job and Carl Edwards' car did not fly into the crowd along the frontstretch.

Also note that the roof flaps on the No. 99 car deployed as designed -- but it was Ryan Newman's car that clipped the No. 99 and sent it catapulting toward the grandstands. Even then, the catch fence did its job and Carl Edwards' car did not fly into the crowd along the frontstretch.

The sanctioning body has its issues -- and in that respect NASCAR is no different than any other sport -- but knee-jerk reactions in the immediate wake of Sunday's race is not what's best for the sport. After all, the catch fence did its job and Carl Edwards' car did not fly into the crowd along the frontstretch.

Duane Cross speaks the truth:
http://www.nascar.com/2009/news/opinion ... index.html

ChrisTRD · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 4:08 pm

I absolutely loved that article when I first read it. 100% truth.

KingOfChins · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:09 pm

Tristar 7AT wrote:

EvilVendingMachine wrote:

TM93 wrote:

Why the hell would they look at the roof flaps on Kenseth's car?

He weight-shifted, and didn't do a blowover.

Because they're retarded.

Read what I posted on the last page. Its not perfect but its an idea. With the proper air routing engineering over the car and to the flaps, my idea could work.

I could see that working. But stopping 3400 pounds that is already biased towards the left side would be hard regardless. I can't help but wonder if maybe a bit stiffer suspension on the left side would work too, for the weight shifts?

EvilVendingMachine · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:34 pm

Tristar 7AT wrote:

EvilVendingMachine wrote:

TM93 wrote:

Why the hell would they look at the roof flaps on Kenseth's car?

He weight-shifted, and didn't do a blowover.

Because they're retarded.

Read what I posted on the last page. Its not perfect but its an idea. With the proper air routing engineering over the car and to the flaps, my idea could work.

I don't think it would deploy fast enough to stop a weight shift flip, but it would be worth looking into.

ChrisTRD · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:39 pm

wasted money imo.

Tristar 7AT · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:14 pm

All I'm trying to do with my idea is tackle the problem of transferring the weight of the car over in a way it wont roll over. NASCAR drivers are complaining about physics and there's only so much engineering can do before they run out of options. Current roof flaps work aerodynamically with the low pressure situation created as air moves over the roof. What if the flaps were electronic instead, using gyroscopic sensors that deploy the flaps when a change in the car's forward direction is detected.

trout · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:48 pm

i just remembered kezolowski having an ironically similar "launching" incident last year at a non-restrictor plate track.

Cartman · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:03 pm

A little off the subject, but I would love to hear the MRN radio commentary of the last lap.

KingOfChins · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:31 pm

trout wrote:

i just remembered kezolowski having an ironically similar "launching" incident last year at a non-restrictor plate track.

Actually, that was 2 years ago.

And Keselowski hit the wall driver's-side first, and got air from the impact.

a3017 · PostPosted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:03 pm

Cartman wrote:

A little off the subject, but I would love to hear the MRN radio commentary of the last lap.

http://www.nascar.com/video/cup/2009/04 ... ds.nascar/

ChrisTRD · PostPosted: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:48 am

That had some really good angles of the wreck.

trout · PostPosted: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:19 pm

TM93 wrote:

trout wrote:

i just remembered kezolowski having an ironically similar "launching" incident last year at a non-restrictor plate track.

Actually, that was 2 years ago.

And Keselowski hit the wall driver's-side first, and got air from the impact.

agreed, but contact by the 42 launched him back into the air and nearly into the catchfence; similar to how newman launched edwards back into the air. i wouldnt say its exactly the same, just similar with one car throwing the other back into the air.

and yes 2007 not 2008, sorry.

The Old cArmAkAze · PostPosted: Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:03 pm

How in the fuck is that wreck anything like Carl's

Tommy Vercetti · PostPosted: Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:23 pm

cArmAkAze wrote:

How in the fuck is that wreck anything like Carl's

Yea, especially when it's not really a flip, and rather, a right turn at a left corner.

KingOfChins · PostPosted: Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:37 pm

They're not even similar.

highgroove · PostPosted: Fri May 01, 2009 11:42 am

wurst comparison

NC24 · PostPosted: Sun May 03, 2009 4:41 am

NASCAR fans (idiots)

TBK-Light.com

All "Dega Fever" joking aside.....

Who is online