Post-Atlanta: It Never Ends, All Right
Atlanta was supposed to be a good race – but this was a little ridiculous.
Actually, it was a bit of a mixed bag. The racing up front was good, but it
involved a curiously low number of cars – only eight leaders, not exactly a
number to expect in modern NASCAR. And while Tony Stewart had to race hard all
day, for most of the day it looked like he could take the lead whenever he felt
like it.
Thus continues a remarkable streak by Joe Gibbs Racing – six Atlanta wins in
the last twelve 500-milers there; this, though, was the first time a Joe Gibbs
car other than Bobby Labonte’s #18 pulled it off.
Atlanta also confirmed that Chevrolet is way off the pace this year. The
Chevrolets looked like walking wounded as a class, and no Chevy had the muscle
of Tony Stewart’s Pontiac or the Fords of Kurt Busch and Matt Kenseth; that
Junior and Jimmie Johnson finished ahead of Kenseth and Busch is rather
surprising.
Of course GM has had it its own way here the last seven seasons, losing only
one of the last fifteen Atlanta Winston Cup races. So that streak goes on as
well.
There was another pit crash, but this time it occurred under green when Jimmy
Spencer drilled Bobby Labonte and was thus summoned to the NASCAR trailer after
the race.
This latest pit crash brings to the fore yet
another Mike Mulhern op-ed piece about pit safety, one that ties in the
related issues of pit safety and the fact that the pits are the only place left
where the cars can pass anymore.
Yet again the idea of leaving the pits open when the caution comes out, and
thus allowing cars to pit at naturally staggered intervals as was done before
the March 1989 rule change closing the pits, was never even mentioned. Instead
we read yet more growls for the racetracks to rebuild their pits to suit the
teams, a needless expense given that it doesn’t address the real issues – which
has been depressingly typical of all safety-related approaches discussed.
By far the most idiotic idea was floated by crew chief James Ince – "No
pit stops under yellow…..Make it simple: you can’t pit under the yellow, only
under green." Ince further claims such a change "would make the racing
better, and it would make the crew chief more valuable."
James Ince, you need to have your head examined.
NASCAR implemented just such a rule in 1991 – no one could change tires under
yellow. The result was that no one pitted under yellow, and instead of making
the racing better and adding strategy to the issue, the change wiped out all
ability to race – drivers made no effort to race anyone; strategy was a myth
because no team could take any chances; literally no one was happy, not teams,
not fans, no one – and the rule lasted exactly five races. To go back to such a
change is so irrational as to defy belief.
Steve Hmiel then points out why pit road has become so vicious of late – the
cars cannot pass each other anywhere else. Don Miller – who has first-hand
experience with pit tragedy; during the 1974 Alabama 500, his driver Gary
Bettenhausen missed his pit box and had to come back around when everyone else
was done; he pitted, but Grant Adcox hit a patch of oil and smashed into Miller,
costing him a leg – notes, "These cars are so aero-sensitive that the front
fenders mean everything."
Ray Evernham discusses how teams are now using 1,000 pound springs instead of
the 2,000 pounders of the past to get the nose lower. He also claims, "Some
of these cars are making as much as 1,800 pounds of down force." Such a
figure, though, is rather suspicious; if they made that kind of down force
problems with grip would be far less.
Evernham notes the obvious in how "in clean air it helps a car run much
faster, but when such a car loses clean air…the driver suddenly has an
ill-handling monster." But Evernham’s recommendation – "How do you get
out of this problem? By taking the aerodynamics away from these cars." – is
not as clear-cut positive as it may sound. "They tried to cut the spoilers
down but the drivers didn’t like it because the cars were too sensitive side to
side. But I say they didn’t go far enough. What they need to do is leave just
enough of the body on the car to give an idea of what they’re supposed to look
like, and give it back to the springs and shocks and the drivers."
Actually the best solution is to give the cars back to the draft, the best
equalizer there is in racing. The cars of old drafted well at Atlanta and most
everywhere else, and because they weren’t round they lost far less in dirty air
than today’s cars – on the contrary, the cars of old ran faster in dirty air
than in clean.
Evernham says "these things are getting too much like Indy cars,"
echoing Tony Stewart’s comment after Rockingham and Vegas; at Michigan and
Fontana CART solved all that with the Hanford air-displacement rail on the rear
wing; the IRL solved that problem with its high-down force rear wings and the
greater aero bulk of its body designs. The result is that Indy cars don’t race
like Indy cars of old at places like Michigan and Texas – instead they race like
Daytona and Talladega stockers.
The Trucks run Gurney rails on their front fenders, and they help with the
draft at Daytona. Such rails aren’t quite big enough on the Trucks, and the use
of bigger such rails on the cars as well will help solve a lot of competition
problems; bringing back the roof spoiler will also help with making dirty air
more cooperative for the cars via a stronger draft.
"The
early word on next month’s race at Texas (following several tire tests) is
‘it’s going to be dangerous.’" A top tire specialist warns teams,
"Don’t go low on tire pressure, and don’t use too much camber."
Two comments – if it’s going to be dangerous, then what are those SMI
schmucks doing suing NASCAR to get a second Texas date? Second, if Goodyear
doesn’t want teams to go low on pressure and use too much camber, will they thus
provide a tire that will help the cars turn better for a change?