Pre-Darlington – Wind Tunnel Rules, Anyone?
Now NASCAR’s Big Three enter Darlington – the Trucks raced on Friday, Grand
National races Saturday, and Winston Cup Sunday.
Entering Darlington, the big story is the publication of unofficial wind
tunnel numbers, and Ray Evernham’s 1,800-lb. downforce figure, while an
exaggeration, nonetheless wasn’t quite so far off after all. Thanks to the
always-reliable Jayski
site the numbers are as follows –
Dodge – 1,380 lbs. of downforce Ford – 1343 lbs. Pontiac – 1,297 lbs.
Chevrolet – 1,246 lbs.
Based on last year’s numbers, the Dodge gained 55 lbs., the Ford gained three
pounds, the Pontiac lost 47 lbs., and the Chevrolet lost 85 lbs.
And yet these numbers don’t jibe with the results on the racetrack – by the
numbers the Dodge should have won the race with Ford second, and the Ford they
tested – #32 of Ricky Craven – wasn’t even the strongest Ford, the Ford the race
winner had to race all day.
Not that such numbers aren’t useful – they help confirm what was obvious
already, that Chevrolet isn’t terribly competitive – but they confuse more than
they reveal.
Also, why won’t NASCAR test MORE than one of each make – would, for instance,
a test with the Dodges of Ward Burton, Sterling Marlin, and Buckshot Jones not
reveal more about what that manqué is making in downforce? Likewise testing
Jimmie Johnson’s Chevy with Earnhardt Junior’s and Terry Labonte, and the Fords
of Kurt Busch and Ryan Newman as well as Craven would reveal more than just
testing one of each make.
Several sports radio stations around the country now have "The Whiner
Line." Terry Elledge might want to call the Whiner Line based on his
gripe about NASCAR’s one-engine rule.
He claims practice and qualifying motors don’t cost a lot of money because
they use older parts, "and you use them over and over again." Uh,
Terry, why can’t you do the same with your race motors? He also talks about
racetracks running a high RPM all day, like Chicagoland and Pocono, but it seems
not to occur to him to detune the engines so they don’t run so many RPMs – they
shouldn’t be running like that in any event, and if they lower RPMs to something
like 7,500 they can improve cornering in some places.
The one-engine rule is designed so teams don’t use practice and qualifying
motors, which contrary to Elledge DO cost a lot of money, particularly in
throwaway parts teams CAN’T use over and over. To allow them to run practice
motors defeats the whole purpose of the rule.
Detune the motors; put a rev limiter or something in to keep them at 7,500
RPMs; make the engines run all out for the entire weekend. That is what the
one-engine rule should do. "We’re used to (building our race motors) to run
500 miles barely." So start building them to run 1,000 miles.
Is NASCAR losing its appeal? Such is asked by Brendan
Kelly, but the case provided is a bit weak.
Kelly gripes about several issues in NASCAR that anger him, such as price
gouging at racetracks. Show me a sport where there isn’t price gouging. Kelly
also gripes about how drivers have no personality, but that’s the fault of the
sponsors, not so much NASCAR. "NASCAR has been slow to take the lead on the
safety issue…." never mind that the valid criticism is that NASCAR, in
part due to pressure from outside, won’t take the one vital step toward
improving safety – drastically slowing the cars down, a step I suspect Kelly
opposes to at least some extent. "NASCAR helped to destroy the career of
Bill Simpson." Simpson destroyed his own career – remember that phony tape
of EMTs cutting Earnhardt’s belt at Daytona he boasted about?
On it goes – "NASCAR has made a mess of the restrictor plate
issue." Actually the drivers did that – they demanded removal of the roof
spoiler and they got it, and the result is they castrated their best racing for
a nonexistent improvement in safety, all because they find it stressful to race
four abreast for the lead on back for all 500 miles of a race. "Big TV is
leading to childish clip fights." So blame ESPN for it; it’s their fault.
"Cookie cutter tracks are producing boring racing." Though there is
need for different track shapes, it is abysmal racecars lacking raw drag and
grip that are producing boring racing.
Kelly then dredges up the cooler issue. What the heck is the point? Why is it
such a concern to bring coolers into a racetrack? Why can’t you just accept it
and go in without a cooler? I’ve sat next to people with coolers and it impedes
elbow room and maneuverability a lot more than the radio I bring in.
Kelly also whines about "inconsistent" rulings on the racetrack, as
if such isn’t the norm in all sports – further making a mockery of such lines as
"If NASCAR wants to be taken seriously by the mainstream sports
press…" The mainstream sports press are notoriously lazy when it comes to
learning something of which they lack knowledge and carry a snobbish
superficiality that NASCAR should want anything to do with in any event. NASCAR
doesn’t need to publicize the rulebook – the mainstream press need to ditch the
prejudice and just read it.
"The racing is not the same as it was ten years ago." Actually it
is, albeit worse. That the sport is getting away from short tracks is not
particularly important, especially since the last two titles were won by drivers
without one short track win. On short tracks the cars are as plagued by handling
issues as on speedways; the only difference is that they crash more on short
tracks, and always hit harder than at Daytona or Talladega. It is the racecars’
speeds and inability in traffic that made Chicagoland and Kansas (and almost
everywhere else) boring shows.
Kelly dredges up yet again the TV deal, never mind that it has worked well.
So "many fans didn’t receive FX and (soon-to-disband) CNN/SI and weren’t
able to watch as much racing coverage as in years past." Most of what they
missed was practice and qualifying; the actual races were still there to see,
and cable/satellite systems integrated FX and CNN/SI into their systems thanks
to the old reliable law of supply and demand. The clip feud between ESPN and
NASCAR is ultimately ESPN’s fault now – they can solve it by putting their
NASCAR coverage on SportCenter instead of RPM2nite. "Did NASCAR forget
about the years of promotion ESPN gave?" Chances are they better remembered
the cheap rights fees ESPN paid and the fact ESPN needed NASCAR a lot more than
NASCAR needed ESPN.
As for the cars, "NASCAR also spends so much time trying to make every
car equal it is beginning to make Winston Cup look like a glorified IROC
series." Good. Parity is always better than domination. If "Dodge
builds an awesome aero package" it will still show in a parity situation;
if anything parity shows quality more, because it takes more work to win.
There is nothing in Kelly’s piece to suggest that NASCAR is losing its
appeal. The real issues – the absurd speeds of the cars, the lack of drafting,
the lack of lead changes (Atlanta being an exception proving the rule), the
unraceability of tires, the multi-car team disease – ought to carry greater
concern that the peripheries Kelly touches.