Poll

What is your opinion of developing new classes for NASCAR type cars?

Yes setup new classes for NASCAR type cars.
15 (25%)
No Need for New Classes they can run Time Only..
45 (75%)

Total Members Voted: 47

Author Topic: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......  (Read 29196 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sumner

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4078
  • Blanding, Ut..a small dot in the middle of nowhere
    • http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/sumnerindex.html
NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« on: October 20, 2007, 05:31:09 PM »
I know some might not agree with this idea, but I would like to throw out the idea that SCTA consider adopting a "vintage NASCAR" class just like the vintage oval track class.

I think one of the charms and perhaps duties of land speed racing is to preserve the fundamental roots of our racing heritage. As the car of tomorrow takes over, the old NASCAR chassis will quickly pass into a historical class that I think deserves to be preserved. They will run for a while on the smaller tracks but they also have some historical value as cars that developed one of the most successful racing organizations in the world, with huge fan support. They broke key historical records like the first 200+ mph lap on a closed course.

If such a class was formed you could resolve the tire width issue by including rules for tire width, requiring a narrower more salt suitable tire over some specific speed. That would put all these cars on a level playing field and they can continue to race. Given the public popularity for NASCAR and the potential for easier access to sponsor money it might be a natural for folks to run a reasonably affordable chassis and with reasonable opportunities for sponsorship money.

Just food for thought!

Larry

Ok I'm not afraid to admit that I'm a die hard NASCAR fan that usually only misses one or two races a year, but I can't see the need for this.  NASCAR had so many body styles over the years and has gone from actual modified stock cars to the cars of the 80's on up that hardly resembled a stock car at all in regards to the chassis and later the body.  Also look at the wide range of engine sizes that were used over the years.  I think by the time you put in some type of rule structure that Dan and others could deal with in impound you would have a spec car like what NASCAR has today.

I think their needs are meet by being able to come and run "time only" if they are interested.  Personally I think NASCAR's drive to be the most popular motor series has really hurt them with their base and will hurt them in the long run when a number of their new fans move on.  You can see that in the ratings already.  I love Land Speed Racing and wonder just how popular we want it to be.  At Bonneville we run on a surface that can only handle "X" number of runs a year, take this year for instance, so how big do we really want our sport to grow.  I'll bet at the moment there are at least 100-150 new cars/bikes being built to run on the salt. 

I think the history of our sport has been to make/modify cars to run on the salt/dirt and not to make rules that adapt the salt/dirt to cars that were meant to run under different conditions such as Indy cars, F1, Modifieds, Wing Cars, drag cars, etc..  NASCAR cars are designed to go around in circles, so I think if there is a need to run older cars they will find a venue and don't they now have some road races setup for them??

Don't forget the race tomorrow, I like those short tracks,

Sum

Sumner,

My feelings too.

We have a petition from interested parties of 9-12. Some restrictions in my mind are:

cars from 1997 -2007, except 2007 COT
engine class C only
"as raced" configuration

Personally, I do not see a need for this class. There are plenty of venues to run that cater to this style of race car. I don't see a challege here.

The SCTA tries to listen to the wishes of the competitors and this class will be considered. Any other comments?

Lets start another thread, include the last two posts. The input will assist us in the validity of yet another class.

Thanks to all for your interest in LSR,
DW


Ok my feeling is that Land Speed Racing is trying to go the maximum speed you can achieve within the rules of the class you are running in.  Even in "Production" where the car or bike has to have an outward appearance of stock changes or made under the sheet metal to maximize the potential of the car/bike to achieve maximum speed on the salt or dirt.

Now you take a NASCAR type car whose main objective in life is to turn left as fast as possible and run it on the salt and attempt to maximize it's top speed you will probably make changes to it that would take it away from the car that it was when it passed through NASCAR tech.  So now is it really a NASCAR car anymore or a car that started life as a NASCAR car??

What templates does it have to match??  A 90's car is way different that what was allowed in the 80's, 70's, 60's and 50's.  If early 2000's cars are available pretty reasonable now which ones will be reasonable in 10 years.

Same for engine size??  What era engine size would be allowed??? Hemis, small blocks, big blocks??

Trying to set up enforceable classes for these cars to me sounds like opening a can of worms that will never be closed.  Land speed racing is about building land speed racing cars not about running cars from other forms of racing.

Like I said before I have no problem about them running for time only and if they want to setup some kind of organization, kind of like the 200 mph club, that wants to set up there own classes or whatever and keep track of their records and run at SCTA, USFRA events under their safety rules for time only have at it.

This is from someone who has probably missed less than 10 NASCAR Cup races in the past 17 years,

Sum
« Last Edit: October 20, 2007, 05:34:37 PM by Sumner »

Offline JackD

  • NOBODY'S FOOL
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4684
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2007, 07:04:13 PM »
Every time a new class or rule is proposed, there is an age old tradition in SDRC that suggests for every 1 new class or rule, you should remove 2.

Wanna buy a shirt ? :roll:
"I would rather lose going fast enough to win than win going slow enough to lose."
"That horrible smell is dirty feet being held to the fire"

Offline Stan Back

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5879
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2007, 07:23:49 PM »
Sum--

You nailed it!

Stan
Past (Only) Member of the San Berdoo Roadsters -- "California's Most-Exclusive Roadster Club" -- 19 Years of Bonneville and/or El Mirage Street Roadster Records

Offline GeneF

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 71
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #3 on: October 20, 2007, 07:45:42 PM »
Personally speaking, I like to go to Bonneville to get away from Nascar and all the other, cookie cutter-monkey see monkey do, kinds of racing.

Offline hotrod

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
    • Black Horse photo
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #4 on: October 20, 2007, 08:07:26 PM »
My test is would my father or others of his generation have tried to race it if they had access to it.


When you look at the history of hotrodding and land speed racing you see in the early days that they did some very wild things to go faster. They didn't let convention and the norms of the day stand in the way of their quest for speed.

Some where in the last few decades that open attitude of figure out a way to go faster has slowly been overtaken by rules that cast in concrete one specific way of doing it. Time and technology changes and the racing classes should have room for similar cars using currently available technology that can compete for a record.

Time only is fine for a one off car that wants to try something, but when you create rule sets that outlaw entire classes of current production cars or current technology I think it is a step in the wrong direction.

I do understand the logisitical challenge of coming up with a rules package for a new class especially the proposal of a NASCAR class. I do also understand the problems with class proliferation and over popularity.

But I also think it is important to ask the questions that help define what classes make sense, and if certain classification decisions are really appropriate for the available equipment that the racer has access to today.
Since NASCAR bodies are all one off, there would be a major challenge to standardize body shape.

There are two ways to deal with that, One would be to force them to run to a specific template, or the other option is to "maintain the as raced appearence" but let them have a free hand with minor tweaks, by setting only height and width requirements.

In the vintage Oval Track class that is exactly what they do by the phrase:

Quote
  ... the appearance and design of cars in this catagory must be practical for, and as were used in, OVAL TRACK and SPEEDWAY competition.

Simple to document, provide pictures of a car (this specific car) in original competition trim and if it appears "as raced" and meets a width and height limit -- let it race. Part of the spirit of the competition would be to see if the track cars were given free reign on things like spoiler height and angle how fast could they have gone on a unlimited length straightaway?


Larry
« Last Edit: October 20, 2007, 08:10:55 PM by hotrod »

Offline JackD

  • NOBODY'S FOOL
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4684
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2007, 08:45:20 PM »
If F-1 is the logical next choice, can Indy Cars be far behind ?
NASCAR means a lot of things to a lot of different people, but you take "LOWRIDERS", they are solid.
The only fair way would be to run "CLAIMERS" you say ? :roll:

" Don't date out of your species."
"I would rather lose going fast enough to win than win going slow enough to lose."
"That horrible smell is dirty feet being held to the fire"

dwarner

  • Guest
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #6 on: October 20, 2007, 08:53:21 PM »
I repeat:

"cars from 1997 -2007, except 2007 COT
engine class C only
"as raced" configuration"

Entries will have to provide five templates for their car.

Center line, front/rear fender cross & front/rear windows. If the cars are available so are the templates. See photo in latest issue of Hot Rod.

DW

Black Star

  • Guest
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #7 on: October 20, 2007, 10:25:00 PM »
If F-1 is the logical next choice, can Indy Cars be far behind ?

Sorry Jack, you are mistaken. We already allow Indy Cars in VOT.

My feeling is if people actually bring these vehicles to the salt already then we should make a class for them. I base that on the fact that SCTA already has HUNDREDS of classes where nobody has EVER shown up with a race vehicle to compete in yet we still maintain those classes.

I like the process of to add one class, you must remove two, except it should be remove TEN.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2007, 10:26:36 PM by Black Star »

Offline Stainless1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8948
  • Robert W. P. "Stainless" Steele
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #8 on: October 20, 2007, 10:46:49 PM »
So if they are running old NASCARs why not run in Oval Track, just open a part of that class that now has VOT and MVOT.  Maybe NASCAROT...
Personally I don't plan to run one, but I also think if folks want to race one, then go for it. 
I'll bet USFRA would host a NASCAR race at WOS if someone approached them with an idea...
Hey if a dozen guys want to race round-de-round cars in a straight line, one at a time, I'm not the guy to stop em... I'll leave that to the trained professionals....
Stainless
Red Hat 228.039, 2001, 65ci, Bockscar Lakester #1000 with a little N2O

Offline desotoman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2815
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #9 on: October 21, 2007, 12:04:31 AM »
I repeat:

"cars from 1997 -2007, except 2007 COT
engine class C only
"as raced" configuration"

Entries will have to provide five templates for their car.

Center line, front/rear fender cross & front/rear windows. If the cars are available so are the templates. See photo in latest issue of Hot Rod.

DW

NO, we don't need any more classes. If you cannot find a class to run in with all the classes we have too bad. Run for time only. Nascar is not about straight away speed, lets keep it that way.

Tom G.
I love the USA. How much longer will we be a free nation?

Asking questions is one's only way of getting answers.

The rational person lets verified facts form or modify his opinion.  The ideologue ignores verified facts which don't fit his preconceived opinions.

Offline Stan Back

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5879
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #10 on: October 21, 2007, 12:12:19 AM »
Anybody know what the C/Fuel Roadster record is at Martinsville?
Past (Only) Member of the San Berdoo Roadsters -- "California's Most-Exclusive Roadster Club" -- 19 Years of Bonneville and/or El Mirage Street Roadster Records

Offline Greyboy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 50
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #11 on: October 21, 2007, 12:15:26 AM »
Speaking of open wheelers and oddballs .. anybody know what ultimately happened to the B.A.R. Formula One land speed experiment? I recall they were trying to crack 400 kph (250 mph or so). Not very impressive considering A.J. Foyt had already gone faster than that (257 mph) in the Olds Aerotech, a gloved Champ car, in 1988.  I recall seeing fat tires and no rear wing on the B.A.R.....

Grey

Offline interested bystander

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 997
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #12 on: October 21, 2007, 01:25:16 AM »
STAN- get those C FUEL thoughts outta yer mind!

You'd over-tax me and AL!
5 mph in pit area (clothed)

Offline JackD

  • NOBODY'S FOOL
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4684
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #13 on: October 21, 2007, 03:13:03 AM »
Modified Roadsters don't look like Roadsters any more, and rear Engined Modified Roadsters don't look like anything anybody has ever seen before.
Lets invent something and call it "Sports Racing".
We can let all the Sports race each other at their own meet.
It goes without saying that your template provided by you has to fit your car. :roll:
Every time you add something at the wishes of a few, you divide all the rest.
If you don't get back to basics, basically you have destroyed the unique character and tradition of the LSR event.
Prostitution is the "World's Oldest Profession", but this is supposed to be amateur.

 
"I would rather lose going fast enough to win than win going slow enough to lose."
"That horrible smell is dirty feet being held to the fire"

Offline hotrod

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
    • Black Horse photo
Re: NASCAR cars and the SCTA.......
« Reply #14 on: October 21, 2007, 05:26:09 AM »
Quote
but this is supposed to be amateur.

And the amateur has always tried to go as fast as he could with the equipment he could afford. The NASCAR chassis are a well engineered chassis that is available at reasonable prices where folks can get a 200 mph capable car that they know is safe at a sensible price.

The current rules already make it too expensive to run many of the current production cars in any of the modified classes, because of the drive train changes required you basically need to redesign the car.
What is SCTA going to do when none of the current production cars can run in Modified classes without prohibitive modifications in their design?

Larry