Forum: HoseHeads Sprint Car General Forum (go)
Moderators: dirtonly  /  dmantx  /  hosehead

Over the last several years I've head the argument 100 times that we have to line up the features using a system that allows the fast guys to start up front. Because the cars are all so equal now, nobody can win from the third row, etc. If you look at it objectively, that theory doesn't hold up.

If all the cars are so equal, then the variable that determines winners and losers should be driver skill.  For example, if a driver like Sweet or Gravel started behind 10 other guys who had never won a WoO or H-L race, but are driving cars that are so equal, shouldn't their talent put them in the winner's circle?
 

I think a case can be made that the cars have gotten out of hand, to where any "pretty good " driver can drive just as fast as any "top caliber" driver. All he has to do is hold the pedal down and steer. The "so equal cars" just don't seem to be beyond the good driver's capabilities to make it go as fast as nearly every other car on the track. Consider this. When a track gets dry slick, the drivers have to use both pedals to go fast. Overdo it, and you'll spin around. Tracks like that, allow the better drivers to show their talents and actually race other "equal " cars. Maybe it's time to take an objective look at what winged sprint cars have evolved into and tweak them into something that is better for the sport. 

Spending maybe but how do you put a cap on it? The big money owners are gonna spend whatever it takes. I remember reading something from I think Doug Wolfgang said Sprint car is thoroughbred racing for thoroughbred owners. I used to hear regional drivers say I have the same stuff as them just not as much of it. Today you have NASCAR guys owning teams and Roth and Quiring and  them teams are up front all the time. I miss the days of having open tires the racing imo was better.

Open tire rules will cost even more money because you will need more inventory. 

A pretty good driver won't make the A main most nights. The guys on woo and HL tour are the elite. What makes them so good is the crew chief.  What also makes them so good is how well the team knows what each wants and needs are before the helmet comes off. Donny Shatz won all his championships with Ricky turning the bolts. Without RW his win totals are nowhere near what they used to be. Is DS a pretty good driver, he far surpasses being just pretty good. These cars today are equally fast, and you can classify them the same,  when these cars come off the set up blocks it's the guy putting turns in and out that makes them go fast.

I see what you're saying. The equipment is equal, but the driver / set man combination are what makes the car win.

So why can't those top driver/ setup man combinations win from 10th against lesser talent in equal equipment?

Not a whole lot of tweaking needed. Smaller wings and narrow tires. It's been brought up about twenty years ago and hasn't gotten any traction,haha. Rich people like to out spend the others, that will never change. Money gets you to the next level.

I don't think the cars are "equal" but there is absolutely no denying they are "more equal" than they were in the past, and it's become easy to prove they are so much more equal, there is little that driving talent can do to overcome this equality in a sprint race, especially a heat race.  I know Knoxville is probably not the best example of this, as there are many other smaller tracks with less disparity, but I have a seasonal campsite a Knoxville, I'm most familiar with Knoxville, and their archives are second to none.  So, here's what I found randomly picking 3 Nationals over the past 40 years:

1.  1984.  Still a 10 car invert based on qualifying time.  Sammy Swindell, quick time at 17.477.  Because their were fewer than 50 cars, he started 9th in his heat, and won.  The pole sitter in his heat----20.100.  That's 2.623 seconds slower.  Pole starter finished outside of a transfer spot.

2.  2002.  Still a 10 car invert at that time.  Quick time, Lasoski at 15.277.  The winner of this heat, timed in 36th quick at 16.218, .941 seconds slower than Lasoski, and ran away with the race before lasoski could catch him.  (The pole sitter was 1.100 seconds slower than lasoski----much closer than 1984)  This doesn't mean lasoski didn't have the talent to catch him, just not the time with his head start.  

3.  Fast forward to 2023.  8 car invert now.  Rico sets quick time at 15.703.   The pole sitter of his race set a time of 16.589 setting the 36th quick time.  This is a difference from 1st to 36th of only .886 seconds.  The pole sitter ran away with the heat.  Rico did not transfer.  Rico was FAR better than the pole sitter----no time to catch him.  

  I picked 3 random events and just plucked that info out.  In Sammy's 1984 run from last to first in his heat, the race would have taken much more time to complete, with slower cars, and a bigger disparity from 1st to last.  Thus, making it much easier for top-notch equipment and drivers to move up through the field.  2023, the heat races are over as fast as they begin.  Laps are MUCH quicker, the race time is much shorter, the cars are ALL faster than they were before, and because the lap time difference has narrowed so dramatically, the front row can run away from the field while the back row is trying to maneuver through the 2nd and 3rd rows.  To me, this isn't even an argument-----the cars are getting more and more alike with each passing year.  No denying it, and the numbers are there to support it.

Now, if your pole sitter is .886 seconds slower than your 8th place starter, and the race is 50 laps long, game over, the faster car/driver wins almost every time.  However, invert for 10 laps, and suddenly the .886 seconds mean nothing.  It's just math.  I don't think the cars are limiting what a great driver can do at all.  There's just not enough time to do it in a heat race.  This is why, outsided of the Nationals format, inverts, IMO, are a bad idea.  

I don't think we are ever going backwards here.  The cars, equipment, motors, etc. etc. are only going to keep getting better and better.  This is why straight up lineups are the only way for talent to overcome the "equality" of the cars.  Talent cannot overcome this if they continue to invert 8 or 10 lap heats.  And only moving the sport backward can bring back these big differences in 1st to last.  

JMO

I can't say I disagree with anything you've said. I did chuckle at the idea of Sammy leisurely passing those 9 other cars with that extra 26.23 seconds he had.

If the cars keep getting more equal, where does the sport go?

Well done with math and logic. Refreshing! The aero wash caused by the giant wings set at crazy steep angles is what holds the good guys back and we all know it. Fix that and sprint car racing would be much more entertaining.

In answer to your question, I don't know.  Michael N's idea is a good place to start, until innovation catches up to that.  I personally don't have an issue with the way the Outlaws line up now, but I am in the minority.  

How much innovation does it take to reduce the areo wash plow hole, or dirty air as some say? I love to read ideas from people who only know how to solve problems by increasing spending.

I think the cars all being equal and very tough to pass was a real thing about 10-15 years ago. While the cars are still way more equal than they were back in the 90's and earlier, there seems to have been more development in the engine department such that only a handful of local teams can now afford to compete with the big buck touring teams. The great equalizer is smaller tracks or dry-slick tracks, which provide both better racing and lower budget guys to be competitive.

A

I've wondered what would happen is the wings were narrowed to 4 feet wide. The look would be slightly different and the cars would all be a tick slower. What would be the effect on the engines, tires, and wear & tear old the rest of the car?

If the WoO set the field for the feature straight up, and skipped the heat races a dash, would the feature lineup be much different than using the current system?

Gravel would start on the pole a lot more than he does now. 

20/20 rule will take care of some it. 20 sq ft top wings set at 20 degrees.

To help with your question I have an experiment for you to try. Grab a sheet of plywood and place it on your head, get on your bike and pedal around the neighborhood for a lap or two. Then go home and cut that sheet of plywood in half put it back on and pedal a couple of more laps around your neighborhood. I think you will find that the smaller sheet of plywood is easier on your body, and bike, and you could possibly pedal longer distances. I love when I get to be a science teacher. 

"So why can't those top driver/ setup man combinations win from 10th against lesser talent in equal equipment?

Difference between various teams isn't enough to overcome equality of equipment (Except on a really challenging track?). I agree with the poster who said that "bad air" makes it a lot harder to pass too

If you think there should be an invert, you are stupid and not a real fan and don't know near as much as I do about racing because I am really smart and a real fan and you saying you want inverts means you voted for Trump and are a socialist and probably still wear a mask and because I'm so smart my opinions have turned into facts and if you have a different opinion than my facts then you are stupid and inverts are stupid.  Sorry I had to say it lol.  People get pretty worked up about inverts but I think the good part is that many nights still produce a good feature, it's that 3 hours before that could be improved maybe.  There's some good ideas here.  I know this might sound stupid but I don't want smaller wings or smaller tires, just because of the look of the car.  It's funny, as I push through my 40s I'm not really a fan of any vehicles out there today, including most race cars, however I think a sprint car continues to get better looking every year.  I love the fat tires and big wing on top, as dumb as it sounds I really don't want to see a "gen 2" (or whatever they would call it) sprint car.  But I think there's things that could be done to improve the quality of racing or make the car harder to drive. 

I think making a maximum wing angle would be huge but I don't think it has to stop there.  As someone pointed out there's NASCAR money in sprint cars now.  Which can be a good or bad thing.  I believe "dirty air" does exist in sprint cars.  With the "NASCAR money" hopefully means NASCAR connections?  I guess what I'm getting at is some wind tunnel testing.  I would like the wing to be redesigned slightly to where most fans wouldn't notice but that they would produce much less "dirty air".  You're always going to have some but NASCAR did make huge improvements with their new car on "aero race tracks" and made much better racing at what used to be their most boring tracks.  I think a maximum wing angle and a reduction in dirty air behind the cars would really help, especially at bigger tracks like Knoxville.

I think there's lots of room for tire improvement or degradation of tires?  I think this one's huge.  There's lots of things that could be done here that the average fan wouldn't notice.  Everyone brings up harder compounds, which I think would help but I think other things could be done.  Years ago racing go karts if you had a tire too soft they would "go away".  I don't know exactly why but once certain tires reached a certain temperature they would quit working but wouldn't wear it was like flipping a switch, you would be really fast and then have trouble making a corner.  When you would come in the tires would be cold.  Now the big difference here is you're talking 10-15 HP vs 900 HP, I'm thinking it wouldn't completely work like it did in the go karts.  But I would think there's things that could be done, maybe creating some tire falloff?  But I know they have tried to save teams money by making them start the feature on the same tire they qualified with.  So I'm not sure what you would happen with tire falloff.  I'm not Walter White so I don't have the answers here, I just know there's a lot of things being tried in other series that could be tried in sprint cars to make them harder to drive.

The other thing I think could be tweaked is motors.  From listening to NASCAR drivers talk about their new car, which sucks on small racetracks, I've come to a few conclusions.  First off I don't think a reduction in horsepower is a good step because that only makes the car easier to drive.  I've thought for years there should be a gear rule that would reduce the RPMs down to about a max of 7500 RPMs.  I know this doesn't reduce the power of the engine or the immediate cost but if you reduce it from a max of 9,000 RPMs to 7,500 RPMs, there will be much less wear and tear on the motors which hopefully would help with cost.  But I have another idea.  What if you mandated a cam that had a much narrower power band?  I'm not sure what that is right now, but say right it's between 8,200 and 9,000 RPMs.  What if with a gear rule it went to between 7,200 and 7,500 RPMs?  Just thinking about it here if a guy missed a corner slightly and was out of the power band that much longer it could take longer to recover from that mistake than it does now, which would just make it harder to drive a perfect race.  If a guy starting 10th could nail every corner and win no matter what.  You could also see people gear to run the bottom or the top and if one of them went away, they would be out to lunch.

I'm no expert here by any stretch of the imagination but I do believe small tweaks could be made that would make huge differences that most fans wouldn't notice.  I'm sure they're looking at things.  As was pointed out, I don't think it's going to get better but lots of series that are dealing with the same thing.

Drivers have a device that has changed the handling of the car from the first few laps of the feature race to the last lap. 

Wing sliders. Take them away and you would see a huge difference in who finishes where. By the end of races today everyone has that wing slid back as far as they can get it. That in itself makes the front ends very lite, if not for that front wing it would be almost impossible to be hard on the throttle because the car would be pulling wheelies. 

That wing all the way back punches a huge hole in the air, hence, aero push. Back before they mandated the 25 Sq ft wing everyone thought keep the top flat because if you put angle in it it would slow you down. Then you had the right side panel top edge even with the top surface of the wing and it was hanging down so low you had no idea who was on your outside. Thankfully, and 1 of the few times, safety came into play and the huge right side panels got banned. 

So in the end the cars and wings today create the problem. Take the air off the guy behind you and there's not a chance in hell of his car handling as well as yours. Corner entry speed, the more the better, create huge amounts of downforce on that wing.