|
|
|
|
|
Topic: Knoxville Nationals early entries/q'fying nites
|
Email this topic to a friend |
Subscribe to this Topic
| Report this Topic to Moderator
|
|
Page 2 of 5 of 87 replies
|
|
|
|
|
July 24, 2018 at
06:54:34 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
05/31/2007
|
|
Posts:
|
4394
|
|
|
|
Up to 72 410s and 74 360s.
Hey, at least we got to 60, haha
|
|
|
|
|
July 24, 2018 at
07:45:17 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
07/03/2010
|
|
Posts:
|
859
|
|
|
This message was edited on
July 25, 2018 at
10:57:53 AM by ColtanW
New additions today for the 410s:
Wednesday:
1 - Travis Rilat, Heath, TX
5H - Sammy Walsh, Orangeville, NSW, AU
12 - Lynton Jeffrey, Sydney, NSW, AU
Thursday:
26 - Joey Saldana, Pittsboro, IN
28AU - Allan Woods, Brisbane, QLD, Au
35 - Jamie Veal, Warnabool, VIC, AU
91 - Kyle Rinehardt, Neptune City, NJ
97G - Hunter Schurenberg, Sikeston, MO
Total Car Count: 72 (35 Wednesday/37 Thursday)
New additions for the 360s:
Thursday:
55 - McKenna Haase, Des Moines, IA (Listed on the entry list for both Thursday and Friday)
Friday:
1 - Travis Rilat, Forney,TX
5H - Sammy Walsh, Orangeville, NSW, AU
13M - Josh Higday, Runnells, IA (Moved from Thursday to Friday)
23 - Seth Bergman, Snohomish, WA
26 - Joey Saldana, Brownsburg, IN
55 McKenna Haase, Carlisle, IA (Once again, listed on both Thursday and Friday)
Total Car Count: 74 (44 Thursday/30 Friday) [Including McKenna only on the Thursday list)
I'll try to keep up with the changes as time goes on until I'm in the camper at Knoxville.
Ask Frank
|
|
|
|
|
July 24, 2018 at
07:54:00 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
04/23/2015
|
|
Posts:
|
881
|
|
|
|
I've always had a crush on Kendra Jacobs..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 24, 2018 at
10:53:20 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
08/16/2009
|
|
Posts:
|
3962
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: chilly on July 23 2018 at 05:31:42 PM
Given that car counts are down a little in Knoxville, PA, and other places this year, I'm thinking the residual effects of that will be a car count that is a little lower than past years... but like I said, still somewhere in the 90's. I hope you're right and I'm wrong. A car count above 110 would signal a strong number of 410s nationwide (which would be good!) ... but I'm not that interested in watching a last chance heat Wed/Thurs with the 101st - 110th place drivers duking it out for a spot in the back of the C... maybe you are??
|
Correct. There is no difference in the quality of racing between 90 and 110 cars.
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
02:35:19 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
06/10/2015
|
|
Posts:
|
2420
|
|
|
This message was edited on
July 25, 2018 at
02:40:47 AM by blazer00
Reply to:
Posted By: egras on July 24 2018 at 10:53:20 PM
Correct. There is no difference in the quality of racing between 90 and 110 cars.
|
You're right, but keep in mind the cars are split into two nights. The Nationals qualifying format is designed for 50 cars each Wednesday and Thursday nights......five heats, ten cars to a heat. With heats inverted four rows (used to be all five). So with 100 plus cars the split makes it easier to have at least 50 each night.
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
10:05:16 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
12/02/2004
|
|
Posts:
|
2114
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: turn4guy on July 24 2018 at 07:54:00 PM
I've always had a crush on Kendra Jacobs..
|
LMAO....
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
10:23:54 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/07/2006
|
|
Posts:
|
5580
|
|
|
This message was edited on
July 28, 2018 at
07:36:55 AM by StanM
Reply to:
Posted By: egras on July 24 2018 at 10:53:20 PM
Correct. There is no difference in the quality of racing between 90 and 110 cars.
|
When I was younger and hitting the photography hard I'd camp at the tracks for multi day events. I never shot the Nationals but I didn't care for huge car counts at some of the shows. It meant that I wouldn't crack open my first beer until midnight. 
Stan Meissner
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
11:13:24 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
05/31/2007
|
|
Posts:
|
4394
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: blazer00 on July 25 2018 at 02:35:19 AM
You're right, but keep in mind the cars are split into two nights. The Nationals qualifying format is designed for 50 cars each Wednesday and Thursday nights......five heats, ten cars to a heat. With heats inverted four rows (used to be all five). So with 100 plus cars the split makes it easier to have at least 50 each night.
|
Agreed, the Nationals is an event built for 100 cars, although now that they invert 8 instead of 10 in the heats, I guess you can get away with 80.
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
11:26:21 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
08/16/2009
|
|
Posts:
|
3962
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: blazer00 on July 25 2018 at 02:35:19 AM
You're right, but keep in mind the cars are split into two nights. The Nationals qualifying format is designed for 50 cars each Wednesday and Thursday nights......five heats, ten cars to a heat. With heats inverted four rows (used to be all five). So with 100 plus cars the split makes it easier to have at least 50 each night.
|
That is correct. But, with the final 2 rows not included in the invert, only 80 cars are truly needed to complete the show. I may be mistaken, but I seem to remember at least 1 time where there was not a C-main on one of the qualifying nights due to low car count and attrition. Anyone else confirm this? And, if memory serves me, the racing that night was fantastic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
11:26:43 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
01/19/2009
|
|
Posts:
|
1187
|
|
|
|
If the track was a little drier during the heats would it still be feasible to invert 10? I understand why they did it but is it all b/c of horsepower?
Would the track rubber by the end of the night with 50-70 cars if the track was wider earlier in the night? Maybe not with only one class. This would obviously mean slower time trials, which I'm fine with, but I'm guessing the times would drop off more dramatically if the track was wider.
This is in no way a knock on Knoxville or their track prep, which is amazing. They're so good at what they do, given all the variables; rain, humidity, wind, sun, plus 8 nights of racing in 10 days
Keep It Real
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
11:54:52 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
07/03/2010
|
|
Posts:
|
859
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: YungWun24 on July 25 2018 at 11:26:43 AM
If the track was a little drier during the heats would it still be feasible to invert 10? I understand why they did it but is it all b/c of horsepower?
Would the track rubber by the end of the night with 50-70 cars if the track was wider earlier in the night? Maybe not with only one class. This would obviously mean slower time trials, which I'm fine with, but I'm guessing the times would drop off more dramatically if the track was wider.
This is in no way a knock on Knoxville or their track prep, which is amazing. They're so good at what they do, given all the variables; rain, humidity, wind, sun, plus 8 nights of racing in 10 days
|
If I recall correctly, the main reason for switching to an 8 car invert was for safety. They determined that the speed/skill difference between those bottom two cars in each heat was too great so they moved them to the back to prevent accidents early in the heat races. I believe it was stated or at least hypothesized that if they ever got to a bigger car count, the 10 car inverts could come back because there might be less of a speed/skill differential between your 1st to 50th fastest cars.
Ask Frank
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
12:09:26 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
06/10/2015
|
|
Posts:
|
2420
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: ColtanW on July 25 2018 at 11:54:52 AM
If I recall correctly, the main reason for switching to an 8 car invert was for safety. They determined that the speed/skill difference between those bottom two cars in each heat was too great so they moved them to the back to prevent accidents early in the heat races. I believe it was stated or at least hypothesized that if they ever got to a bigger car count, the 10 car inverts could come back because there might be less of a speed/skill differential between your 1st to 50th fastest cars.
|
Could be, but I thought it had more to do with the fact that it was getting tougher and tougher to transfer from the fifth row with the cars being more equal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
12:39:32 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
07/15/2014
|
|
Posts:
|
1226
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: blazer00 on July 25 2018 at 12:09:26 PM
Could be, but I thought it had more to do with the fact that it was getting tougher and tougher to transfer from the fifth row with the cars being more equal.
|
Read the fourth post, especially the end.
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
12:54:43 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/07/2006
|
|
Posts:
|
5580
|
|
|
|
In the case of the Knoxville Nationals the question becomes how many qualifying races does a person want to sit through before the 15 pulls into victory lane?
Stan Meissner
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
03:25:34 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
06/10/2015
|
|
Posts:
|
2420
|
|
|
Reply to:
What does that have to do with my post? Mine was about why the invert changed from five rows to four rows. Nothing to do with car count.
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
03:34:29 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
12/01/2004
|
|
Posts:
|
975
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: blazer00 on July 25 2018 at 12:09:26 PM
Could be, but I thought it had more to do with the fact that it was getting tougher and tougher to transfer from the fifth row with the cars being more equal.
|
Both points (safety and tougher to transfer with cars so equal) are valid. The link below is highlights from Wed night of the 2008 Nationals... the last year the invert was 10. Skip ahead to 1:04 for the start of heat #4. Carl Wilson (who timed in 49th and started on the pole of the heat), lost it going into one, Doug Esh had nowhere to go, drilled him, and all hell broke loose. The tornado of carnage is seldom seen, and it's amazing nobody was hurt. Next year, the invert went to 8 and has been there ever since. That night (Wed in 2008), QT was 14.897 and Carl Wilson's 49th quick lap was 16.415... or a second and a half slower. Some years it's closer to around a second difference... really just depends. If Carl Wilson didn't take out most of the field in '08, maybe the full invert lasts a little while longer... guess we'll never know!? I wasn't happy when they changed it 'cause nostalgia and all that... but am ok with where it's at being 8. That said, they'd better keep it where it's at for a long time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaNLg1v3vvk
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
03:46:16 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
04/29/2014
|
|
Posts:
|
1206
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: chilly on July 25 2018 at 03:34:29 PM
Both points (safety and tougher to transfer with cars so equal) are valid. The link below is highlights from Wed night of the 2008 Nationals... the last year the invert was 10. Skip ahead to 1:04 for the start of heat #4. Carl Wilson (who timed in 49th and started on the pole of the heat), lost it going into one, Doug Esh had nowhere to go, drilled him, and all hell broke loose. The tornado of carnage is seldom seen, and it's amazing nobody was hurt. Next year, the invert went to 8 and has been there ever since. That night (Wed in 2008), QT was 14.897 and Carl Wilson's 49th quick lap was 16.415... or a second and a half slower. Some years it's closer to around a second difference... really just depends. If Carl Wilson didn't take out most of the field in '08, maybe the full invert lasts a little while longer... guess we'll never know!? I wasn't happy when they changed it 'cause nostalgia and all that... but am ok with where it's at being 8. That said, they'd better keep it where it's at for a long time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaNLg1v3vvk
|
Thanks for the share. That was interesting to watch. This is gonna happen once in a while with a 10 car invert where some guy looses it in front of the field but some though it actually may be easier for the back row of the invert to move up with a full field invert. Really interesting debate. I understand both opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
05:33:04 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
07/15/2014
|
|
Posts:
|
1226
|
|
|
This message was edited on
July 25, 2018 at
05:35:32 PM by Johnny Utah
Reply to:
Posted By: blazer00 on July 25 2018 at 03:25:34 PM
What does that have to do with my post? Mine was about why the invert changed from five rows to four rows. Nothing to do with car count.
|
My initial comment was a link.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
06:35:11 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
06/10/2015
|
|
Posts:
|
2420
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: Johnny Utah on July 25 2018 at 05:33:04 PM
My initial comment was a link.
|
That discussion was about cars being more equal on a dry slick track. And I do disagree with that. But all cars are faster than they were and if you look back the qualifying times are tighter throughout the fields today than they were years ago. I think last year on one of the nights at the Nationals there was only about a one second gap from quick time to slowest time. Back in the '80's and '90's I think gaps were as much as 2.5 seconds a lot of years from top to bottom. It did get tougher to transfer from the fifth row. Split hairs if you like on my statements, but my thoughts are that just because all the cars are faster today, that doesn't make them equal. Money still seperates the top performers from the rest.
|
|
|
|
|
July 25, 2018 at
06:55:54 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
08/16/2009
|
|
Posts:
|
3962
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: StanM on July 25 2018 at 12:54:43 PM
In the case of the Knoxville Nationals the question becomes how many qualifying races does a person want to sit through before the 15 pulls into victory lane?
|
I say as many as they can give us in 4 day's time!!!! Then, the cherry on top is when something magical happens and the 15 DOESN'T pull into victory lane! 
It does happen here and there you know
|
|
|
