HoseHeads.com | HoseHeads Classifieds | Racer's Auction
Home | Register | Contact | Verify Email | FAQ |
Blogs | Photo Gallery | Press Release | Results | HoseheadsClassifieds.com


Welcome Guest. Already registered? Please Login

 

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


Records per page
 
Topic: If a fan rewrote the 410 sprint car specs Email this topic to a friend | Subscribe to this TopicReport this Topic to Moderator
Page 3 of 3   of  52 replies
Murphy
May 10, 2018 at 01:23:10 PM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 3262
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Keyboard Jockey on May 10 2018 at 12:13:48 PM

For whom are you reducing the costs for?  

Racer A: $100,000 budget for a season,

Racer B: $20,000 budget for the season. 

Racer C: cant afford to race.

 

Magical change the rules for teams so the budget needed to race is half of what it was last year. 

Racer A is now going to spend $50,000 on other things to win races, re design parts for maximum efficency. 

Racer B only has $10,000 to spend on making things better. 

Racer C can now afford to buy in to go racing. 

 

 

Racer A is still $40,000 faster, slice the pie any way you want. You may get another team "back in" and I don't disagree that new life breathes new tallent one bit, but how are you measuring new life from past seasons to new seasons?



     I'm fairly certain you are not an accountant or a magician. If you're slicing pie, I like pumpkin with whipped cream.

     Your magic theory is off. It doesn't work as a percentage. Instead, it works as something of a constant. For example, if changes saved the racers $250 per night of racing, over 50 races that's $12,500 saved, no matter who the racer is.  True, that $12,500 mighr just be spent on different equipment by a high dollar team. The low dollar team might spend it on parts to be more competitive. For the dormant team, that might be the incentive that gets them back into the game. For a team looking to get into racing, that might be a way to lower the hurdle of entry into the sport.

     Maybe the same drivers still win. A lot of that has to be attributed to talent as well as good (expensive) equipment. Which do you think would be a better race? Donny Schatz winning in a 24 car feature or in an 11 car feature? There's a reason that Donny Schatz was working on a funky engine thing a couple years back. What do you suppose that was about?

    Just a thought- You are suggesting that we shouldn't lower the costs for all racers because the high dollar teams will just spend the savings to go faster. That's some weird logic in itself. I question if the high dollar teams are already spending as much money as they can to win races. I cintend the $12,500 saved in my example above is more likely to be used easing the current exoenses than it is to buy shinnier paint for the car.

     I also like blueberry pie but I can get kinda fussy about the crust.



BigRightRear
May 10, 2018 at 01:32:55 PM
Joined: 11/27/2004
Posts: 3751
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: tenter on May 09 2018 at 06:45:24 PM

Most of what you suggested that was made obsolete was not because of rules.

Non-downtube chassis can still be used.

Wings , yes rules made some wings obsolete. At $650 to replace each , that hurt .

Steel motors are still legal. Most people switched when their steel motor was in need of being replaced.

Tires are replaced weekly anyhow. But not the wheels.

Shocks became obsolete because of technology, not rules.

I used BRR example because EVERYTHING he suggested would instantly make racing un-affordable to most because of the huge initial cost.

 

I've been around it for half a century. It goes in cycles. I see nothing wrong with the current product. If there were less classes , the racing would be like the 60's again. Not saying it was better than now either. I see a lot of complaining about current sprint car racing. I think it's as tough as ever to win.



I will use Brent as an example because everything he suggest makes him burp... Have another thirty pack and refuse to accept cheap horsepower...thinking it will cost more than $50-60k and run less than 8 nights. 

 

BURP.... BURP


Lincoln 1845 ft/.35 mile T1=118MPH 
Eldora 2287 ft/.43mile T3=135MPH
Port 2716 ft/.51 mile T3=TBD
Grove 2792 ft/.53 mile T3=135MPH
Selinsgrove 2847 ft/.54 mile T1=136MPH
"I didn't move to PA from El Paso in search of better 
weather." Van May

Murphy
May 10, 2018 at 02:56:03 PM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 3262
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: BigRightRear on May 10 2018 at 01:32:55 PM

I will use Brent as an example because everything he suggest makes him burp... Have another thirty pack and refuse to accept cheap horsepower...thinking it will cost more than $50-60k and run less than 8 nights. 

 

BURP.... BURP



     For those of us apparently not in on the joke, can you explain what you mean?

-Thanks




Murphy
May 10, 2018 at 03:01:44 PM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 3262
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Keyboard Jockey on May 09 2018 at 04:14:23 PM

A harder tire should take away bite in theory, hoever if you are spinning the tires more I think you will put ruber down on the track faster and in turn create a ruberdown race track more than you see now. 



     Wouldn't soft tires put down rubber sooner than hard tires?



MandGRacing96
May 10, 2018 at 03:04:30 PM
Joined: 01/19/2009
Posts: 583
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Murphy on May 10 2018 at 03:01:44 PM

     Wouldn't soft tires put down rubber sooner than hard tires?



Did someone say earlier, take away stagger?  How would that save money?  I guess less tires?  Of all the ideas thrown out , that one should be thrown out.  You cant have a set stagger..different tracks, different conditions.  JMO



blazer00
May 10, 2018 at 06:19:38 PM
Joined: 06/10/2015
Posts: 2420
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: MandGRacing96 on May 10 2018 at 03:04:30 PM

Did someone say earlier, take away stagger?  How would that save money?  I guess less tires?  Of all the ideas thrown out , that one should be thrown out.  You cant have a set stagger..different tracks, different conditions.  JMO



I was the one who mentioned limiting stagger. That wasn't so much from a cost savings step, but more of a handling/driving approach. I was thinking more in the lines of putting more emphasis on driver ability and less on the characteristic of the car doing most of the work when cornering. I know not one measurement would fit all tracks. But as mentioned earlier, some ideas are bad and some are good. If that's a bad one by all means throw it out. That won't hurt my feelings. Smile  It's not like any of the changes being discussed here are going to take shape anyhow.




hardon
May 10, 2018 at 11:30:14 PM
Joined: 02/20/2005
Posts: 485
Reply

I think we can all agree that the costs of sprint car racing should be addressed if they could.  I've often thought a gear rule would help a lot.  I think if they would mandate a gear that would keep the max around 7,000 RPMs no equipment is immediately obsolete.  I understand that the big money teams will spend the money to make more power at 7,000 RPMs but they shouldn't have to freshen them as often, also without them turning those kinds of RPMs hopefully less money could be spent on the valve train.  Also hopefully you would see fewer blown engines.

Another thing I think could help is the tires.  I know a lot of people keep recommending a harder tire.  I'll be honest, here's what I know about tires, they are round, black and hold air.  However I have to believe that tires from 20 years ago are quite different than they are today.  Like I said I don't have the answer here but I'm sure the rubber is different than it was years ago.  Maybe they can come up with a rubber that doesn't provide as much grip or lay down as much rubber or lasts longer without sacrificing too much grip.  Maybe they could redesign the sidewall so you need more than 10 or 15 pounds in the tire.  Not sure if this would save money or not but I think there is some options there.

Another thing I think could help is the lightweight parts.  As far as I'm concerned the lightweight parts did nothing to help racing at all.  Once everyone started using them it provided no advantage and it didn't do anything to help the racing on the track.  How about outlawing titanium nuts and bolts?  Or saying titanium isn't allowed anywhere on the car?  Other lightweight parts could be outlawed too like lightweight rear axles and whatever else.  I don't think just putting a higher weight rule is going to help much as the teams that can afford it will continue to buy the lightweight parts and put the weight on the car where they want it.

As far as outlawing certain parts and the concern with it costing teams a lot of money, which I agree is a genuine concern.  How many 410 teams have anything on any of their cars that they had three years ago?  As far as implementing new parts couldn't they give a 2-3 year window?  An example of the rule could read like this, starting in 2019 LS engines are legal as well as the engines that have been running.  If you run the traditional engine you will need to also use (anything to try to even the HP to the LS engine).  Starting in 2022 the traditional engine will no longer be allowed and you must use LS engines only.  This way you have three years to use up your current inventory of parts.  If you gernade an engine, buy an LS engine to replace it.  The same with wings, how long do they last?  I will say though as a fan I do remember those little IMCA wings Murphy was talking about and I hated how they looked so I hope wings aren't changed appearance wise.

Other things that I think could be changed are shocks.  I will say that I don't know much about shocks but I can imagine they are much better (and more expensive) than they were 20 years ago.  Maybe outlaw split valve shocks?  Or just allow a split valve shock on the LR (but the same shock always)?  I'm not sure how long shocks last but at least they wouldn't have to carry a huge inventory of different shocks with backups to everything.

I'm sure there are options out there to save money.  Some people aren't going to like some of the ideas or any of them.  But I think everyone can agree the costs need to be addressed.



Murphy
May 11, 2018 at 04:27:49 PM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 3262
Reply

     What about mufflers? I know- most people hate them because they makes the cars sound weird. Noise is one of the biggest complaints from people living near race tracks. I say the tracks need to embrace mufflers to keep peace with the neighbors and such. There's also that thing about hearing loss. My wife says my hearing is going away because of going to 1,000 or so races in my lifetime. I kinda thought it was because we've been married for 29 years, but what do I know.

     Would there be a way to have some sort of universal standard for sprint car mufflers? In my mind it would need to be simple and allow the use of more than one supplier. If there were such a thing as a universal standard it would show that the racing community is aware of the noise issue and is working on it. It might also make it easier to deal with varying local regulations.

     What do you think?



hardon
May 11, 2018 at 07:31:55 PM
Joined: 02/20/2005
Posts: 485
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Murphy on May 11 2018 at 04:27:49 PM

     What about mufflers? I know- most people hate them because they makes the cars sound weird. Noise is one of the biggest complaints from people living near race tracks. I say the tracks need to embrace mufflers to keep peace with the neighbors and such. There's also that thing about hearing loss. My wife says my hearing is going away because of going to 1,000 or so races in my lifetime. I kinda thought it was because we've been married for 29 years, but what do I know.

     Would there be a way to have some sort of universal standard for sprint car mufflers? In my mind it would need to be simple and allow the use of more than one supplier. If there were such a thing as a universal standard it would show that the racing community is aware of the noise issue and is working on it. It might also make it easier to deal with varying local regulations.

     What do you think?



Haven't mufflers been on sprint cars for quite a while?  I've never really looked at them but what I'm thinking of was attatched to the end of the header and was slightly bigger than the tubing on the header, was this a muffler?  I guess I could never tell any difference when they had them on, maybe if they were side by side I could tell a difference but I never sat in the stands and thought they sounded any different.  Are you talking about a more agressive muffler?

I'm not saying it's a bad idea but I don't see how it saves teams any money.




oswald
May 11, 2018 at 08:44:17 PM
Joined: 11/30/2004
Posts: 1982
Reply

Knoxville already runs mufflers.



Michael_N
May 12, 2018 at 12:02:08 AM
Joined: 11/30/2004
Posts: 720
Reply

Sprint Bandits have it figured out. Get rid of a pile of traction by flattening the wing out. Less motor needed and less stress put on the entire drivetrain should equal savings for Joe six pack.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCs7LjQctvw

 



revjimk
May 12, 2018 at 02:36:22 AM
Joined: 09/14/2010
Posts: 7595
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Murphy on May 11 2018 at 04:27:49 PM

     What about mufflers? I know- most people hate them because they makes the cars sound weird. Noise is one of the biggest complaints from people living near race tracks. I say the tracks need to embrace mufflers to keep peace with the neighbors and such. There's also that thing about hearing loss. My wife says my hearing is going away because of going to 1,000 or so races in my lifetime. I kinda thought it was because we've been married for 29 years, but what do I know.

     Would there be a way to have some sort of universal standard for sprint car mufflers? In my mind it would need to be simple and allow the use of more than one supplier. If there were such a thing as a universal standard it would show that the racing community is aware of the noise issue and is working on it. It might also make it easier to deal with varying local regulations.

     What do you think?



"29 years"..... good one! wink




tenter
May 13, 2018 at 11:36:29 PM
Joined: 07/16/2008
Posts: 978
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Murphy on May 10 2018 at 02:56:03 PM

     For those of us apparently not in on the joke, can you explain what you mean?

-Thanks



No clue what he is trying to say either???





Post Reply
You must be logged in to Post a Message.
Not a member register Here.
Already registered? Please Login





If you have a website and would like to set up a forum here at HoseHeadForums.com
please contact us by using the contact link at the top of the page.

© 2024 HoseHeadForums.com Privacy Policy