The 2022 running NASCAR, IMSA & other racing things thread

[playthrough]

Mercy. Fewer than 2,000 Superbirds were originally made and who knows how many are still around.

 

[2muchcoffeeman]

Daytona International Speedway:

 

[Sam Mills 51]

Daytona International Speedway:

Maybe the Unlimited Hydroplanes would grip the track better than 3,300-pound stock cars.

 

[maumann]

Daytona International Speedway:

When the tunnel under Turn 1 is full of water, infield parking is not advisable.

 

[Batman]

Daytona International Speedway:

The France family just announced that the 2023 Pepsi Zero Sugar 400 will be run with jet skis.

 

[playthrough]

Daytona International Speedway:

Damn weepers.

 

[maumann]

Damn weepers.

In the words of Tom Carnegie, "It appears they've lost the track."

 

[UPChip]

Well, Johnny, I guess we better get out the rain tires.

 

[doctorquant]

In the words of Tom Carnegie, "It appears they've lost the track."

Chuckling, but ... the track proper is "dry" in that snap, isn't it?

 

[2muchcoffeeman]

In the world of motorcycle helmets, there are two safety standards: the Snell Memorial Foundation and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Traditionally, the Snell standard has been considered "better" and if you had a choice, you go with the Snell-certified helmet over the one that "only" has DOT safety certification.

That may be the wrong way to look at things. One of the test a Snell helmet has to pass is penetration of the helmet shell, and while a helmet may be able to pass that it can be argued that if you're in that kind of wreck then penetration of the helmet shell might be the least of your problems.

There is also a school of thought that says the internal foam in a Snell-certified helmet might be too stiff, that rather than absorbing the shock from a crash it's just passing it along to the skull of the wearer, and that maybe a DOT helmet is safer. I think that might be where NASCAR's new car is: Maybe it's too stiff.

Last Sunday after Alex Bowman wrecked at Texas, he told his crew he wouldn't be able to drive the rest of the day. But the car looked fine, so they sent him back out again. Now he's out for at least a week with post-concussion syndrome. Kurt Busch has missed 11 races so far with post-concussion syndrome, and he has said his vision and balance aren't 100 percent.

Is the new Cup Series car too safe? Does NASCAR need to take a step back in terms of chassis stiffness in order to take a step forward in terms of driver safety?

 

[Driftwood]

Back in my riding days, I wore the very unsafe turtle style helmet because I wanted the wind in the face and smell of the breeze.
I survived, thankfully, and although I'll unlikely ever own another bike, I'd jump on one today and take off.
Dang, I miss my Harley but don't want it back.

 

[maumann]

In the world of motorcycle helmets, there are two safety standards: the Snell Memorial Foundation and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Traditionally, the Snell standard has been considered "better" and if you had a choice, you go with the Snell-certified helmet over the one that "only" has DOT safety certification.

That may be the wrong way to look at things. One of the test a Snell helmet has to pass is penetration of the helmet shell, and while a helmet may be able to pass that it can be argued that if you're in that kind of wreck then penetration of the helmet shell might be the least of your problems.

There is also a school of thought that says the internal foam in a Snell-certified helmet might be too stiff, that rather than absorbing the shock from a crash it's just passing it along to the skull of the wearer, and that maybe a DOT helmet is safer. I think that might be where NASCAR's new car is: Maybe it's too stiff.

Last Sunday after Alex Bowman wrecked at Texas, he told his crew he wouldn't be able to drive the rest of the day. But the car looked fine, so they sent him back out again. Now he's out for at least a week with post-concussion syndrome. Kurt Busch has missed 11 races so far with post-concussion syndrome, and he has said his vision and balance aren't 100 percent.

Is the new Cup Series car too safe? Does NASCAR need to take a step back in terms of chassis stiffness in order to take a step forward in terms of driver safety?

One of the issues with everything up to the Twisted Sister car was that all the impact of a crash was absorbed by the only thing that could move inside the cockpit: the driver. And worse, because the body was strapped in tightly, that left the arms, legs and the head and neck to take the brunt. HANS has greatly improved the chances of survival, but it doesn't address the simple fact that a human brain isn't built to withstand impacts in the multiple G-force range.

The Next Gen car is still a steel tube rollcage that is designed to protect the driver, which has more pros than cons.

NASCAR did improve the crushability of the front and rear clips, and seat safety has never been better. But a side impact hit -- or one with a severe deceleration -- still leaves too much energy for the body to absorb. They've moved the driver closer to the center of the car and added crush panels, but it's obviously still not enough.

For basically not giving much thought to it until Dale got killed, NASCAR's at least made crashes 99.9 percent survivable. (When it comes to racing anything, I still don't believe in 100 percent reliability.) But there's got to be another leap forward, led either by the drivers or the sanctioning body, to address the issue of incorrectly assuming everybody's going to walk away every time from a big crash.

This generation of drivers has lost the respect for the speed and danger -- because nobody's died or even had much sheet time -- and they drive like they're bulletproof, which is wrecking somebody to gain a position. And it's Talladega, which means a whole lot of torn up cars because of stupidity. From a driving standpoint, these guys aren't half as good as they think they are.