- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
David Betts wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 10:46:31 +0100, Steve Campbell
> <the.goondens…@ntlspamworld.com> wrote:
> >ymenard wrote:
> >> F1 teams were going around 325-330km/h at the end of the backstretch.
> >> Cart
> >> teams were around 295-300km/h. (source is the RDS broadcast).
> >Based on the kinds of speeds those things can achieve on ovals, do you
> >think this suggests they are running more downforce than the F1′s?
> No. It suggests that they are slower out of the preceding corner and
> less accelerative because of their greater weight.
Eggzackly. Which debunks the myth that CART cars could be faster than
F1 cars on a circuit with long straights. The run from the hairpin to
the pit entrance is probably the longest flat-out section in F1, but the
CART cars are approx 20mph slower at the fastes point: I guess 192mph vs
212mph. The reason CART cars are fast on ovals is that it tkes them
2-2.5 miles to get up to speed and they can run ultra low drag wing
settings because they don’t need to decelerate for chicanes or hard
curves.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
Richard Harding wrote:
> David Betts wrote:
> > On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 10:46:31 +0100, Steve Campbell
> > <the.goondens…@ntlspamworld.com> wrote:
> > >ymenard wrote:
> > >> F1 teams were going around 325-330km/h at the end of the backstretch.
> > >> Cart
> > >> teams were around 295-300km/h. (source is the RDS broadcast).
> > >Based on the kinds of speeds those things can achieve on ovals, do you
> > >think this suggests they are running more downforce than the F1′s?
> > No. It suggests that they are slower out of the preceding corner and
> > less accelerative because of their greater weight.
> Eggzackly. Which debunks the myth that CART cars could be faster than
> F1 cars on a circuit with long straights. The run from the hairpin to
> the pit entrance is probably the longest flat-out section in F1, but the
> CART cars are approx 20mph slower at the fastes point: I guess 192mph vs
> 212mph. The reason CART cars are fast on ovals is that it tkes them
> 2-2.5 miles to get up to speed and they can run ultra low drag wing
> settings because they don’t need to decelerate for chicanes or hard curves
What is so surprising is not that CART cars are 6 secs a lap off the F1
pace; it is that they are so much slower through the speedtraps. If I
had a dollar for every "CART cars would beat F1 cars because they have
more top end on the straights" threads that have appeared n this ng over
the last 5 years, I wouldn’t need my day-job.
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 01:52:10 -0400, "ymenard" <francois-men…@sympatico.ca>,
wrote :
>>"Richard Harding" <rhard…@optonline.net> wrote
>> Anybody have thsose figures, too, please?
>F1 teams were going around 325-330km/h at the end of the backstretch. Cart
>teams were around 295-300km/h. (source is the RDS broadcast).
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH!!!!!!!!
Suzie
—
Suzieflame
"Nigel Roberts" <nigel…@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:3D68D854.8F8B6040@optonline.net…
> What is so surprising is not that CART cars are 6 secs a lap off the F1
> pace; it is that they are so much slower through the speedtraps. If I
> had a dollar for every "CART cars would beat F1 cars because they have
> more top end on the straights" threads that have appeared n this ng over
> the last 5 years, I wouldn’t need my day-job.
Of course the fact that CART has reduced boost and downforce for 3
consecutive years while F1 has done nothing to curb excessive increases in
speed has nothing to do with that Nigel. The statement that Champcars would
be faster on longer straights came when they were producing 900+ horsepower.
Now they are producing about 800. It’s physically impossible for a Champcar
to be faster down a long straight when you consider they are 500 lbs heavier
and have about the same and in some cases less hp than a current F1 car.
Like Dario said, give us back our horsepower and downforce levels from 99
and we would have embarrassed F1 here. I should mention since Dario’s
statement comes out of context that what he meant by that is not that
Champcars would have been significantly faster but that the lap time
difference between the two would have been so small to as embarrass F1 for
spending $200 million to go as fast as CART teams spending $10 million/car.
Mike
"Richard Harding" <rhard…@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:3D68D6B0.A9DEF641@optonline.net…
> Eggzackly. Which debunks the myth that CART cars could be faster than
> F1 cars on a circuit with long straights.
Nonsense. Those statements were made when Champcars were producing 900+
horsepower and had way more downforce. You cannot take statements made
about Champcars three years ago when different regulations were in place and
apply them to today. CART has reduced boost and downforce levels for three
consecutive years in order to make oval racing safer. F1 on the other hand
has done very little during the same time period to slow the cars, combine
that with the tire war and you have speeds this year some 3 seconds faster
per lap than last year. In 1999 when Champcars had more downforce than
today and 100 more hp (while F1 cars had less hp than they have today) then
absolutely they would have been faster down long straights but not today.
Mike
"Mike" <mtcr…@netscape99.net> wrote in message
news:1V5a9.40531$bu81.6820@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com…
> "Nigel Roberts" <nigel…@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:3D68D854.8F8B6040@optonline.net…
> > What is so surprising is not that CART cars are 6 secs a lap off the F1
> > pace; it is that they are so much slower through the speedtraps. If I
> > had a dollar for every "CART cars would beat F1 cars because they have
> > more top end on the straights" threads that have appeared n this ng over
> > the last 5 years, I wouldn’t need my day-job.
Surely they are running much more downforce.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> Of course the fact that CART has reduced boost and downforce for 3
> consecutive years while F1 has done nothing to curb excessive increases in
> speed has nothing to do with that Nigel. The statement that Champcars
would
> be faster on longer straights came when they were producing 900+
horsepower.
> Now they are producing about 800. It’s physically impossible for a
Champcar
> to be faster down a long straight when you consider they are 500 lbs
heavier
> and have about the same and in some cases less hp than a current F1 car.
> Like Dario said, give us back our horsepower and downforce levels from 99
> and we would have embarrassed F1 here. I should mention since Dario’s
> statement comes out of context that what he meant by that is not that
> Champcars would have been significantly faster but that the lap time
> difference between the two would have been so small to as embarrass F1 for
> spending $200 million to go as fast as CART teams spending $10
million/car.
> Mike
Hallelujah!!!
Couldn’t have said it better myself. I believe Tommy Kendall said the same
thing as well.
Not to mention the tire issue. And I don’t think the fact that the track is
shorter plays such a big factor. The truth is that F1 cars are two to four
seconds faster at EVERY track than they were in 2000 due to the tire war.
CFster
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:47:44 GMT, "Mike" <mtcr…@netscape99.net>
wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>"Richard Harding" <rhard…@optonline.net> wrote in message
>news:3D68D6B0.A9DEF641@optonline.net…
>> Eggzackly. Which debunks the myth that CART cars could be faster than
>> F1 cars on a circuit with long straights.
>Nonsense. Those statements were made when Champcars were producing 900+
>horsepower and had way more downforce. You cannot take statements made
>about Champcars three years ago when different regulations were in place and
>apply them to today. CART has reduced boost and downforce levels for three
>consecutive years in order to make oval racing safer. F1 on the other hand
>has done very little during the same time period to slow the cars, combine
>that with the tire war and you have speeds this year some 3 seconds faster
>per lap than last year. In 1999 when Champcars had more downforce than
>today and 100 more hp (while F1 cars had less hp than they have today) then
>absolutely they would have been faster down long straights but not today.
>Mike
Nothing but ifs and buts. What would happen if F1 cars had slicks
instead of slotted tires?
In any case, 6 seconds a lap difference is huge.
I was led to believe that suziefl…@suzieflame.com said…
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 01:52:10 -0400, "ymenard" <francois-men…@sympatico.ca>,
> wrote :
> >>"Richard Harding" <rhard…@optonline.net> wrote
> >> Anybody have thsose figures, too, please?
> >F1 teams were going around 325-330km/h at the end of the backstretch. Cart
> >teams were around 295-300km/h. (source is the RDS broadcast).
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH!!!!!!!!
> Suzie
> —
> Suzieflame
After reading 7 intelligent, well thought out, and well-written posts in
this thread, and then coming to yours, Suzie……
Well, OMG. I can’t plonk you fast enough.
<bye>
–
Cheers,
J.
———————————
"People say that he has big balls, but maybe
it’s a case of big balls and a small brain."
DC on JPM
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
CFster wrote:
> "Mike" <mtcr…@netscape99.net> wrote in message
> news:1V5a9.40531$bu81.6820@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com…
>> "Nigel Roberts" <nigel…@optonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:3D68D854.8F8B6040@optonline.net…
>>> What is so surprising is not that CART cars are 6 secs a lap off
>>> the F1 pace; it is that they are so much slower through the
>>> speedtraps. If I had a dollar for every "CART cars would beat F1
>>> cars because they have more top end on the straights" threads that
>>> have appeared n this ng over the last 5 years, I wouldn’t need my
>>> day-job.
> Surely they are running much more downforce.
>> Of course the fact that CART has reduced boost and downforce for 3
>> consecutive years while F1 has done nothing to curb excessive
>> increases in speed has nothing to do with that Nigel. The statement
>> that Champcars would be faster on longer straights came when they
>> were producing 900+ horsepower. Now they are producing about 800.
>> It’s physically impossible for a Champcar to be faster down a long
>> straight when you consider they are 500 lbs heavier and have about
>> the same and in some cases less hp than a current F1 car. Like Dario
>> said, give us back our horsepower and downforce levels from 99 and
>> we would have embarrassed F1 here. I should mention since Dario’s
>> statement comes out of context that what he meant by that is not
>> that Champcars would have been significantly faster but that the lap
>> time difference between the two would have been so small to as
>> embarrass F1 for spending $200 million to go as fast as CART teams
>> spending $10 million/car.
>> Mike
> Hallelujah!!!
> Couldn’t have said it better myself. I believe Tommy Kendall said the
> same thing as well.
> Not to mention the tire issue. And I don’t think the fact that the
> track is shorter plays such a big factor. The truth is that F1 cars
> are two to four seconds faster at EVERY track than they were in 2000
> due to the tire war.
It’s not all due to the tires. Factor in traction control, automatic
gearboxes, engine materials and design, bi-directional telemetry, aero
development and whatever else I might have forgotten. Much of the
improvements to F1 tires went to compensate for the stupid grooves they
have in them, and while the tires have improved in F1, they’ve improved in
CART too, Bridgestone supplying tire to both series.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
Mike wrote:
> "Nigel Roberts" <nigel…@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:3D68D854.8F8B6040@optonline.net…
> > What is so surprising is not that CART cars are 6 secs a lap off the F1
> > pace; it is that they are so much slower through the speedtraps. If I
> > had a dollar for every "CART cars would beat F1 cars because they have
> > more top end on the straights" threads that have appeared n this ng over
> > the last 5 years, I wouldn’t need my day-job.
> Of course the fact that CART has reduced boost and downforce for 3
> consecutive years while F1 has done nothing to curb excessive increases in
> speed has nothing to do with that Nigel. The statement that Champcars would
> be faster on longer straights came when they were producing 900+ horsepower.
> Now they are producing about 800. It’s physically impossible for a Champcar
> to be faster down a long straight when you consider they are 500 lbs heavier
> and have about the same and in some cases less hp than a current F1 car.
> Like Dario said, give us back our horsepower and downforce levels from 99
> and we would have embarrassed F1 here. I should mention since Dario’s
> statement comes out of context that what he meant by that is not that
> Champcars would have been significantly faster but that the lap time
> difference between the two would have been so small to as embarrass F1 for
> spending $200 million to go as fast as CART teams spending $10 million/car.
> Mike
I doubt that 100hp more would give you an extra 20-25mph down the
straight. Plus, Dario has been begging for an F1 ride for years and
hasn’t been offered one. Everyone knows he has a huge chip on his
shoulder as a result.
All these comments about "give us back this, give us back that" are just
horse shit. Why not give F1 back *their* horsepower from 1986 (1300hp)
and allow them slick qualies? If a current F1 car could take back all
the things they’ve been denied by rule changes over they years, they’d
be lapping Montreal in under a minute.
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:33:33 GMT, "Mike" <mtcr…@netscape99.net>
wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>"Nigel Roberts" <nigel…@optonline.net> wrote in message
>news:3D68D854.8F8B6040@optonline.net…
>> What is so surprising is not that CART cars are 6 secs a lap off the F1
>> pace; it is that they are so much slower through the speedtraps. If I
>> had a dollar for every "CART cars would beat F1 cars because they have
>> more top end on the straights" threads that have appeared n this ng over
>> the last 5 years, I wouldn’t need my day-job.
>Of course the fact that CART has reduced boost and downforce for 3
>consecutive years while F1 has done nothing to curb excessive increases in
>speed has nothing to do with that Nigel. The statement that Champcars would
>be faster on longer straights came when they were producing 900+ horsepower.
>Now they are producing about 800. It’s physically impossible for a Champcar
>to be faster down a long straight when you consider they are 500 lbs heavier
>and have about the same and in some cases less hp than a current F1 car.
>Like Dario said, give us back our horsepower and downforce levels from 99
>and we would have embarrassed F1 here. I should mention since Dario’s
>statement comes out of context that what he meant by that is not that
>Champcars would have been significantly faster but that the lap time
>difference between the two would have been so small to as embarrass F1 for
>spending $200 million to go as fast as CART teams spending $10 million/car.
Nonsense. CART has reduced downforce and increased drag for running on
ovals. They still run significant downforce on road courses. during
the same time frame F-1 has had aero rule changes that reduce their
downforce. Please settle on the amount of weight more you feel the
CART cars are than F-1. Some say 300 lbs., others 400 lbs., you say
500 lbs. At this progression soon CART cars will weigh more than
NASCAR cars. You should consider that 100 bhp does not a sudden twenty
M.P.H. make. I was also completely unaware of all of the F-1 Grand
Prix that Dario Franchitti had competed in. Why do so many make so
many excuses for the CART cars? They are simply much slower than F-1
cars despite so many claims to the contrary over the years.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
ccal…@mindspring.com wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:47:44 GMT, "Mike" <mtcr…@netscape99.net>
> wrote:
>> "Richard Harding" <rhard…@optonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:3D68D6B0.A9DEF641@optonline.net…
>>> Eggzackly. Which debunks the myth that CART cars could be faster
>>> than F1 cars on a circuit with long straights.
>> Nonsense. Those statements were made when Champcars were producing
>> 900+ horsepower and had way more downforce. You cannot take
>> statements made about Champcars three years ago when different
>> regulations were in place and apply them to today. CART has reduced
>> boost and downforce levels for three consecutive years in order to
>> make oval racing safer. F1 on the other hand has done very little
>> during the same time period to slow the cars, combine that with the
>> tire war and you have speeds this year some 3 seconds faster per lap
>> than last year. In 1999 when Champcars had more downforce than
>> today and 100 more hp (while F1 cars had less hp than they have
>> today) then absolutely they would have been faster down long
>> straights but not today.
>> Mike
> Nothing but ifs and buts. What would happen if F1 cars had slicks
> instead of slotted tires?
> In any case, 6 seconds a lap difference is huge.
Bullshit. Six seconds in Montreal is the difference between a qualifying
lap and a first lap in race trim loaded with fuel in a F1 car. Given the
weight difference between the two this puts both cars on a par in terms of
performance and given the obscene amounts of money spent in F1 and the
problems experienced by the smaller teams I believe F1 bosses and teams
owners should have a good long look at what’s happening in Montreal this
week-end. If anything this comparison is making F1 the laughing stock, not
CART.
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:51:23 GMT, "CFster" <maxcfs…@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>"Mike" <mtcr…@netscape99.net> wrote in message
>news:1V5a9.40531$bu81.6820@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com…
>> "Nigel Roberts" <nigel…@optonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:3D68D854.8F8B6040@optonline.net…
>> > What is so surprising is not that CART cars are 6 secs a lap off the F1
>> > pace; it is that they are so much slower through the speedtraps. If I
>> > had a dollar for every "CART cars would beat F1 cars because they have
>> > more top end on the straights" threads that have appeared n this ng over
>> > the last 5 years, I wouldn’t need my day-job.
>Surely they are running much more downforce.
The CART teams are allowed to tune their cars to the circuit just as
F-1 teams do. That they have ended up at a setup that has them going
20 M.P.H. down the straights than F-1 cars is a choice they have made
and probably the only way they can get those trucks, as Kenny Brack
has called them, through the corners. CART cars may weigh more but
they do have the advantage of a substantially wider track width and
slick tires. I am surprised there is so little mention of this. They
also have underbody tunnels which provide substantial downforce with
little drag penalty.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>> Of course the fact that CART has reduced boost and downforce for 3
>> consecutive years while F1 has done nothing to curb excessive increases in
>> speed has nothing to do with that Nigel. The statement that Champcars
>would
>> be faster on longer straights came when they were producing 900+
>horsepower.
>> Now they are producing about 800. It’s physically impossible for a
>Champcar
>> to be faster down a long straight when you consider they are 500 lbs
>heavier
>> and have about the same and in some cases less hp than a current F1 car.
>> Like Dario said, give us back our horsepower and downforce levels from 99
>> and we would have embarrassed F1 here. I should mention since Dario’s
>> statement comes out of context that what he meant by that is not that
>> Champcars would have been significantly faster but that the lap time
>> difference between the two would have been so small to as embarrass F1 for
>> spending $200 million to go as fast as CART teams spending $10
>million/car.
>> Mike
>Hallelujah!!!
>Couldn’t have said it better myself. I believe Tommy Kendall said the same
>thing as well.
And Tommy Kendall’s F-1 credentials would be?
>Not to mention the tire issue. And I don’t think the fact that the track is
>shorter plays such a big factor. The truth is that F1 cars are two to four
>seconds faster at EVERY track than they were in 2000 due to the tire war.
The track being shorter is certainly a factor when you have a car that
accelerates far faster, reaches a higher terminal speed quicker,
brakes in a much shorter distance, and spends less time in the corner
than the CART car. F-1 cars continue to develop and go faster while
teams, sponsors, drivers, and manufacturers continue to leave CART,
leaving them to grow slower and slower. I doubt Honda and Toyota are
spending any engine development money in CART at the moment consider
they are gone in 2003.
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:47:44 GMT, "Mike" <mtcr…@netscape99.net>
wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>"Richard Harding" <rhard…@optonline.net> wrote in message
>news:3D68D6B0.A9DEF641@optonline.net…
>> Eggzackly. Which debunks the myth that CART cars could be faster than
>> F1 cars on a circuit with long straights.
>Nonsense. Those statements were made when Champcars were producing 900+
>horsepower and had way more downforce. You cannot take statements made
>about Champcars three years ago when different regulations were in place and
>apply them to today. CART has reduced boost and downforce levels for three
>consecutive years in order to make oval racing safer. F1 on the other hand
>has done very little during the same time period to slow the cars, combine
>that with the tire war and you have speeds this year some 3 seconds faster
>per lap than last year. In 1999 when Champcars had more downforce than
>today and 100 more hp (while F1 cars had less hp than they have today) then
>absolutely they would have been faster down long straights but not today.
Then you cannot make statements about F-1 cars and apply them to today
either. 100 bhp does not a 20 M.P.H. top speed and six second a lap
difference make. Yes, what you said above was pure and utter nonsense.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 15:05:16 GMT, ccal…@mindspring.com wrote:
>On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:47:44 GMT, "Mike" <mtcr…@netscape99.net>
>wrote:
>>"Richard Harding" <rhard…@optonline.net> wrote in message
>>news:3D68D6B0.A9DEF641@optonline.net…
>>> Eggzackly. Which debunks the myth that CART cars could be faster than
>>> F1 cars on a circuit with long straights.
>>Nonsense. Those statements were made when Champcars were producing 900+
>>horsepower and had way more downforce. You cannot take statements made
>>about Champcars three years ago when different regulations were in place and
>>apply them to today. CART has reduced boost and downforce levels for three
>>consecutive years in order to make oval racing safer. F1 on the other hand
>>has done very little during the same time period to slow the cars, combine
>>that with the tire war and you have speeds this year some 3 seconds faster
>>per lap than last year. In 1999 when Champcars had more downforce than
>>today and 100 more hp (while F1 cars had less hp than they have today) then
>>absolutely they would have been faster down long straights but not today.
>>Mike
>Nothing but ifs and buts. What would happen if F1 cars had slicks
>instead of slotted tires?
Agreed.
>In any case, 6 seconds a lap difference is huge.
Yes. Agreed. A dramatic and very telling difference, as is the
ineffectual defenses offered up for the CART cars.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
<ccal…@mindspring.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:47:44 GMT, "Mike" <mtcr…@netscape99.net>
> wrote:
> >Nonsense. Those statements were made when Champcars were producing 900+
> >horsepower and had way more downforce. You cannot take statements made
> >about Champcars three years ago when different regulations were in place and
> >apply them to today. CART has reduced boost and downforce levels for three
> >consecutive years in order to make oval racing safer. F1 on the other hand
> >has done very little during the same time period to slow the cars, combine
> >that with the tire war and you have speeds this year some 3 seconds faster
> >per lap than last year. In 1999 when Champcars had more downforce than
> >today and 100 more hp (while F1 cars had less hp than they have today) then
> >absolutely they would have been faster down long straights but not today.
> Nothing but ifs and buts. What would happen if F1 cars had slicks
> instead of slotted tires?
> In any case, 6 seconds a lap difference is huge.
Not under the circumstances is isn’t. 92.2% is bloody impressive in my
book!
–
Cheers
Wayne "Dark 1" Stuart
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/wssenterprises/
Newton <carti…@nibble.net> trolled with:
> On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:51:23 GMT, "CFster" <maxcfs…@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >Not to mention the tire issue. And I don’t think the fact that the track is
> >shorter plays such a big factor. The truth is that F1 cars are two to four
> >seconds faster at EVERY track than they were in 2000 due to the tire war.
> The track being shorter is certainly a factor when you have a car that
> accelerates far faster, reaches a higher terminal speed quicker,
> brakes in a much shorter distance, and spends less time in the corner
> than the CART car.
Yet despite all that, they’re still within 92.2% – And you’re seriously
not impressed by that? ’Cos I fucking am!
–
Cheers
Wayne "Dark 1" Stuart
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/wssenterprises/
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 17:33:06 +0100, wssenterpri…@gimmiemorespam.com
wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>Newton <carti…@nibble.net> trolled with:
>> On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:51:23 GMT, "CFster" <maxcfs…@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>> >Not to mention the tire issue. And I don’t think the fact that the track is
>> >shorter plays such a big factor. The truth is that F1 cars are two to four
>> >seconds faster at EVERY track than they were in 2000 due to the tire war.
>> The track being shorter is certainly a factor when you have a car that
>> accelerates far faster, reaches a higher terminal speed quicker,
>> brakes in a much shorter distance, and spends less time in the corner
>> than the CART car.
>Yet despite all that, they’re still within 92.2% – And you’re seriously
>not impressed by that? ’Cos I fucking am!
I am more impressed with the Toyota Atlantic pole time being 85.56% of
the CART pole time, all with spec tires, a spec chassis, and only 250
bhp.
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 17:22:01 +0100, wssenterpri…@gimmiemorespam.com
wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
><ccal…@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:47:44 GMT, "Mike" <mtcr…@netscape99.net>
>> wrote:
>> >Nonsense. Those statements were made when Champcars were producing 900+
>> >horsepower and had way more downforce. You cannot take statements made
>> >about Champcars three years ago when different regulations were in place and
>> >apply them to today. CART has reduced boost and downforce levels for three
>> >consecutive years in order to make oval racing safer. F1 on the other hand
>> >has done very little during the same time period to slow the cars, combine
>> >that with the tire war and you have speeds this year some 3 seconds faster
>> >per lap than last year. In 1999 when Champcars had more downforce than
>> >today and 100 more hp (while F1 cars had less hp than they have today) then
>> >absolutely they would have been faster down long straights but not today.
>> Nothing but ifs and buts. What would happen if F1 cars had slicks
>> instead of slotted tires?
>> In any case, 6 seconds a lap difference is huge.
>Not under the circumstances is isn’t. 92.2% is bloody impressive in my
>book!
Not as impressive as the Toyota Atlantics pole time being 85.56% of
the CART pole time running spec tires, spec chassis, and a 250 bhp
spec engine. Imagine how close the Atlantics will be to the CART cars
in 2003 on so much smaller a budget.
Newton wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:33:33 GMT, "Mike" <mtcr…@netscape99.net>
> wrote:
> I was also completely unaware of all of the F-1 Grands
> Prix that Dario Franchitti had competed in.
Me too. He’s been waiting for the phone to ring, but noone has shown
much interest.
> Why do so many make so many excuses for the CART cars? They are simply much slower than F-1
> cars despite so many claims to the contrary over the years.
Bullseye!
> Given the weight difference between the two this puts both cars on a par in terms of
> performance and given the obscene amounts of money spent in F1 and the
> problems experienced by the smaller teams I believe F1 bosses and teams
> owners should have a good long look at what’s happening in Montreal this
> week-end. If anything this comparison is making F1 the laughing stock, not
> CART.
Denial. It’s not just a river in Egypt.
wssenterpri…@gimmiemorespam.com wrote:
> Not under the circumstances is isn’t. 92.2% is bloody impressive in my
> book!
> —
> Cheers
> Wayne "Dark 1" Stuart
Yup. Probably means CART cars are about on a par with F3000 cars.
"Richard Harding" <rhard…@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:3D690EC9.5451D5F0@optonline.net…
> wssenterpri…@gimmiemorespam.com wrote:
> > Not under the circumstances is isn’t. 92.2% is bloody impressive in my
> > book!
> > —
> > Cheers
> > Wayne "Dark 1" Stuart
> Yup. Probably means CART cars are about on a par with F3000 cars.
F3000 cars are habitually about 11 to 15 seconds down on F1 cars.
Pat.
—
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.384 / Virus Database: 216 – Release Date: 21/08/2002
In article <1V5a9.40531$bu81.6…@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>,
Mike <mtcr…@netscape99.net> wrote:
>Like Dario said, give us back our horsepower and downforce levels from 99
>and we would have embarrassed F1 here. I should mention since Dario’s
>statement comes out of context that what he meant by that is not that
>Champcars would have been significantly faster but that the lap time
>difference between the two would have been so small to as embarrass F1 for
>spending $200 million to go as fast as CART teams spending $10 million/car.
Claiming that CART in ’99 would have ‘embarrassed’ F1 is just as nonsensical
as interpreting the present gap of 6 secs as an embarrassment for CART.
The ultimate speed of either is determined to within a few secs by the
technical regulations. Once you have enough money to build a reasonable
car according to the specs (e.g. Minardi with $30million or whatever
there budget is), another factor of 10 in resources will just give the
last 2 or 3 seconds per lap. Neither set of regulations were designed
to give the fastest car for the money.
So why does a mid-pack F1 team spend $200 million a year? Because they
can. Any why is there no CART team doing it? Because no-one believes that
the additional exposure gained from it would be worth it.
What would happen if CART would adopt F1 specs? Unless one claims that
miraculously the CART engineers/designers are more talented than their
F1 counterparts, a simple comparison of resources suggests that the better
teams would be somewhere at the Minardi/Arrows level of performance.
Gunther
In article <3D68FA0B.8EB54…@optonline.net>,
Richard Harding <rhard…@optonline.net> wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>Mike wrote:
>> "Nigel Roberts" <nigel…@optonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:3D68D854.8F8B6040@optonline.net…
>> > What is so surprising is not that CART cars are 6 secs a lap off the F1
>> > pace; it is that they are so much slower through the speedtraps. If I
>> > had a dollar for every "CART cars would beat F1 cars because they have
>> > more top end on the straights" threads that have appeared n this ng over
>> > the last 5 years, I wouldn’t need my day-job.
>> Of course the fact that CART has reduced boost and downforce for 3
>> consecutive years while F1 has done nothing to curb excessive increases in
>> speed has nothing to do with that Nigel. The statement that Champcars would
>> be faster on longer straights came when they were producing 900+ horsepower.
>> Now they are producing about 800. It’s physically impossible for a Champcar
>> to be faster down a long straight when you consider they are 500 lbs heavier
>> and have about the same and in some cases less hp than a current F1 car.
>> Like Dario said, give us back our horsepower and downforce levels from 99
>> and we would have embarrassed F1 here. I should mention since Dario’s
>> statement comes out of context that what he meant by that is not that
>> Champcars would have been significantly faster but that the lap time
>> difference between the two would have been so small to as embarrass F1 for
>> spending $200 million to go as fast as CART teams spending $10 million/car.
>> Mike
>I doubt that 100hp more would give you an extra 20-25mph down the
>straight. Plus, Dario has been begging for an F1 ride for years and
>hasn’t been offered one. Everyone knows he has a huge chip on his
>shoulder as a result.
>All these comments about "give us back this, give us back that" are just
>horse shit. Why not give F1 back *their* horsepower from 1986 (1300hp)
>and allow them slick qualies? If a current F1 car could take back all
>the things they’ve been denied by rule changes over they years, they’d
>be lapping Montreal in under a minute.
Full ground effect with skirts
Active suspension
Turbo engines
ABS
Traction control
Wide slicks
Wide track
‘Jungle Juice’ fuel
500 kg min weight w/o driver
Oh boy, that would be scary (and that leaves things like fans and moveable
aero devices out).
Gunther