>The drivers hate the concrete and would much prefer pavement.
>previous owner evidently didn't have the money to put down a good
>surface that wouldn't tear up, so he went with concrete.
That's a somewhat uncalled for slam on the "previous owner". When
went concrete, the only other track with concrete was Martinsville,
concrete seemed to be a very successful solution to the problem of
tearing up (at least, no one complained about it). Bristol was
major pavement work every 3 or 4 years (which was always completed well
before race time, I don't recall there ever being major pavement
during a race, unlike NHIS). Concrete seemed like a good idea, and
trying it no-one would ever know if it really was good. (Now, if you
to blame someone, blame the dimbulbs at Dover, who apparently didn't
to ask the drivers how well they liked the concrete Bristol before
the same to Dover Downs).
As for why concrete is worse, it seems to me there is just too much
On asphalt a driver can run the outside groove, and gain on the inside
the driver on the inside spins his tires coming off the corner. With
there just doesn't seem to be enough wheelspin to give the outside the
(trying netcom on a freebie, and not liking it very much)