Rain Outs & Impoundment of Cars

Rain Outs & Impoundment of Cars

Post by Terry E. Ledfor » Wed, 30 Apr 1997 04:00:00


I can remember in the olden days that when there was a rain out NASCAR
would impound the cars until the rescheduled date.  The only thing they
would allow the crews to do before the race was to change the oil,
correct tire pressures and maybe a few other minor things.  I think they
still impound the qualifying tires?

Question is:  How does NASCAR control what the crews do to the cars in
the meantime now?  Is the pre-race tech inspection so good that they let
this be the catch all?

 
 
 

Rain Outs & Impoundment of Cars

Post by Randy Lindse » Wed, 30 Apr 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

> I can remember in the olden days that when there was a rain out NASCAR
> would impound the cars until the rescheduled date.  The only thing they
> would allow the crews to do before the race was to change the oil,
> correct tire pressures and maybe a few other minor things.  I think they
> still impound the qualifying tires?

> Question is:  How does NASCAR control what the crews do to the cars in
> the meantime now?  Is the pre-race tech inspection so good that they let
> this be the catch all?

There were interviews yesterday with drivers and mechanics about the
impounding issue. Mark Martin thought the cars should be impounded and
when they return, no practice just run the race.

What appeared to be a NASCAR official said the reason for not impounding
the cars was a security issue. There would be millions of dollars of cars
and equipment sitting until May 10th. Not only would the cars have to be
guarded from outsiders, the question of natural disasters was raised. I
guess a freak tornado hitting the garage area would be quite a long shot
but NASCAR is not going to assume that type of liability.

Several drivers noted that the serial numbers of the cars were not being
recorded nor were any seals applied. This would raise the issue of
whether the same car that was qualified was returned to be raced.

I don't really know what else could have been done. Should raise some
great rumors though.

 
 
 

Rain Outs & Impoundment of Cars

Post by Tom Brinkma » Wed, 30 Apr 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

> Question is:  How does NASCAR control what the crews do to the cars in
> the meantime now?  Is the pre-race tech inspection so good that they let
> this be the catch all?

      I believe the answer is yes.   The cars have gone thru tech.
 inspection several times this last weekend, and it'll be the same
 before May 10th.

~~~~~~  Tom Brinkman  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  nascar *fan* ~~~~~


 
 
 

Rain Outs & Impoundment of Cars

Post by Henry B Kell » Wed, 30 Apr 1997 04:00:00

Get over it.
What the hell can anyone really do?
Certainly not anything that would survive an after race inspection.
Improvements will still be within Nascar rules and will
not be any more than anyone could have done FRI. SAT. or SUN. night.
Quit whining! Maybe someone will remove all restriction plate BS.
Wouldn't that be surprising?

After the big deal reminder for the reason for the imposition of
restriction that ESPN showed with the crash coming close to the fans,
my immediate reaction was: Move the fan's seats to a safe distance.
Even if the cars tend to fly more at higher speeds, how much worse can it
get than DE's wreck last year?
Taladega was built for future speeds.

The changes should have been made to the spectator seating not the cars.
I have strong opinions on safety, namely that open Indy cars are stupid
compared to the safety of NASCAR, but restrictor plates are nothing more
than Wimp factors from liability lawyers. Nothing implied towards the
drivers. Drivers risk their life every race and the fans should be
protected, but perspective would show that lawsuits, not flying cars are
the reason for restrictors. I'd like to see drivers like Darrell Waltrip
put their influence where their mouth is. If enough drivers said what he
said monday about Taladega being built for 225MPH, and they presured
NASCAR to lift the restriction and move the fan stands, then we would see
some new records, some exciting races, and unfortunately some worse
wrecks, but does it really matter whether a car is right side up when it
crashes? Steve Grissom's car looked like he couldn't survive. Nemechek's
truck didn't look that bad. Ricky Craven's car looked like it could have
been fixed. Dale Earnhardt is driving the car he wrecked at daytona at
taladega. DE walked away from the 'dega wreck last year.
Call me calloused, but restrictor plate racing is
'cause of wimpy lawyers, greedy track owners, and driver/teams that don't
have enough guts to stand up to NASCAR.
'Nuff said, agree or flame away, It's just MNSHO!
Henry

 Terry E. Ledford
: I can remember in the olden days that when there was a rain out NASCAR
: would impound the cars until the rescheduled date.  The only thing they
: would allow the crews to do before the race was to change the oil,
: correct tire pressures and maybe a few other minor things.  I think they
: still impound the qualifying tires?

: Question is:  How does NASCAR control what the crews do to the cars in
: the meantime now?  Is the pre-race tech inspection so good that they let
: this be the catch all?

 
 
 

Rain Outs & Impoundment of Cars

Post by Henry B Kell » Wed, 30 Apr 1997 04:00:00


: I can remember in the olden days that when there was a rain out NASCAR
: would impound the cars until the rescheduled date.  The only thing they
: would allow the crews to do before the race was to change the oil,
: correct tire pressures and maybe a few other minor things.  I think they
: still impound the qualifying tires?

: Question is:  How does NASCAR control what the crews do to the cars in
: the meantime now?  Is the pre-race tech inspection so good that they let
: this be the catch all?

 
 
 

Rain Outs & Impoundment of Cars

Post by Tom Brinkma » Wed, 30 Apr 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

> Certainly not anything that would survive an after race inspection.
> Improvements will still be within Nascar rules and will
> not be any more than anyone could have done FRI. SAT. or SUN. night.

   ##  exactly Henry

Quote:
> Call me calloused, but restrictor plate racing is
> 'cause of wimpy lawyers, greedy track owners, and driver/teams that don't
> have enough guts to stand up to NASCAR.
> 'Nuff said, agree or flame away, It's just MNSHO!
> Henry

         Anytime lawyers get involved in anything it adds to the
 problem,  common sense gets thrown out the window, as does what's
 right or wrong.  But....

       It's prob'ly fair to say that the corporations that own/
 operate the tracks are looking to maximize investment return
 to the shareholders and partners.  But...

       The driver's, owner's, and team members prob'ly do make
 guarded criticisms of NASCAR at the public level. But....

       The one reason that keeps surfacing from many quarters is
 that the _Insurers_ of the tracks won't except, nor provide
 liability coverage at _any price_ unless the speeds are kept
 under 200 mph (maybe less ?)  So NASCAR resorted to the plates
 in an immediate attempt to satisfy the insurance carriers. Seems
 that was adequate, and most prob'ly the insurers would frown on
 untried substitutions.  Could be the reason for the recent
 trials to find other methods to slow the cars (spoiler-air dam
 manipulations).  Still, I believe the insurers will be slow to
 accept an alternative to the plates.  Damn shame too :(

~~~~~~  Tom Brinkman  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  nascar *fan* ~~~~~

 
 
 

Rain Outs & Impoundment of Cars

Post by Pat Farnswor » Wed, 30 Apr 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

>There were interviews yesterday with drivers and mechanics about the
>impounding issue. Mark Martin thought the cars should be impounded and
>when they return, no practice just run the race.

I don't agree with Mark here.  I would think conditions at the track
may change to the point where they SHOULD take some practice rounds
just to feel it out.  May 10th could very well be a hot and dry day in
Talladega.  Much different from the cold and wet one they last ran
practice in.  For nothing else but safety reasons I would allow a
practice.

And this brings up another question/comment I have.  Right now their
cars are set up for racing on a cold wet day.  If the 10th *does* turn
out to be extremely different climate conditions will they be allowed
to set up their cars differently or do they run them exactly as they
are now?  I really don't know and don't understand whether its an
issue or not.  Anyone care to explain it to me?  Thanks.

Go #3!!!

Pat

 
 
 

Rain Outs & Impoundment of Cars

Post by Bill Matthe » Thu, 01 May 1997 04:00:00

<further thread drift alert>
Regarding the need for speeds less than 200 mph, I hate to put myself
in a position where I might be seen defending any of the scum of of
the earth mentioned in the posts sited below 8^) but there is valid
engineering justification for the imposition of the 200 mph limit and
ways to make a case to go beyond that limit.

The engineering limit is the calculated (and empirical evidence)
ability of a crash fence to absorb the energy of a 3400 lb WC

amount of energy in a moving body is directly proportiion to the mass
and the square of the velocity. You can solve the problem by
1. lower speeds
or
2. lower weight
or
3. stronger fences

Nascar has chosen option 1. I don't know that a lot of effort has been
directed towards opton 3 in the last few years. It's pretty easy to
build a stronger fence the problem is being able to see thru it. Now
if you want to drop the weight of the cars down to 1600 lbs you can
make a case for 290 mph.

We need a step change in fence technology 8^?



Quote:



<snipped original thread stuff>

Quote:

>> Call me calloused, but restrictor plate racing is
>> 'cause of wimpy lawyers, greedy track owners, and driver/teams that don't
>> have enough guts to stand up to NASCAR.
>> 'Nuff said, agree or flame away, It's just MNSHO!
>> Henry

>         Anytime lawyers get involved in anything it adds to the
> problem,  common sense gets thrown out the window, as does what's
> right or wrong.  But....

>       It's prob'ly fair to say that the corporations that own/
> operate the tracks are looking to maximize investment return
> to the shareholders and partners.  But...

>       The driver's, owner's, and team members prob'ly do make
> guarded criticisms of NASCAR at the public level. But....

>       The one reason that keeps surfacing from many quarters is
> that the _Insurers_ of the tracks won't except, nor provide
> liability coverage at _any price_ unless the speeds are kept
> under 200 mph (maybe less ?)  So NASCAR resorted to the plates
> in an immediate attempt to satisfy the insurance carriers. Seems
> that was adequate, and most prob'ly the insurers would frown on
> untried substitutions.  Could be the reason for the recent
> trials to find other methods to slow the cars (spoiler-air dam
> manipulations).  Still, I believe the insurers will be slow to
> accept an alternative to the plates.  Damn shame too :(

>~~~~~~  Tom Brinkman  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  nascar *fan* ~~~~~


Bill Matthews
94 855T
73 1800ES

On advise of my lawyer I have no .sig at this time

 
 
 

Rain Outs & Impoundment of Cars

Post by math.. » Thu, 01 May 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

>  I can remember in the olden days that when there was a rain out NASCAR
>  would impound the cars until the rescheduled date.  The only thing they
>  would allow the crews to do before the race was to change the oil,
>  correct tire pressures and maybe a few other minor things.  I think they
>  still impound the qualifying tires?

>  Question is:  How does NASCAR control what the crews do to the cars in
>  the meantime now?  Is the pre-race tech inspection so good that they let
>  this be the catch all?

At least ALL the teams will be able to change their cars.  This will be an interesting race????
 
 
 

Rain Outs & Impoundment of Cars

Post by Wayne Ma » Thu, 01 May 1997 04:00:00

Quote:


>>There were interviews yesterday with drivers and mechanics about the
>>impounding issue. Mark Martin thought the cars should be impounded and
>>when they return, no practice just run the race.

>I don't agree with Mark here.  I would think conditions at the track
>may change to the point where they SHOULD take some practice rounds
>just to feel it out.  May 10th could very well be a hot and dry day in
>Talladega.  Much different from the cold and wet one they last ran
>practice in.  For nothing else but safety reasons I would allow a
>practice.

>And this brings up another question/comment I have.  Right now their
>cars are set up for racing on a cold wet day.  If the 10th *does* turn
>out to be extremely different climate conditions will they be allowed
>to set up their cars differently or do they run them exactly as they
>are now?  I really don't know and don't understand whether its an
>issue or not.  Anyone care to explain it to me?  Thanks.

>Go #3!!!

>Pat

        I suspect they would have to rebuild the carb or they
would burn a lot of pistons, but I am sure one of the
experts can tell us.  Thank you.
 
 
 

Rain Outs & Impoundment of Cars

Post by male.. » Thu, 01 May 1997 04:00:00


 Maybe I'm being too simplistic, but if the track owners would just
move the fans 10-15 seats back wouldn't that vastly lower the case of
dramaticly *** accidents at superspeedways??? (sorry for the
spelling)

Quote:
> <further thread drift alert>
> Regarding the need for speeds less than 200 mph, I hate to put myself
> in a position where I might be seen defending any of the scum of of
> the earth mentioned in the posts sited below 8^) but there is valid
> engineering justification for the imposition of the 200 mph limit and
> ways to make a case to go beyond that limit.

> The engineering limit is the calculated (and empirical evidence)
> ability of a crash fence to absorb the energy of a 3400 lb WC

> amount of energy in a moving body is directly proportiion to the mass
> and the square of the velocity. You can solve the problem by
> 1. lower speeds
> or
> 2. lower weight
> or
> 3. stronger fences

> Nascar has chosen option 1. I don't know that a lot of effort has been
> directed towards opton 3 in the last few years. It's pretty easy to
> build a stronger fence the problem is being able to see thru it. Now
> if you want to drop the weight of the cars down to 1600 lbs you can
> make a case for 290 mph.

> We need a step change in fence technology 8^?




> <snipped original thread stuff>

>>> Call me calloused, but restrictor plate racing is
>>> 'cause of wimpy lawyers, greedy track owners, and driver/teams that don't
>>> have enough guts to stand up to NASCAR.
>>> 'Nuff said, agree or flame away, It's just MNSHO!
>>> Henry

>>         Anytime lawyers get involved in anything it adds to the
>> problem,  common sense gets thrown out the window, as does what's
>> right or wrong.  But....

>>       It's prob'ly fair to say that the corporations that own/
>> operate the tracks are looking to maximize investment return
>> to the shareholders and partners.  But...

>>       The driver's, owner's, and team members prob'ly do make
>> guarded criticisms of NASCAR at the public level. But....

>>       The one reason that keeps surfacing from many quarters is
>> that the _Insurers_ of the tracks won't except, nor provide
>> liability coverage at _any price_ unless the speeds are kept
>> under 200 mph (maybe less ?)  So NASCAR resorted to the plates
>> in an immediate attempt to satisfy the insurance carriers. Seems
>> that was adequate, and most prob'ly the insurers would frown on
>> untried substitutions.  Could be the reason for the recent
>> trials to find other methods to slow the cars (spoiler-air dam
>> manipulations).  Still, I believe the insurers will be slow to
>> accept an alternative to the plates.  Damn shame too :(

>>~~~~~~  Tom Brinkman  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  nascar *fan* ~~~~~

> Bill Matthews
> 94 855T
> 73 1800ES

> On advise of my lawyer I have no .sig at this time

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    History and          |          RICK MALEK         |    P.O. Box 541      
    Government           | Western Kentucky University |    Bowling Green,

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  "Even paranoids have enemies"         | "To be great is to be misunderstood"
                -Henry Kissinger        |                  -Emerson
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  "Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names"
                                                -John F. Kennedy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------