Someome please splain to me on the COT

[jslone]

I think this was covered on the old style of the forums but refresh my memory,was is NAscar still using leaded fuel and also Carbs, and iron blocks,with the so called new COT,one would think that Nascar could jump into the 21st century with technology,with Toyota in the fold and others thinking about coming in(Honda).It makes me wonder why Nascar spent so much money on the COT and they still cant get out of ancient technology.

[Jonesi]

They've now gone to unleaded fuel without any major problems.
What was talked about a few years ago was that after the CoT was phased in, there would be a phased in Engine of Tomorrow. Car manufacterers are much more opposed to a common engine. (It would probably an easier sale to set new specs and let the companies develop new motors. Something like: F/I 3.5L OHC V8 engines are in a lot of cars on the road and could easily make 3hp per CI in racing trim.)

[colinspooky]

Carbs, and iron blocks ------- one would think that Nascar could jump into the 21st century with technology --------- still cant get out of ancient technology.

Good points - answer is probably quite simple. Cost.

Mind you, using this ancient stuff will be getting expensive soon - they will be antiques.

Now aluminium blocks, fuel injection, suspensions which can be adjusted inside the cars by drivers, and low profile tyres are commonplace even on normal road cars perhaps NASCAR will have rethink in another decade or so.

Mind you, the racing is still darn good - best in the world in my opinion.

[RaceFanStan]

John, look on the dash of the racecar & you will see the ignition boxes.
NASCAR mandates them to be there so they can keep out traction control.
If high tech came to NASCAR the big money multi-car team owners would extend their advantage.
Be careful what you wish because the gap between the haves & the have-nots would grow wider. :eek:

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g202/gr8link/heh/jmo.jpg

[trumperZ06]

:dozey: There is absolutely NO REASON why NA$CAR has to continue using 1980's technology !!!

ECU/PCM's can be mapped to insure driver's aids (traction control) is not being used.

Carburetors are Antiques... it's been ~ 20 years or so, since automobile manufacturers changed over to fuel injection !!!

Distributors have been replaced by ECM's, providing more accuate management of fuel and timing, while also greatly reducing polution levels.

It wasn't until this year that NA$CAR finally encouraged the use of un-leaded fuels. Engines, now using unleaded fuel are having problems with the valves & valve seats. These engines are also being set-up to run RICH... ie. more fuel is being put thru the engine... attempting to help cool the heads.

This changes the AFR which creates more polution.

Having looked at Toyota's COT (car of tomorrow) chassis... at the Atlanta auto show... the car set-up is closer to a short track modified jalopy... using a solid rear end, than it is to any current state-of-the-art racing car.

NA$CAR has added "splitters" and a rear wing to adjust down-force. These aero devices have been in use by other series for many... many years.

;) IMO... it would be great to see NA$CAR put the "Stock" back into...

"Stock Car Racing".

Maybe we will see Stock Car racing again, in a couple of years...

if the Factories get back into "Trans-Am", with the Mustangs, Carmaros, and Challenger's.

Until then, the closest thing to "Stock Car" racing, seems to be the GT2 Sports Cars being run in the ALMS series.

[DEI8151]

the COT is pointless, these cars push way more than the regular cars. it is very hard to pass which is evident and wasnt the point of this car to increase competition and passing?

the sport is moving out of our current sleake looking cars into boxes with wheels

[jslone]

thanks for the info kids,some of the stuff I remember being covered but its been so long that a refresher was needed.

[Hoss Ghoul]

They've now gone to unleaded fuel without any major problems.
What was talked about a few years ago was that after the CoT was phased in, there would be a phased in Engine of Tomorrow. Car manufacterers are much more opposed to a common engine. (It would probably an easier sale to set new specs and let the companies develop new motors. Something like: F/I 3.5L OHC V8 engines are in a lot of cars on the road and could easily make 3hp per CI in racing trim.)

In what way would going to small overhead cam V8 engines reflect modern cars? Where are all these small OHC V8's?

Last time I checked the most powerful V8 in a production car is the pushrod LS7 in the Corvette, and it is 7liters. LS4's, LS2's, and LS3's are 5.3-6.2L Ford uses 4.6 and 5.4L(supercharged) engines, sure they have overhead cams, but they aren't much smaller than the 358ci engines NASCAR uses. Dodge also has a 5.7 and 6.2L V8-both pushrod engines.

If anything the general automotive trend the last decade has been to go to larger and larger engines, not smaller. Every single BMW, Merceds, Porsche, all the domestics, etc, their engine sizes have been increasing, not decreasing.

[Bob Riebe]

In what way would going to small overhead cam V8 engines reflect modern cars? Where are all these small OHC V8's?

Last time I checked the most powerful V8 in a production car is the pushrod LS7 in the Corvette, and it is 7liters. LS4's, LS2's, and LS3's are 5.3-6.2L Ford uses 4.6 and 5.4L(supercharged) engines, sure they have overhead cams, but they aren't much smaller than the 358ci engines NASCAR uses. Dodge also has a 5.7 and 6.2L V8-both pushrod engines.

If anything the general automotive trend the last decade has been to go to larger and larger engines, not smaller. Every single BMW, Merceds, Porsche, all the domestics, etc, their engine sizes have been increasing, not decreasing.


Hoss:
THere is no reason to go to OHC engines, as the OHC design is actually older than push-rod engines by about a decade.
Carburettors are actually harder, and take more skill, to tune that electronic inj., which means you need true auto mechanics and engineers, and not computer hackers.(If you read the high performance US auto magazines, you will notice there has been a flury of new advanced carbs coming out)

Here, and at most forums, these boyts who whine about supposed superior this or that, and so called "old" tech. are ususally mechanically illiterate and simply love to here themselves babble.

I actually think the France boys would like to go to elec. inj. as then they could force a spec. NASCAR system on every team, "so no one could cheat" ditto for a generic OHC engine.

It is a lack of torque in the plate engines that helps keep them in freight train strings; smaller engines would force that lack of torque on everyone at all tracks and the boring strings would become the norm, every where.
Bob

[trumperZ06]

:p : BRUHAAHAA.... you need to get into the 21st Century.

;) Carburetor's are an old style anolog system... and full of compromises !!!

:dozey: The good ole boys with many years of experience can "fine-tune" a carburetor... but they are still sacrificing precise control over the Air-Fuel ratio through-out the RPM band. Jetting a carburetor maximazes it's performance over a narrow RPM range... and you are not able to make adjustments to AFR while the engine is running !!!

ECU/PCM's work hand in hand with fuel injection systems to precisely tune an engine over the complete RPM band. You enrich the fuel and add or substract timing to maximise the engine's performance. No carburetor/distributor combination can come close to the precision that is currently available using the latest electronic control systems.

That's fact... not hear-say, and not opinion !!!

[Hoss Ghoul]

:p : BRUHAAHAA.... you need to get into the 21st Century.

;) Carburetor's are an old style anolog system... and full of compromises !!!

:dozey: The good ole boys with many years of experience can "fine-tune" a carburetor... but they are still sacrificing precise control over the Air-Fuel ratio through-out the RPM band. Jetting a carburetor maximazes it's performance over a narrow RPM range... and you are not able to make adjustments to AFR while the engine is running !!!

ECU/PCM's work hand in hand with fuel injection systems to precisely tune an engine over the complete RPM band. You enrich the fuel and add or substract timing to maximise the engine's performance. No carburetor/distributor combination can come close to the precision that is currently available using the latest electronic control systems.

That's fact... not hear-say, and not opinion !!!

On the other hand, Cup cars function within a narrow RPM band...

[call_me_andrew]

If anything the general automotive trend the last decade has been to go to larger and larger engines, not smaller. Every single BMW, Merceds, Porsche, all the domestics, etc, their engine sizes have been increasing, not decreasing.

Hey, remember like 12 years ago when a Mustang GT came with a 5.0? What is it now, a 4.6?... :cool:

NASCAR isn't just a buisness. It's a monopoly. People put up with everything they dislike about it because they don't want to throw out half of their wardrobe as they transition to another series. NASCAR realizes that they can do whatever they want.

NASCAR is like Comcast in Philadelphia. Comcast is the only cable company here. They also own the local sports channel and the Flyers and Sixers. They charge way too much for cable, they charge way too much for internet access, and they moved all the premium channels to digital cable only just to force people into it. I could get DirecTV and Verizon DSL, but it's my understanding that satellite dishes and DSL's are unreliable, and I can't watch local sports without Comcast. So I'm just going to put up with Comcast wether I like it or not. And it's the same with NASCAR.

NASCAR doesn't have to worry about fans leaving. Fans don't have a light at the end of the tunnel to run to. NASCAR doesn't have update the technology because they're not accountable to anyone. As long as they can keep making money with the current forumla, they can keep screwing the fans/consumers and do whatever they wish.

I'll compare them to auto makers. If it wasn't for Ralph Nader's saftey campaign of the 60's, seat belts and air bags would be sold as "accesories".

[Hoss Ghoul]

Hey, remember like 12 years ago when a Mustang GT came with a 5.0? What is it now, a 4.6?... :cool:



Technically it was a 4.9, not a 5.0...but, that was the top of the line Mustang. Now the top of the line Mustang has a supercharged 5.4L engine(the blower is equal to over 100 c.i. on top of that). So, the trend is still larger.

[Bob Riebe]

:p : BRUHAAHAA.... you need to get into the 21st Century.

;) Carburetor's are an old style anolog system... and full of compromises !!!

:dozey: The good ole boys with many years of experience can "fine-tune" a carburetor... but they are still sacrificing precise control over the Air-Fuel ratio through-out the RPM band. Jetting a carburetor maximazes it's performance over a narrow RPM range... and you are not able to make adjustments to AFR while the engine is running !!!

ECU/PCM's work hand in hand with fuel injection systems to precisely tune an engine over the complete RPM band. You enrich the fuel and add or substract timing to maximise the engine's performance. No carburetor/distributor combination can come close to the precision that is currently available using the latest electronic control systems.

That's fact... not hear-say, and not opinion !!!

ROFLMAO--I know,I have seen dozens of the wonderful supposed 21st century cars being hauled in on the back of a truick because some circuit in their computer went phffft.

Electronic fuel injection greatest benefit is simplified electronic tuning for increased mileage at near same horsepower as a carburettor, in reality it just make it simpler for the mechanics, as they shove a fairl load of work onto the shoulders of a computer hacker.

I remember well mechanics in Indy cars whining about having to make a constant flow unit try to perform near a timed units ability to adjust to an engines demand. The sanction finally gave in, but it did not make the show any better, it merely made having top notch injection specialist less critical.

Bob

[call_me_andrew]

Technically it was a 4.9, not a 5.0...but, that was the top of the line Mustang. Now the top of the line Mustang has a supercharged 5.4L engine(the blower is equal to over 100 c.i. on top of that). So, the trend is still larger.

If you want to be technical, then it was a 4.95 and it doesn't take a 3rd grader to round that up to 5. And you're comparing apples to corn. I'm talking about the specific Mutang GT trim. Not some overpriced piece of badge engineering. If you want to go all out, I've heard some rumors that they use to put 7.1L engines in Mustangs. But they don't anymore.

Hey did you ever notice how those diesel F-Series trucks used to come with 7.3L engines. What's the displacement for 2008, 6.4L? Remember when Ford replaced the Taurus which came standard with a 3.0L V6 and replaced it with a Fusion that comes standard with a 2.3L I4?

[Hoss Ghoul]

4948cc does not round up to 5.0 ever. Rounding does not work that way. Unless you round twice for some reason as you seem to...

Also, I never said -every- car has increased in displacement, just that it is the general trend.

The "5.0" was offered in the top of the line Mustang Cobra from 1993-1995, so my comparison to the current Cobra is direct as well.

In any event, what I said regarding a general trend towards larger more powerful engines is in fact true, and it is especially so as it relates to V8 engines over the past 10-25 years.

In case you were wondering, the largest known engine in a mustang from the factory is the 428 Cobra Jet @ 7.0L I hope you knew that, makes "rumors" of a 7.1 sound like you are talking out of your ass(no biggie on the .1 liter here because it is not BS marketing lies-for the record the 5.0 motors are superior IMO to the 4.6).

[call_me_andrew]

4948cc does not round up to 5.0 ever. Rounding does not work that way. Unless you round twice for some reason as you seem to...

Also, I never said -every- car has increased in displacement, just that it is the general trend.

The "5.0" was offered in the top of the line Mustang Cobra from 1993-1995, so my comparison to the current Cobra is direct as well.

In any event, what I said regarding a general trend towards larger more powerful engines is in fact true, and it is especially so as it relates to V8 engines over the past 10-25 years.

In case you were wondering, the largest known engine in a mustang from the factory is the 428 Cobra Jet @ 7.0L I hope you knew that, makes "rumors" of a 7.1 sound like you are talking out of your ass(no biggie on the .1 liter here because it is not BS marketing lies-for the record the 5.0 motors are superior IMO to the 4.6).

Where are you getting 4948 from? It's the same old 302 cubic inch engine from the 60's (save for a few upgrades). 302/61=4.95081967213114754098366557377

There is no current Cobra. The Shelby GT 500 is not going to be called a Cobra.

And I was talking about the Boss 429 Mustangs.

[Hoss Ghoul]

It's all good Andrew, good to see some other car guys on here, I enjoy the bench racing.

The 03/04 Cobras ran the 5.4supercharged, so name change or not, the Shelby's are filling the same spot.

As for the sizing...Do a google search. Or look at Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang You can also do the calculations if you don't believe the above. Also, you shouldn't use U.S. Standard to measure in Metric.

[Bob Riebe]

[quote="call_me_andrew"]Hey, remember like 12 years ago when a Mustang GT came with a 5.0? What is it now, a 4.6?... :cool: QUOTE]

It is a 281 because the Ford engineers designed a long stroke truck engine that cannot be enlarged to even square dimension, 305 in. cubed, without an expensive special siamese block.
Even at that it bore to stroke ration, compard to the old 302 is pathetic.

Ford and Cadillac both learned hard lessons with the small in displacement but huge in size OHC engines and are in the process of replacing both with engines, with a larger bore center, that can be enlarged to somethng that can reach at least mid-level displacement without sing a tiny bore and a looong stroke.

[NASCARWidow]

Ultimately the COT may increase competition. It will weed out the steering wheel holders and bring back drivers who actually have to drive their cars. Once real racecar drivers are in the cars there will be more passing.

[call_me_andrew]

It's all good Andrew, good to see some other car guys on here, I enjoy the bench racing.

The 03/04 Cobras ran the 5.4supercharged, so name change or not, the Shelby's are filling the same spot.

I remember they were using a supercharged 4.6 that produced 390hp. The new Shelby is what, 500hp with the supercharged 5.4?

[Hoss Ghoul]

I remember they were using a supercharged 4.6 that produced 390hp. The new Shelby is what, 500hp with the supercharged 5.4?

My mistake, shows they're going bigger though with the new Shelby/Cobra. I guess I was thinking it was a 5.4 in 2003/2004 and not a 4.6, but in fact it is just a 2 valve vs 4 valve both being 4.6(GT vs Cobra).

New LS3 in the Corvette is putting out 430hp. It will probably become the standard engine for the Z/28 or SS in the new Camaro.

[call_me_andrew]

Considering the newer car has an extra 110hp, I'd say it's got a slightly different place in the market.

[Hoss Ghoul]

Considering the newer car has an extra 110hp, I'd say it's got a slightly different place in the market.

That's what Ford would have you believe. In reality the car is no faster than the previous Cobra, certainly no more than a tenth or two...They are charging more because of the popularity of the body-style. Sales have been fantastic, but the performance has left alot to be desired, especially for the money.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Ultimately the COT may increase competition. It will weed out the steering wheel holders and bring back drivers who actually have to drive their cars. Once real racecar drivers are in the cars there will be more passing.

ya, that Jeff Gordon cant drive, and neither can that Johnson or Stewart guy either....

You have to stop and think here before you condemn today's drivers. They are the best drivers probably in the history of NASCAR talent wise. They drive hard all race and understand the handling and engineering of the cars better than some of the drivers of the past. Not all of them, for they worked on the cars, but these guys know more about chassis dynamics.

Today's drivers are NOT the problem, they are the best thing about NASCAR right now. The COT could be a disaster if it doesn't provide better racing on the intermediates. The fact drivers cannot get these pigs to turn is not a good sign.......

[Jonesi]

Today's drivers are NOT the problem, they are the best thing about NASCAR right now. The COT could be a disaster if it doesn't provide better racing on the intermediates. The fact drivers cannot get these pigs to turn is not a good sign.......

I think Nascar may have to add some adjustability to the cars if they want the CoTs to be runable at more tracks. Maybe even driver adjustable track bar or sway bars.

[call_me_andrew]

That's what Ford would have you believe. In reality the car is no faster than the previous Cobra, certainly no more than a tenth or two...

That's because the heavier engine and supercharger bring the cars weight to about 2 tons. Personally, I'd rather have the Roush Stage 3 Mustang instead of the Shelby, but I'm just an educated consumer.

[RaceFanStan]

Give the teams some time with the COT, they will make it race successfully ...
over the years the cars evolved, the teams adapted & made them faster ...
the COT will be no different, the teams will learn how to fine-tune & adjust it in time ...
the racing will be close & fast with lots of passing while the drivers will be safer, a great combination IMO. :D

[Mark in Oshawa]

Stan, it may well be they will figure it out. Right now, the guys outside of the Hendrick's boys are still not happy about the car, although as time goes on, I suspect some leeway might be given to the teams to tune these cars in. I just am not sold on the reason for what they are gaining by going to the COT vs just having an evolution of the old cars...

[jslone]

My thing is this,if Nascar spent all that money and time and effort in the so called COT,why cant they change the engine,the car itself seems to be as safe as ever,and thats all fine well and good,but they really should do something with the engines,because driver talent can get you so far,it seems that half the field hates the COT,some like it,and some have no opinion.Maybe in the future they well,but they need to upgrade the engine and chasis.

[Hoss Ghoul]

,but they need to upgrade the engine and chasis.

Why?

[call_me_andrew]

Well I can almost understand putting the engine thing off for now. When you buy a house you need to save some money for curtains.

And the chassis is being upgraded.

[jslone]

Why?
Hoss,the engines are outdated,I wont go on the damned plates issue.Nascar keeps heavy assed iron block engines,with pushrods,I thought I have read it here,so that the crews can have an easier time of building and maintining the engines.It just makes sense to update engine technology as well as tha car itself,afterall it is a part of the car.

[Jag_Warrior]

Maybe we will see Stock Car racing again, in a couple of years...

if the Factories get back into "Trans-Am", with the Mustangs, Carmaros, and Challenger's.

I've certainly got my fingers & toes crossed. Speed World Challenge and Grand Am Cup are two more series that might offer something close to that.

Without breaking the bank, Chevy, Ford and Dodge could throw some bucks into this and have something incredible. The trick would be having a competent sanctioning body to manage things.

[RaceFanStan]

If you think about it there seems to be some work left to do on the COT body/chassis ...
they need to get the body/chassis right before the COT is fully implemented ...
I have every faith that NASCAR will get it right. :D

As to overhead cams, fuel injection & other technical updates I say why bother ?
The current engines are very powerful in their current configuration ...
high tech changes could create more problems ...
to add the "refinements" in a controlled engine package you would likely see the crate engine imposed ... :s
NASCAR would have an independent company build the engines & then distribute them to the teams ...
do we really want to see a sanctioning body have this kind of control ?
I think NOT ! :eek:

[Dick Blom]

At least one good thing with the COT that looks like it might happen is they will only be used by Cup. If they aren't used by BUSCH it might reduce the number of bushwhackers using the Busch race for cup practice. That way some of the Busch drivers might be able to build a following and make the Busch races more interesting.

[call_me_andrew]

to add the "refinements" in a controlled engine package you would likely see the crate engine imposed ... :s
NASCAR would have an independent company build the engines & then distribute them to the teams ...

I think they would have four independent companies to build them. They're called Ford, GM, Toyota, and Diamler Chrysler.

[Mark in Oshawa]

NASCAR can mandate chassis and bodywork templates, but if they start messing with the motors, it will be the death knell for the manufacturers. They will have nothing left to make their name on the cars other than just the money they give the teams. At some point, they will pull out, and the cars might as well be spec. I think it would hurt NASCAR in the end, and I know they are not likely to mess with the engines, but who knows? I would have never predicted the COT would be the way it is either.

The cost of engine building is extensive because of the low tech rules mean teams spend a fortune trying to find small gains anywhere they can, and those small gains mean the difference between winning or losing. IF the money is there, the big teams will spend it, and making all the teams use the same motors will mean they spend it somewhere else. In the end, the only way to equal the field is to have one team with 43 cars....

NASCAR in many ways is after racing socialism.....everyone equal...

[Bob Riebe]

Hoss,the engines are outdated,I wont go on the damned plates issue.Nascar keeps heavy assed iron block engines,with pushrods,I thought I have read it here,so that the crews can have an easier time of building and maintining the engines.It just makes sense to update engine technology as well as tha car itself,afterall it is a part of the car.
And the two out of three makes in Detroit use push-rod engines.
What difference does the block material make?
The cars are hundreds of pounds ligher than they once were when they did not fly into the stands.

The engine technology IS 21st century, so what is your point.
Hydraulic valve actuators--when hell freezes.
Titanium valve gear---why?
Engines made out of metals with vastly different expansion rates---Engines would have to be pre-warmed to prevent catastrophic failure. F-1 banned them.
OHC---Ninety year old design
Push-rod---eighty year old design.

Now they could use ****el engines, or two-stroke diesel or any of dozens of other designs, for what reason?

Todays racing fan,
In the sixties the school nerd, by the time he graduated from high school, probably had forgotten more about auto mechanics than the majoity of race fans today will ever know.

The blah, blah, blah about push-rod engines is vacuous bleating from people whose hands on experience with engines and chassis usually extends to flipping pages in magazines.

"High Tech" ideas don't really exist anymore, most the "hgh tech" used in auto racing, are very, very old ideas that were too expensive to develope when they were first thought up seventy or so years ago.

Of the problems NASCAR has, the engine is the least of them.

[wedge]

Even though pushrod technology is inferior, I have the greatest respect for the engine builders. Today's Cup cars are running close to 9000 RPM which is damn right impressive in my book :s hock:

[Bob Riebe]

Even though pushrod technology is inferior, I have the greatest respect for the engine builders. Today's Cup cars are running close to 9000 RPM which is damn right impressive in my book :s hock:
They run well into 9,000 rpm range and have been there for at least a decade.
There are other forms of auto racing where they run well into the 10,000 range.

The main advantage of an OHC engine is its ability to reach a higher rpm limit. IF it is not strangled by restrictors of some type, as long as an engne can stay together, the higher rpm it reaches, the higher the hp output, but that is of little use, as horsepower is not lacking as is.

Multi-valves?
The engine Mercedes used to win LeMans, was a prod. based two-valve engine.


OHC engine have their shortcomeings as those who tried to adapt them to AA/F racers found out.
There is gent who is still trying to get his own fueler OHC engine to work in Australia where they are still legal, and so far he is still an also ran.

[Lee Roy]

They run well into 9,000 rpm range and have been there for at least a decade.
There are other forms of auto racing where they run well into the 10,000 range.


NASCAR engines would probably be there now if NASCAR hadn't implemented the minimum rear gear ratio rules. Probably saved the teams millions of dollars in engine development costs . . . . or allowed them to re-direct those dollars into other areas.

[Hoss Ghoul]

Penske was turning 10K RPM's at some tracks before the grear rule went into effect, possibly some other teams.

[trumperZ06]

And the two out of three makes in Detroit use push-rod engines.
What difference does the block material make?

;) Alumium blocks are ~ half the weight

The cars are hundreds of pounds ligher than they once were when they did not fly into the stands.

;) Hhmmmm.... maybe a few pounds lighter than a gutted Hudson Hornet... not several hundred !!!

The engine technology IS 21st century, so what is your point.

;) Carburetors & distributors haven't been used by OEM's since the early 80's...
21st Century technology uses fuel injection and engine management systems using computers !!!

Hydraulic valve actuators--when hell freezes.

;) Hydraulic vale actuators (lifters) have been standard equipment on OHV engines since the late 60's

Titanium valve gear---why?

Titanium intake valves and connecting rods are.. Now OEM with Chevrolet's LS7 which is in my new Z06 !!! Allows high rpm using hydraulic lifters.




"High Tech" ideas don't really exist anymore, most the "hgh tech" used in auto racing, are very, very old ideas that were too expensive to develope when they were first thought up seventy or so years ago.

Wrong:

The electronic management control systems enable TODAY's engines (since the early 90's) to use high compression while running on 93 octane Unleaded fuel.

NA$CAR's using unleaded fuel for the first time... this year. The racing teams are having to run engines very "Rich" trying to keep the valves opperating for 500 mile races.

Of the problems NASCAR has, the engine is the least of them.

:dozey: If you ignore the 1980 technology currently used in NA$CAR's...

"STOCK CAR RACING" series.

[Bob Riebe]

: And the two out of three makes in Detroit use push-rod engines.
What difference does the block material make?

Alumium blocks are ~ half the weight

The cars are hundreds of pounds ligher than they once were when they did not fly into the stands
Hhmmmm.... maybe a few pounds lighter than a gutted Hudson Hornet... not several hundred !!!
Minimum weight was 3,900 lbs., if you are saying they still weigh that much, you are blatanly wrong.


Carburetors & distributors haven't been used by OEM's since the early 80's...
21st Century technology uses fuel injection and engine management systems using computers !!!
Tell me which major racing series uses production engine management, much less injectors.
It seems back in the bad old days, the intake systems had to be RPO.(although that often meant it had to be available over the counter in a parts book.)
Why don't they run these wonderful RPOs now?


Hydraulic valve actuators--when hell freezes.

Hydraulic vale actuators (lifters) have been standard equipment on OHV engines since the late 60's
OK, get out your book on automobiles.
Most people who say they prefer "high tech" know that hydraulic valve actuators are a system that replaced (valve) springs in Formula One (air systems work on the same physics that govern fluids, so I probably should have said fluid rather than hydraulic)
You do know the difference between a valve-lifter and valve actuation systems?
Of course Desmodromic mech. systems lift and pull closed, but they are not using them either.


Titanium valve gear---why?

Titanium intake valves and connecting rods are.. Now OEM with Chevrolet's LS7 which is in my new Z06 !!! Allows high rpm using hydraulic lifters.
And this is a reason why?


"High Tech" ideas don't really exist anymore, most the "hgh tech" used in auto racing, are very, very old ideas that were too expensive to develope when they were first thought up seventy or so years ago.

Wrong:

The electronic management control systems enable TODAY's engines (since the early 90's) to use high compression while running on 93 octane Unleaded fuel.
And the competitors in the Engine Masters competition have had comp. ratio reduced to a max. of 10.5:1, because they were running, successfully, at ratios of 13.5:1 on required 91 octane street gasoline, with a carburettor.

So what is your point?


NA$CAR's using unleaded fuel for the first time... this year. The racing teams are having to run engines very "Rich" trying to keep the valves opperating for 500 mile races.

Of the problems NASCAR has, the engine is the least of them.
Bring back the lead.

[trumperZ06]

:p :Hey Riebe... You might search Google before making false statements!!!

Try Wikipedia... on the Hudson Hornet...

"When combined with the car's light weight and low center of gravity...(because of it's monocoque body), the Hornet allowed Teague and other Hudson drivers to dominate stock car racing series from 1951 through 1954, consistantly beating out other drivers in cars powered by larger, more modern engines" !!!

;) Now in today's World... carbruetors and distributors are ARCHAIC...

the automoble manufacturers having REPLACED them using fuel injection and computer controled engine management systems !!!

The discussion is about " STOCK CAR RACING "...

you know... STOCK CARS.... with a Vin number ( it was orginially part of Bill France's NA$CAR mandates)...

the kind you can buy down at your local automobile dealer !!!

[Bob Riebe]

:p :Hey Riebe... You might search Google before making false statements!!!

Try Wikipedia... on the Hudson Hornet...

"When combined with the car's light weight and low center of gravity...(because of it's monocoque body), the Hornet allowed Teague and other Hudson drivers to dominate stock car racing series from 1951 through 1954, consistantly beating out other drivers in cars powered by larger, more modern engines" !!!

;) Now in today's World... carbruetors and distributors are ARCHAIC...

the automoble manufacturers having REPLACED them using fuel injection and computer controled engine management systems !!!

The discussion is about " STOCK CAR RACING "...

you know... STOCK CARS.... with a Vin number ( it was orginially part of Bill France's NA$CAR mandates)...

the kind you can buy down at your local automobile dealer !!!
OK Thumper do you have a point or is this dis-jointed, vacuous babble your forté.

Wikipedia is the encylcopedia for morons.

So what is your point?

[trumperZ06]

Wikipedia is the encylcopedia for morons.

So what is your point?

;) Thanks... you've proven my point !!!

Don't confuse Bob with facts !!!

:p : Poor ole unknowledgable Bob can't be mistaken ...

the Encylcopedia.... must be in error !!!

:dozey: Hhmmmm.... and you might consider cleaning up your potty mouth too, Bob !!!

It's easy to tell when a person is stressed.... look at his choice of words & subject matter !!!

[Bob Riebe]

;) Thanks... you've proven my point !!!

Don't confuse Bob with facts !!!

:p : Poor ole unknowledgable Bob can't be mistaken ...

the Encylcopedia.... must be in error !!!

:dozey: Hhmmmm.... and you might consider cleaning up your potty mouth too, Bob !!!

It's easy to tell when a person is stressed.... look at his choice of words & subject matter !!!
Where did I say it was wrong?

I said morons use it as a first reference source, and if you think the cars have the same minimum weight they did in the fifties, your ignorance is only exceeded by your lack of knowledge.

You are a legend in your own mind; now what is your point?

[SOD]

Where did I say it was wrong?

I said morons use it as a first reference source, and if you think the cars have the same minimum weight they did in the fifties, your ignorance is only exceeded by your lack of knowledge.

You are a legend in your own mind; now what is your point?

I'm sure you were born with your accumulation of knowledge, please continue to school us with your expert knowledge. maybe if you didn;'t spend all the time telling everyone that they're morons you'd probably have won a NASCAR championship by now. phew.

[Bob Riebe]

I'm sure you were born with your accumulation of knowledge, please continue to school us with your expert knowledge. maybe if you didn;'t spend all the time telling everyone that they're morons you'd probably have won a NASCAR championship by now. phew.

Your point is?

[Peter Olivola]

I think his point is, you're even more condescending than me. :D


Your point is?

[Bob Riebe]

I think his point is, you're even more condescending than me. :D

OH the HUMANITY!

[SOD]

I think his point is, you're even more condescending than me. :D

Is that possible! :eek: :eek:




























:runs: :D

[trumperZ06]

OH the HUMANITY!



;) I guess you just don't... "Get the Point" !!!

:p : Bob it's.... Oh the STUPIDITY " !!!

Your inane posts and complete lack of knowledge...

adds a bit of humor to this site !!!

[Bob Riebe]

;) I guess you just don't... "Get the Point" !!!

:p : Bob it's.... Oh the STUPIDITY " !!!

Your inane posts and complete lack of knowledge...

adds a bit of humor to this site !!!

OK little fella, now take your pill and go lie.