I have to laugh at all the 'this is how to fix RP racing' comments I see before and after RP races.

The bottom line is this, as long as the track(s) are configured as they are there will always be problems no matter the 'fix.'

Add a couple dog-legs on the backstretch to slow the cars down and the problem is solved.

Here is how it goes down--eventually. Driver XYZ gets killed at 'dega and other drivers tell NASCAR: "We will not race this track again." NASCAR demands a track reconfiguration. Problem solved, and at least one driver dead.

jcmark611 - 02 November 2009 09:38 PM

The problem with a hinged wing is, what do you do if the wing folds during the race? As much as we thing we have all the aero figured out on car it's possible the hinged wing could fold during the race. Then what?

Maybe the travel could be limited?
Maybe flaps?
Or go back to a nationwide series type spoiler?
There certainly appears to be a lift problem when traveling 150 mph backwards.

BillyDKidd has the only rational answer.

Any car traveling forward or backward, wing or no wing, will fly at 200 mph if it gets air under it. The roof flaps might help, but obviously are not the total solution.

Superspeedways may look cool, but they simply don't work as race tracks.

Put a big, wide S-turn in the straights so the drivers have to lift but can still run two- or three-wide, and then there won't be a need for bump-drafting.

How about better roof flaps? What if the trunk lid was made into an airfoil of some sort? It can't be that hard since F-18s have air brakes on them. Spend more finding ways to keep cars down and less finding ways to slow them down.
Just do whatever it takes to find a way to keep the cars from flying, then pull the plates off and let them race.

Someone mentioned the Mercedes CLK that flew at Le Mans in ... 1999 I think.

That car was going forward, and probably made two tons of downforce.

It isn't the wings. At 200 mph, air is almost solid, and wedges under the cars and lifts them.

I doubt that Nascar is interested in chicanes or doglegs. I suspect they will be looking for the solution in the car.
Does anyone remember the track in Brazil that Cart raced on with one wide open banked corner and one tight flat one. I'd love to see Nascar race on that type of track, but it will never happen.

There is no problem with making the cars harder to drive. Last time I checked those guys were making a pretty good wage, let them earn it. Take the spoiler off, harder tire, narrower if necessary, and mention that they may have to drive it. They WILL lift in the corners or they'll wrinkle their little cars.

Maelochs - 03 November 2009 03:04 PM

Someone mentioned the Mercedes CLK that flew at Le Mans in ... 1999 I think

The Mercedes in question was going over a hump in the track that to my knowledge has been there since the LeMans circuit was first configured and has been notorious for unloading the suspension of cars. Even before WW2 cars were going fast enough to go briefly airborne off that hump. After the MB flipped LeMans officials finally decided to "chop" the hump just a bit in order to help prevent it from happening again.

I will continue my stance on this:

These tracks were built for the sole purpose of "lets see just how fast a Stock Car can go."

We have since found out that they can go way faster than reasonably safe for either the drivers or the fans.

Regarding the flying Mercedes: The pint of mentioning it is to show that the problem is not wings. If a car making two tons of downforce can get airborne going forward, then the force acting on it has to be greater than all that downforce.

Some people are claiming that the CoT wing is what lifts up the cars when they go backward. I use the Mercedes example to illustrate that the force of air compressed under the car is by far the greater force.

I second Lovey Dovey. The tracks are simply not suited to racing. Great for closed-course speed records, lousy for racing.