Suzuki Samurai was Re: [geeks] SPARC proprietary (waaaay

[Mike F]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:30:55 -0400
Phil Stracchino <alaric at caerllewys.net> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 05:09:41AM -0400, Michael Schiller wrote:
> > On Monday, October 20, 2003, at 08:44  PM, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> > >
> > >Whereas what they actually are is lookalike fiberglass bodies on
> > >top of mechanically near-identical steel-tube rollng chassis with
> > >mechanically near-identical powertrains and suspension.
> > 
> > I could be wrong, but when a driver is driving a 'Monte Carlo'
> > doesn't that imply that the engine (at least the block) was
> > originally made by GM, and when a driver is driving a Ford that the
> > engine block came from Ford? Or am I showing my ignorance of NASCAR
> > here?
> 
> Well, theoretically, yeah.  I'm not certain it necessarily follows
> (don't a lot of the teams buy their engines from specialized engine
> builders?), but in any case, my recollection is that they have to
> comply with strict limitations on everything from power output to
> inlet throat diameter, and by the time they're done complying with
> tech restrictions, they might as well all be using the same engine.

Honestly, the fact that each team builds its own cars becomes almost
a moot point. The regulations are so strict that the cars might as
well be exactly identical, and any competitive advantages come either
from slight production variations, bending the rules or driver skill.
Obviously, driver skill is what racing is all about, but I'm interested
in the cars, too, and it's really boring when the cars are all the same.
In Formula 1, CART, World Rally, etc. the teams are always exploring
new technologies and cars within a given series can often be radically
different. This is *interesting*. Take the car out of the equation,
a la NASCAR, and you might as well be watching any arbitrary sport.

Plus, NASCAR teams spend millions of dollars every year refining the
ancient technologies their cars are based on. I don't care how much
CFD, FEA, or wind tunnel work you do - you've still got a heavy, steel-
tubed, sheet-metal-bodied car, albeit a highly-tweaked one.

> The other thing to consider is that the GM engine a NASCAR racer gets
> bears about as much resemblance to the GM block you see when you open
> your hood as the Chevy Monte Carlo you see going round and round at
> the track bears to the Chevy Monte Carlo in the local dealer's
> showroom.  It might share the same basic block casting and MAYBE the
> same castings for the heads, but that's *it*.

It's worse than you think. I don't think any of the cars NASCAR cars are
styled after are even _available_ with a V-8. Even then, I believe the
blocks are unique to NASCAR - they're not production-based. Another
thing that I find *really* funny is that the NASCAR cars are quite a bit
_heavier_ than the production cars (!) I always thought the goal of
production-based racing was to take street cars and make them lighter,
not heavier. Anyone who knows anything about racing will say that weight
is one of the most important factors in performance, and less is more.

OK, I'm done ranting - I just think that NASCAR is to the racing world
what PeeCees are to real computing. - Mike