restrictor plate tracks?

[24thunder]

Seems to Me that these 4 point events at Daytona & Talladega require so many more resources & funds than other types of tracks!Should NASCAR bring the banking down on these tracks to around 20+ degrees & get the downforce down on the cars enough so that NASCAR could run non-restricted engines at these prestigeous races,or leave the plate tracks alone or(my fave)tear down these 2 tracks,so tas to bring in another road course & 3 more short events?Any opinions on the matter?

[Speeddemon555]

I don't know if they want to tear down the track, let alone millions of dollars tearing down and rebuilding it. Daytona is special and should be left alone and Tallaedega should reduce to one date.

[muggle not]

I voted that they each lose a date but actually I would like to Dega lose a date and then add a road track.

[24thunder]

Thanks for the input Guys!I know that losing the Daytona 500 event would never happen & Talladega being the only other regular restrictor plate track it's very unlikely that anything will change in this area!

[marcus]

I just dont see what the problem is with restrictor plate racing ?????

can someone eleborate on what you think is the problem ???

very confusing from afar.

[24thunder]

Originally posted by marcus
I just dont see what the problem is with restrictor plate racing ?????

can someone eleborate on what you think is the problem ???

very confusing from afar.

At restrictor plate races,NASCAR takes a 3400lb car & puts plates on their engines that choke(restrict)almost half of their power off,going from around 750HP down to around 400HP which also effectively kills throttle response,so that the drivers have to stay on the gas while in the midst of a big pack which more often than not results in the "big one"or in other words a 18+ car pile-up,JMO!

[marcus]

then why are the rules that way ????

and look at the other side of things , if they let them have their heads for these races , surely the cars will still be in big packs and the "big one" will usually still happen , I mean the pack racing and drafting is part and parcel with nascar isnt it???

I dunno the little technicalities of the series im just speaking as a fan from the other side of the world who doesnt really understand the day to day running of the series but the big packs and close racing is what draws me to the series , its just amazing to watch 43 cars one inch apart and at those speeds one little mistake can cause the big one.

restrictor plates or no restrictor plates the racing will still pack up and wrecks will still happen.


but of course i could be completely wrong

[24thunder]

marcus--I'm not exactly a gear-head Myself,so I'm hoping that Someone with much more experience on NASCAR comes here & really fills U in on the routine of NASCAR!
No,the cars don't normally run that close at other tracks,mainly because the engines do not have that plate & therefore there's more power(750HP)& therefore more throttle response,a driver can get out of the gas a little without losing a bunch of positions,unlike at restrictor plate tracks!Also,a lot of other tracks require more attention to downforce charistics of the car,while short tracks require a lot of care in not tearing up the brakes as a lot of passes on short tracks are done by out-breaking a fellow driver into a turn so as to come out of the turn quicker than the other Guy & therefore make the pass!Road courses(My personal fave,btw)require much more attention to the set-up of a car which includes better balance charistics so as to be able to turn left & right,brakes are fairly important at these venues as well,gears can take a beating on road courses also & a driver with(IMO)great skill is certainly needed to manuever these 3400lb cars through all those turns & IMO most of the passes,at these types of tracks,are done in the turns as well!
I hope this helps U.Again tho,I'm not the most knowlegeable one to ask about this!Hopefully some other posters will give U more of an understanding of this curcuit!Sorry,I couldn't have been of more help marcus!

[marcus]

no probs 24 thunder , Im just here for the racing , as long as its good then im happy

I understand what your saying about other tracks and throttle response and it does make sense.

which brings me to my next question , if they are concerned about the restrictors then why have them in the first place ????

or would this make Daytona and the like just too dangerous to drive on at all ???

[muggle not]

Good question marcus, some of the drivers would like to do away with the plates but Nascar thinks that it would simply be too fast and dangerous.

[JamesJimmy]

I guess people who argue against the plates generally claim that if they didn't have them, then the cars would have far more throttle response and not have to simply run around in a big pack to keep up. But, like I think marcus was saying above, without the plates they would still be running flat out all the time, the draft would still be there, and it would seem that, once the field was up to speed, large packs would still form, only running at 220 mph instead of 190. Plates or not, a car wouldn't be able to pull out and run by itself if others were drafting together as a pack, as the anti-plate crowd seem to claim. The way I see it, they will run flat out all the time at these tracks no matter what, and the plates just control how fast flat out is. But then, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, either.

[24thunder]

Originally posted by JamesJimmy
I guess people who argue against the plates generally claim that if they didn't have them, then the cars would have far more throttle response and not have to simply run around in a big pack to keep up. But, like I think marcus was saying above, without the plates they would still be running flat out all the time, the draft would still be there, and it would seem that, once the field was up to speed, large packs would still form, only running at 220 mph instead of 190. Plates or not, a car wouldn't be able to pull out and run by itself if others were drafting together as a pack, as the anti-plate crowd seem to claim. The way I see it, they will run flat out all the time at these tracks no matter what, and the plates just control how fast flat out is. But then, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, either.

They use to run without restrictor plates till about the mid 1970's,the main reason that NASCAR went to restrictor plates was because a driver(can't recall Whom)went off the track & flipped over in mid-air at over 200MPH,for saftey reasons the restrictor plate was adopted(altho it had been around since like 1970)to bring the speeds down & therefore inherited less throttle control.
The cars,when unrestricted,are way too fast to stay on the gas all the way around,th primary difference being that with a restricted engine,a driver has to stay on the gas & if He doesn't,will soon find Himself out of the draft & losing many positions,whereas with an unrestricted engine the driver has more throttle control & therefore can control His speed better & make up lost track position!