Indy Car Driver Dan Wheldon, Deid In A Fiery Wreck At Las Vegas Speedway.

Now, lets see F1 cars like this:WhiteKnight77

I appreciate you going into such a detailed answer but the fact is it's still a damn foolish idea.

There is a reason that NASCAR racing cars have evolved in one way (significant emphasis on speed, HP, torque, full body, roll cage etc.) and F1 cars have evolved in another (being low, super light, open-top, wings, significant emphasis on developing sophisticated drag-free downforce).

F1 cars are so ridiculously light, even when in slower controlled conditions they look like you could toss a straw down in front of it and make it smash off the track and explode. They are precision machines. Crowding them together on a narrow circuit track, pushing them to extreme speeds, and then attempting to maintain those speeds while jostling for position in among drivers who are used to shunting each other - whoever thought that was a good idea should be shot imo.

Taking an F1 car over to do NASCAR circuits seems to me about as stupid as trying to win a Grand Prix in a Stock Car.

And anyone who thinks it is a good idea really are fooling themselves if they think they appreciating driving or the car's capabilities - they don't. Like I said before they're just appreciating speed and it's really not the same thing.

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]Now, lets see F1 cars like this:MissLibrarian

I appreciate you going into such a detailed answer but the fact is it's still a damn foolish idea.

There is a reason that NASCAR racing cars have evolved in one way (significant emphasis on speed, HP, torque, full body, roll cage etc.) and F1 cars have evolved in another (being low, super light, open-top, wings, significant emphasis on developing sophisticated drag-free downforce).

F1 cars are so ridiculously light, even when in slower controlled conditions they look like you could toss a straw down in front of it and make it smash off the track and explode. They are precision machines. Crowding them together on a narrow circuit track, pushing them to extreme speeds, and then attempting to maintain those speeds while jostling for position in among drivers who are used to shunting each other - whoever thought that was a good idea should be shot imo.

Taking an F1 car over to do NASCAR circuits seems to me about as stupid as trying to win a Grand Prix in a Stock Car.

And anyone who thinks it is a good idea really are fooling themselves if they think they appreciating driving or the car's capabilities - they don't. Like I said before they're just appreciating speed and it's really not the same thing.

I meant lets see F1 cars racing that close. Racing is more than whoever gets to the finish line first. Racing involves passing. I would rather see more passing on the race track than in the pits (and that happens in both series). At least to me, racing means drivers actually running side by side as one tries to take the position from another or keep the position already held. Of the few F1 races I have watched over the years, there was never any side by side racing. Most of the passing took place in the pits and not on the track.

Cup cars do race on a former F1 track, Watkins Glen (they use the short course) and with a death at that track during a race, they added a chicane at the end of the back stretch to slow the cars down before the carousel turn (what used to be turn 5). Not all stock car races are held at what would be called superspeedways (tracks 1.5 miles and greater). They also race on short tracks of one half mile to three quarters of a mile, so it isn't all about speed, it is about how a car handles. A car has to turn great before it can be fast, no matter what size track it is.

I meant lets see F1 cars racing that close. Racing is more than whoever gets to the finish line first. Racing involves passing. I would rather see more passing on the race track than in the pits (and that happens in both series). At least to me, racing means drivers actually running side by side as one tries to take the position from another or keep the position already held. Of the few F1 races I have watched over the years, there was never any side by side racing. Most of the passing took place in the pits and not on the track.

Cup cars do race on a former F1 track, Watkins Glen (they use the short course) and with a death at that track during a race, they added a chicane at the end of the back stretch to slow the cars down before the carousel turn (what used to be turn 5). Not all stock car races are held at what would be called superspeedways (tracks 1.5 miles and greater). They also race on short tracks of one half mile to three quarters of a mile, so it isn't all about speed, it is about how a car handles. A car has to turn great before it can be fast, no matter what size track it is.WhiteKnight77

God I really can't be bothered to keep trying to argue a point you just don't seem to get, especially in a crossing-two-threads discussion, I thought from the very moment I discovered about this Indy racing thing that racing F1-type cars close together on a circuit track sounded like one of the most ridiculously stupid things I have ever heard of in my life. And I still feel that way, and I am not at all surprised this guy died, and I have no sympathy for him whatsoever.

F1 driving has evolved the way it has because there needs to be constant judgment of the track, awareness and knowledge of the course, and shifting control of the car at all times. Over time the actual 'race' comes down to individual driver's abilities to master the track to the very best standard rather than flogging it out against some guy next to him like a unnecessarily glorified drag-race.

Seeing that sort of car, and saying 'gee those cars'll go real fast in a circle!' and then deciding that's a good idea and implementing it, that's taking away all of the subtlety and art of the style of racing as well as the complex design and heritage of the cars in order to provide mindless sensational entertainment accessible at the most basic of mental capacities.

But that's what the US usually does with most things I guess so *shrugs*

God I really can't be bothered to keep trying to argue a point you just don't seem to get, especially in a crossing-two-threads discussion, I thought from the very moment I discovered about this Indy racing thing that racing F1-type cars close together on a circuit track sounded like one of the most ridiculously stupid things I have ever heard of in my life. And I still feel that way, and I am not at all surprised this guy died, and I have no sympathy for him whatsoever.

F1 driving has evolved the way it has because there needs to be constant judgment of the track, awareness and knowledge of the course, and shifting control of the car at all times. Over time the actual 'race' comes down to individual driver's abilities to master the track to the very best standard rather than flogging it out against some guy next to him like a unnecessarily glorified drag-race.

Seeing that sort of car, and saying 'gee those cars'll go real fast in a circle!' and then deciding that's a good idea and implementing it, that's taking away all of the subtlety and art of the style of racing as well as the complex design and heritage of the cars in order to provide mindless sensational entertainment accessible at the most basic of mental capacities.

But that's what the US usually does with most things I guess so *shrugs*

MissLibrarian

I do know what you're saying, but one thing to remember is that all racing is about speed, no matter how it takes place be it on foot, bicycle, snowmobile, motorcycle, car, boat or airplane.

hehe I was just watching this news on CNN when I saw this thread, anyways...

Not a racing fan, at all, but still, RIP

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="theone86"]

Yes, but driving to work has a purpose.

theone86

And driving in an auto race has a purpose.

Yes, driving around in circles has a purpose.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

And driving in an auto race has a purpose.

comp_atkins

Yes, driving around in circles has a purpose.

[QUOTE="MissLibrarian"]

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]Now, lets see F1 cars like this:WhiteKnight77

I appreciate you going into such a detailed answer but the fact is it's still a damn foolish idea.

There is a reason that NASCAR racing cars have evolved in one way (significant emphasis on speed, HP, torque, full body, roll cage etc.) and F1 cars have evolved in another (being low, super light, open-top, wings, significant emphasis on developing sophisticated drag-free downforce).

F1 cars are so ridiculously light, even when in slower controlled conditions they look like you could toss a straw down in front of it and make it smash off the track and explode. They are precision machines. Crowding them together on a narrow circuit track, pushing them to extreme speeds, and then attempting to maintain those speeds while jostling for position in among drivers who are used to shunting each other - whoever thought that was a good idea should be shot imo.

Taking an F1 car over to do NASCAR circuits seems to me about as stupid as trying to win a Grand Prix in a Stock Car.

And anyone who thinks it is a good idea really are fooling themselves if they think they appreciating driving or the car's capabilities - they don't. Like I said before they're just appreciating speed and it's really not the same thing.

I meant lets see F1 cars racing that close. Racing is more than whoever gets to the finish line first. Racing involves passing. I would rather see more passing on the race track than in the pits (and that happens in both series). At least to me, racing means drivers actually running side by side as one tries to take the position from another or keep the position already held. Of the few F1 races I have watched over the years, there was never any side by side racing. Most of the passing took place in the pits and not on the track.

Cup cars do race on a former F1 track, Watkins Glen (they use the short course) and with a death at that track during a race, they added a chicane at the end of the back stretch to slow the cars down before the carousel turn (what used to be turn 5). Not all stock car races are held at what would be called superspeedways (tracks 1.5 miles and greater). They also race on short tracks of one half mile to three quarters of a mile, so it isn't all about speed, it is about how a car handles. A car has to turn great before it can be fast, no matter what size track it is.

[QUOTE="BranKetra"][QUOTE="PandaTrueno86"]

Go to your local track & smoke a crack pipe. I'm sure there's a difference.

PandaTrueno86

No I'm serious. Experiment.

lol 1 post in and it's a indy vs. nascar discussion. a new record..comp_atkins

safety first.jediknight52501

What a horrible way to die. Rest in peace good sir.

safety first.jediknight52501

safety first.jediknight52501

"You can never make race cars completely safe, things happen at speed." -Greg Moore

Also while unrelated to Wheldon's crash, two brothers Rick and Jeff Huseman(Rick being an off-road racer)were killed in a plane crash the same day.

I hope that after this, Indy goes through an extensive review of their safety regulations. Hopefully, the death of Dan will have the same effect the death of Senna had to F1. It is sad that someone needs to die for drivers and the leaders of the category to work harder on improving safety, though.

RIP Dan Wheldon

I hope that after this, Indy goes through an extensive review of their safety regulations. Hopefully, the death of Dan will have the same effect the death of Senna had to F1. It is sad that someone needs to die for drivers and the leaders of the category to work harder on improving safety, though.

RIP Dan Wheldon

Pierst179

Wheldon was experimenting with the new 2012 car. Yesterday was the last race for the VERY outdated Dallara chassis.

Surely they will develop new safety regulations after this. I highly doubt not a single person was questioning the sanity and safety of F1 racing when Senna died. I don't see why this should be treated any differently

[QUOTE="PandaTrueno86"]

[QUOTE="BranKetra"] Yeah.BranKetra

No I'm serious. Experiment.

Well what you compared, was pretty offensive.

I meant lets see F1 cars racing that close. Racing is more than whoever gets to the finish line first. Racing involves passing. I would rather see more passing on the race track than in the pits (and that happens in both series). At least to me, racing means drivers actually running side by side as one tries to take the position from another or keep the position already held. Of the few F1 races I have watched over the years, there was never any side by side racing. Most of the passing took place in the pits and not on the track.

Cup cars do race on a former F1 track, Watkins Glen (they use the short course) and with a death at that track during a race, they added a chicane at the end of the back stretch to slow the cars down before the carousel turn (what used to be turn 5). Not all stock car races are held at what would be called superspeedways (tracks 1.5 miles and greater). They also race on short tracks of one half mile to three quarters of a mile, so it isn't all about speed, it is about how a car handles. A car has to turn great before it can be fast, no matter what size track it is.

WhiteKnight77

I hope that after this, Indy goes through an extensive review of their safety regulations. Hopefully, the death of Dan will have the same effect the death of Senna had to F1. It is sad that someone needs to die for drivers and the leaders of the category to work harder on improving safety, though.

RIP Dan Wheldon

Pierst179

Shame since he was still young and had young children too. :(

[QUOTE="PandaTrueno86"]

[QUOTE="theone86"]

So do crack addicts.

theone86

drugs and motorsport are two different things. If you don't care for it then that's fine. But for the people who love to compete behind the wheel, it's a feeling that can't be described.

How is one feeling that can't be described different from another that can't be described? And honestly, it's the same effect, increased release of endorphins. You can also get the same rush from a lot of extreme activities, skydiving for instance.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/10/16/sports/main20121120.shtml]link 2 time Indy 500 winner Dan Wheldon died today in what was the worst crash i have ever seen in Racing since 2000. i watched him win the Indy 500 on TV. with the speeds the cars get, this proves NASCAR has the best cars in racing since they have a lot more safety in the cars then in Indy Car.jediknight52501

The problem with indy car is they are racing on the same tracks as nascar but have roughly the same ideologies of F1 in a lto of ways, the problem mainly can be associated with the lack of run off space in the tracks(even the afformented monaco has run off areas now), the reason we hardly see fatalities in F1 now is because of advancements in mechanical design,vehicle design and commonly track design a lot of tracks have been altered significantly over the past 20 years to meet stringent safety standards.

This does show Indy car does need a safety wake up call that they need to develope the tracks with better safety features on the outside barriers,There needs to be a shakeup in the car designs and a focus on safety rather than aerodynamics in a few ways there will need to be compromises but in the end it will be for the greater good.

Nascar's are hardly comparable either as their design logic and ideology is far diffrent from that of a 1 seat open top racer.Sure they have advanced but a lot of the advancements couldnt be carried over to open wheel racing.

In the end indycar really needs to look at what the FIA has done since Senna and Ratzenburger both died in 94 and how they improved their safety records in the past 20 years.