Subscribe to this blog's feed« AT&T files second lawsuit against NASCAR | Main | Skinner makes it three in a row »
March 30, 2007
NASCAR supposedly addressing COT problems
There were a few problems that came about during the COT's debut at Bristol...
*Hamlin and several other drivers complained about an unusual amount of carbon monoxide in their systems after the Bristol race.
*Some of the teams had issues with the protective foam in the right side door overheating, melting and producing toxic fumes.
*Others had springs that failed, which they think may have happened to Biffle's car with it coming in too low after the race.
*Exhaust system failures, where pipes actually broke, this lead to Brian Vickers getting second degree burns on his feet and seat.
So far I've only heard that they are suggesting the teams use a thicker pipe for the exhaust system, supposedly teams were using thinner pipes for less weight. The other issue is that NASCAR has upped the allowable difference for minimum height to a half an inch, instead of a quarter of an inch until they figure out the car settles.
I haven't heard anything NASCAR has said about the foam issue, but I hope they address that problem before the drivers get into the cars.
Even with these problems, NASCAR is still saying that the debut of the COT went fine and I've even heard the term "without a hitch" used. If there were these problems, I wouldn't say it went without a hitch and all these problems should be addressed before the drivers have to get in the car.
Your thoughts?
March 30, 2007 in NASCAR | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451bce769e200d83527766369e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference NASCAR supposedly addressing COT problems:
Comments
To repeat, marc, since you're not gasping reality - aeropush IS INHERENT IN THE COT DESIGN AND SHOWS UP ANYWHERE IT RACES.
Posted by: Mike Daly | Apr 5, 2007 5:42:48 PM
marc, the facts are right there in front of you; reality supports my "opinion." Aeropush was there for you to see at bristol - if they weren't able to close up and pass with any frequency, and you could see with your own eyes that they couldn't, then they had an aeropush problem. What is there that you can't accept about it? Because drivers didn't come out and say it? Kyle Busch's slam was all you needed to hear about it from this race.
Here's the real challenge - cite some evidence that THERE WASN'T ANY AEROPUSH at Bristol. As if you can.
"So why use (the pending resurfacing) as an example in your argument?" You're the one who wants to make an issue of that, all I did was point out that the racing won't be made better with it.
Posted by: Mike Daly | Apr 5, 2007 5:41:43 PM
Daly: A prime example of how illogical you are follows,
"(and the resurfacing will do nothing to make it better because the place is junk and the surface is junk)"
You use as part of your argument the surface is junk yet readily admit it's being resurfaced. So why use it as an example in your argument?
Simple, you aint' got nothing else.
"how about accepting that aeropush is worsened by the COT instead of disputing its presense at this Bristol race?"
Yes, of course I and others are to bow down and capitulate before the all knowing Daly.
This despite the fact you provide nothing to support your argument beyond opinion. An opinion based on observation from hundreds if not thousands of miles from Bristol.
An opinion that still isn't supported by any drivers quotes of complaints of aero push at Bristol.
Got any?
I won't hold my breath waiting.
Posted by: marc | Apr 1, 2007 3:34:31 AM
So marc, how about accepting that aeropush is worsened by the COT instead of disputing its presense at this Bristol race?
Posted by: Mike Daly | Apr 1, 2007 12:29:24 AM
marc, when cars cannot close on each other, it's because of aeropush. You want to cite ride height and shock parameters as if the car's design isn't proving to be unsound.
This wasn't like that 80% of Bristol races you cite because in those races we saw more cars closing up and passing than we didn here. In fact literally everyone commenting on this race expressed surprise at how uncompetitive it was. Yes, Bristol races aren't competitive to begin with (and the resurfacing will do nothing to make it better because the place is junk and the surface is junk), but the COT made things worse.
"So what's your point?" This - aeropush is inherent in the COT design. It showed up at Bristol and will show up everywhere this garbage heap races.
And you have the nerve to talk about moving goalposts - the drivers didn't have to mention aeropush for you to see it at Bristol.
Posted by: Mike Daly | Apr 1, 2007 12:27:40 AM
Daly:
"Oh, like you couldn't tell watching the race? No one could close up on anyone until Burton and Gordon got fresh tires. All day long the cars rode, generally unable to pass..."
And of course YOU can tell (from a distence via TV) handling problems were because of aero-push.
It just isn't possible in "your world" that ride height (cited by drivers) and shock parameters (again cited by drivers) had absolutely nothing to do with it did it Daly?
" All day long the cars rode, generally unable to pass."
That describes about 80% of all Bristol events because it's a one groove track. Something that may change when they start to resurface startting Monday.
"And drivers have repeatedly noted during COT testing how it pushes worse in traffic than the flush-airdam/spoilered cars."
Have to hand it to you, when it comes to moving the goalposts you're a master.
The vast majority of testing has been on tracks other than Bristol. So what's your point?
In fact I'm still waiting for your driver quotes complaining about aero-push at Bristol.
Posted by: marc | Mar 31, 2007 7:29:12 PM
Just shut up and race the damn thing, all will work out in the end.
On another note, I read where Jeff Gordon said the only reason he was passing on the outside, was because he took the air off the car on the inside
Posted by: guarino | Mar 31, 2007 6:28:28 PM
NASCAR needs to address the issues that the teams found with the car and move on down the track. The splitter needs to have a major alteration to get rid of the sharp edges before some one gets seriously injured. According to pit crews they experienced cuts from the sharp edges and at least one tire was cut down on the track from a competitors splitter coming in contact while making a close pass.
Posted by: Jon | Mar 31, 2007 5:09:18 PM
marc, yes, aeropush on a high banked half-miler. They've been fighting that there for years - the leader was home free, the top five were secure, the rest of the field was trapped where they were. "Show me a driver quote that contains 'aeropush' in it." Oh, like you couldn't tell watching the race? No one could close up on anyone until Burton and Gordon got fresh tires. All day long the cars rode, generally unable to pass. And drivers have repeatedly noted during COT testing how it pushes worse in traffic than the flush-airdam/spoilered cars. As is normal, marc, you are wrong.
Posted by: Mike Daly | Mar 31, 2007 3:01:59 PM
Kurt2...you are right about the splitter. If it is sharp enough to cut a valve stem on the race track. Imagine what it will do in close pit stops to a crewman's leg or body. A race car without brakes, with the sharp splitter, could do a Texas Chain Saw Massacre on crew members. This could become a very serious problem on Sunday at Martinsville. The splitter is an issue that needs to be addressed immediately, while the fine tuning of the COT is taking place.
Posted by: jim | Mar 31, 2007 8:38:16 AM
Aero push?
On a high banked half mile?
As is the norm Daly, you're out to lunch and grasping at a straw to "demostrate" your long standing lack of support for the CoT.
Show me a single driver quote that contains "aero push" in it.
Posted by: marc | Mar 31, 2007 3:12:29 AM
We are beling allowed a few areas to work on, this was addressed this afternoon. We are going to have issues where ever the track is, its a new car, and just as with anything the "bugs need to be worked out".
Kat you only left out one issue, some teams had issues with the splitter cutting more than other teams tires,i.e hands, gloves, uniforms and arms.
It doesnt amtter and I cant believe I of all people am saying this , its not going to go away(THE CO NOW). So I have accepted and NASCAR is at least listening to us on what issues we all have.
Cant wait to have the tight and small pitroad Sunday. SHould be fun. NOT..
Posted by: Kurt2 | Mar 30, 2007 5:53:10 PM
One race with the COT. Just one race so far, problems were expected. To say that Nascar is "supposedly" addressing the COT problems is a little ridiculous. Of course they're going to address the problems! Jeez. fan has it right, it took several years to get the current (old? what the hell do I call the 'other' car now? COY?) car to the point it's at. We've seen all of one race on a non-aero dependent track to give it an official shake-down. It's a start. The thing is ugly standing still but I really didn't think it was that different looking with 43 of them on the track. Besides, not every Bristol race is a classic, that's people suffering from selective memory syndrome.
Posted by: canucken | Mar 30, 2007 5:05:48 PM
Ummmm good points Y'all but Danny "Chocolate" Meyers WAS a gasman! =) But I get yer drift anyhow
Posted by: Tbfka#5 | Mar 30, 2007 2:18:57 PM
The testing limits make even less sense now, trying to work the bugs out of a totally new, spec car design. If they had allowed more extensive testing under conditions closer to racing, perhaps they would have discovered some of these glitches before they tried to race it the first time.
Posted by: SallyB | Mar 30, 2007 1:00:34 PM
It's got 4 wheels and a motor, they will figure it out. It took many years of evolution to get the cars like they were before Bristol. It might not be the same racing as you were used to, but it will evolve just like it did before.
Posted by: fan | Mar 30, 2007 12:09:15 PM
Good call Mike...Precisely the way I see it.
For anyone who cares to intentionally use it, the splitter can take a tire off a competitor's car faster than Chocolate Myers. The COT will be unsafe at any speed on the super speedways...dega.
Posted by: jim | Mar 30, 2007 11:58:42 AM
NASCAR is in spin mode right now. When Robin Pemberton remarked that he noticed "a few more" small teams in the top-20 at Bristol, that signalled the spin cycle from NASCAR because one of the selling points of the COT was that it would allow smaller teams to race on an even keel with the big teams - never mind that those smaller teams were in the top-20 more because of attrition common to Bristol than because the COT suddenly took away advantages for the big teams.
The bigger problem with the COT remains that it is not a raceable design. At Bristol the leader was home free, the top five pretty secure where they were, and everyone else from sixth on back had no realistic straight-up chance to pass anyone. Drivers were trying to conserve their car so they wouldn't grind the splitter off; they could not afford to push the issue at any point of the race. The aeropush was not lessened at all; it looked worse in fact. In short the Bristol race merely illustrated all the failings the COT has shown in testing.
Posted by: Mike Daly | Mar 30, 2007 11:51:11 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
Advertisements
