Formula 1 vs. Nascar

[InFecTed]

I'm playing EA's F1 2002 now and just had to race the Indianapolis track. That made me think about Nascar and how boring the round tracks are. I'm a big fan of driving and driving simulations but making circles isn't my idea of fun. Watching F1 competions is far more entertaining IMO.

 

[BCYL]

F1 of course...

They dont even need to change gears while entering turns in Nascar! Just too boring to watch unless there's a crash...

 

[XZeroII]

Nascar uses more conventional parts though. It's like watching actual cars, wheras F1 is kinda like watching something completely different. There are still road courses in Nascar too.

 

[Lars]

Formula 1

 

[amdskip]

What people don't get is that Nascar tracks vary greatly in size and shape!

 

[VFAA]

Nascar. Been to Michigan and Daytona on a race 2 each times and I loved it.

F1? Too much politics. Team Ferrari that is :disgust:.

 

[StageLeft]

Nascar is for fat beer drinking ignorant hicks, no offense to those who watch it of course, but check out the average F1 crowd then go check out the average nascar crowd.

 

[CraigRT]

Nascar is for fat beer drinking ignorant hicks, no offense to those who watch it of course, but check out the average F1 crowd then go check out the average nascar crowd.

i concur!

 

[ElFenix]

nascar has two road courses which had to be straightened out for those boats to get around them in a timely fashion. the one problem F1 has is the almost complete inability for a pass to happen. nascar has far more problems than that, first of which is that its far more dangerous to compete in.

 

[BCYL]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
Nascar uses more conventional parts though. It's like watching actual cars, wheras F1 is kinda like watching something completely different. There are still road courses in Nascar too.

And do you see how many crashes occur during Nascar's road courses? On top of that, they have to widen the track for Nascar to run already!

 

[NFS4]

F1. NASCAR is boring and technologically deficient. At least we get cool sh!t from F1 like traction control, ABS, stability, systems, advanced engine management controls, 5-valve per cylinder technology, ceramic brakes, advanced crash sensors, carbon fiber construction experience, semi-automatic transmission, etc.

You name, F1 delivers it.

 

[Doggiedog]

Rally racing is more fun to me. Nothing like a huge power slide inches away from gawking Europeans!

 

[ElFenix]

ABS was airplanes, i thought.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Doggiedog
Rally racing is more fun to me. Nothing like a huge power slide inches away from gawking Europeans!

true that, rally is awesome! we need something like that over here! nothing like seeing a car tear it up down a rural road

 

[StattlichPassat]

...That made me think about Nascar and how boring the round tracks are. I'm a big fan of driving and driving simulations but making circles isn't my idea of fun. Watching F1 competions is far more entertaining IMO.

You bet your ascot. I hate NASCAR- driving a Lumina around in circles is not true motorsport racing. Le Mans is true motorsport racing, as is super touring cars, rally, F1 and others of the like. If you like F1 and types of realracing like that, check out motorsportvortex.com

 

[StattlichPassat]

Originally posted by: amdskip
What people don't get is that Nascar tracks vary greatly in size and shape!

Oh you're right- small ovals, and BIG ovals!

 

[VFAA]

LOL sounds like a flame war. My oval is bigger than yours!

GO NASCAR!

lol

 

[edro]

Playing Nascar 2002 at a LAN party with like 30 racers is FUN AS HELL!

On the real world side, it seems Nascar drivers depend more on their crew and the setup of the car, rather than their driving ability.

On a road course, I think it depends more on the driver than the car.

Just my opinion.... And no I am not saying Nascar drivers can't drive and they suck, I just think Formula One is "more" driver intensive.

 

[trmiv]

I'm sorry, but sitting behind your computer and playing a video game does not give you the experience to say whether racing a car on an oval track is boring or not. Please strap yourself into a 600-700 horsepower race car, and go door to door with other drivers every weekend, and then tell me that racing on an oval is boring. Unlike 99% of you chair jockies, I speak from experience in that I've actually driven race cars on both ovals, and road courses, neither of which is boring. I currently race NASCAR modifieds on ovals, and trust me, there is nothing boring about racing on an oval.

As far as the technology goes, let me tell you, 90% of race car drivers could give a flying fvck how technologically advanced the series they race in is, they just want to race. I race because I love driving race cars.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

I perfer NASCAR because it's good close racing. In F1 a draft is when a driver is 100' behind the guy infront of him. In NASCAR that 100' becomes 100" or less.


...and NASCAR _DOES_ do roadracing. They're at Sears Point this weekend (I almost went there this year)

Edit:
To me F1 cars are like glass hammers, they look good and all, but get in close and both cars shatter. How often do you see an F1 race where 20 cars fit into a single shot more than one lap after a green flag? Last year at Talledega 25 cars finished within 1 second of the leader. After 500 miles of green flag racing. F1 drivers have to worry about the road, NASCAR drivers have to worry about the wind patterns coming off the cars around them.

The road doesn't change from lap to lap, the wind patterns change constantly. A guy gets in too close and you'll find yourself backwards if you aren't paying attention. In F1 it's run what your sponsor bought you. In NASCAR it's run what YOU brung. F1 teams can't open up the engines, NASCAR teams can tear them down and rebuild them, they are the ones that fine tune the carburetors, they are the ones that tweak with the spark.

The pits? What's more exciting, a car drives in, a guy on each corner pulls one nut off as a guy on top inserts two tubes, then swap tires and put that nut back on as the guy removes the tubes, 13 seconds?! 14-16 seconds a NASCAR team has to run around the car, pull off 5 nuts as a guy runs over with a jack and lifts the vehicle, swap tires, put 5 nuts on, run to the OTHER SIDE of the car, repeat, in the meantime some burly guy holding an 11 gallon fuel canister just emptied it and went for a second.

To me, the lack of automation makes it more interesting.

In NHRA Pro Stock they outlawed airshifters and required manual shifters. Why? To make it more interesting. The drivers loved the change. Did it make them faster? HELL NO! Did it make it more fun? Hell yeah it did!



If you want all the high tech stuff, watch a shuttle launch. If you want racing, you gotta get in close.

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

I find NASCAR boring to watch, doesn't mean it is crap though. I'm sure there is tremendous skill involved to particiapte in it...but from a viewer's stand point, I find it boring. That said, NASCAR is not technology-deficient. Sure they are restricted to OHV V8, but those engine builders sure are efficient. They have to maximize hp and minimize weight/packaging using a strict set of rules. And there's a lot of engineering in their chassis/suspension/etc..just cause they don't use high-revving small discplacement V10s doesn't make them any less technological.

And to the guy who said F1 is all politics...isn't NASCAR based on politics as well? Always changing the rules if one team is faster than the other, making people slow down so there is a pack of cars, etc..

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
I find NASCAR boring to watch, doesn't mean it is crap though. I'm sure there is tremendous skill involved to particiapte in it...but from a viewer's stand point, I find it boring. That said, NASCAR is not technology-deficient. Sure they are restricted to OHV V8, but those engine builders sure are efficient. They have to maximize hp and minimize weight/packaging using a strict set of rules. And there's a lot of engineering in their chassis/suspension/etc..just cause they don't use high-revving small discplacement V10s doesn't make them any less technological.

And to the guy who said F1 is all politics...isn't NASCAR based on politics as well? Always changing the rules if one team is faster than the other, making people slow down so there is a pack of cars, etc..

I'm talking track --> road technology. Nascar uses old school engines, chassis, and suspension designs. Please don't tell me that live rear axles, 4 speed manuals, and roll cages are bleeding edge...

 

[BCYL]

Originally posted by: Doggiedog
Rally racing is more fun to me. Nothing like a huge power slide inches away from gawking Europeans!

Hell Yeah!

One little mistake and your car fly off the cliff... I still can't believe they can race at that speed in those environments...

 

[Atrail]

F1...

I can't believe Nascar is one of the faster growing sports events in America.
Watching guys make left turns for 3 hours is not my idea of fun.

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
I find NASCAR boring to watch, doesn't mean it is crap though. I'm sure there is tremendous skill involved to particiapte in it...but from a viewer's stand point, I find it boring. That said, NASCAR is not technology-deficient. Sure they are restricted to OHV V8, but those engine builders sure are efficient. They have to maximize hp and minimize weight/packaging using a strict set of rules. And there's a lot of engineering in their chassis/suspension/etc..just cause they don't use high-revving small discplacement V10s doesn't make them any less technological.

And to the guy who said F1 is all politics...isn't NASCAR based on politics as well? Always changing the rules if one team is faster than the other, making people slow down so there is a pack of cars, etc..

I'm talking track --> road technology. Nascar uses old school engines, chassis, and suspension designs. Please don't tell me that live rear axles, 4 speed manuals, and roll cages are bleeding edge...

Your probably right about the track-->road tech..and i wasn't arguing that.

But OHV engines aren't any more old-school than DOHC engines. Both were being used 'back in da day'...just that DOHC wasn't as popular as it is now. As for it being OHV, does it really matter? They need an engine that runs reliabily for 500 miles at near redline (i think 7.5k RPM on most NASCAR cars). The small-block OHV design is perfect for this.....and you need technology and engineering to make an engine like that reliabie.