NFS4 and Othe NASCAR Haters

[Pacfanweb]

<<The driver? Anybody can run around making left turns all day and downshift and upshift every once in a while. What's so special about that? >>

Try it and you'll see. Plenty of drivers from other sports have tried to come to Winston Cup racing and failed. Maybe plenty of Cup drivers would fail at F1 racing....who knows. What I do know is you have no basis in truth to say anyone could race Winston Cup just because they only turn left.

Different forms of racing require different skills. If you and I went to the drag strip and started bracket racing, unless you've been doing it for a long time, you'd be lucky to win one round. But by your reasoning, drag racing should be easy because they only go straight. Anybody can do that too, right?

Like it or not, Formula 1 is all about the car. There is some awesome technology on display there, but the same few people seem to win most of the races and championship, and they don't switch teams every year and keep on winning. The car makes a difference in Cup racing also, but the driver is very critical.

Also, yes, Earnhardt is the greatest driver ever in Nascar, hands down. Petty has more wins, but nobody will ever touch that mark since they don't race 3 times a week anymore. Nascar didn't try to keep everyone competitive back then like they do now, either.

 

[GL]

How anyone can even begin to compare the likes of an F1 driver to that of a NASCAR one just boggles the mind. Since only Americans seems to think this way (and of these Americans, only a small percentage) I'm not quite sure what to think but that they are heavily biased towards the homegrown NASCAR.

F1 drivers are phenomenally talented and athletic. The same cannot be said about a NASCAR driver and I'd dare anyone to prove me wrong. The amount of heat, G-forces and mind-numbing noise that an F1 driver must deal with during a race puts about 99% of the human population out of contention for their job. These people are athletes, and that's why you don't see overweight F1 drivers - the same cannot be said about NASCAR. The amount of skill required to handle a course like Monza, Monaco, or Imola is tremendous. Each and every course is different, and not by varying degrees like NASCAR ovals, but by leaps and bounds.

Look at the following circuit description for San Marino's Imola:



<< Tamburello is the first corner from the start and cars brake heavily at its entrance. The corner is a left-handed S-bend which is entered in 3rd gear at 75 mph and exited in 4th gear at 125 mph as cars power up the straight to Villeneuve. This is a second S-bend that slows the approach to the forthcoming hairpin and slows cars down from 130 mph to 105 mph in 4th gear. Accelerating quickly up to 150 mph, cars almost immediately brake for Tosa, a tight hairpin from right to left taken in 2nd gear at around 55 mph. On exit, cars accelerate to 175 mph and climb towards Piratella. This is a somewhat blind left-hander that pulls -3.5g as drivers brake at its entrance, it is taken in 4th gear at 100 mph and accelerated away from at 160 mph. Despite its nature it is a corner well liked by most drivers.
The approach to Acque Minerali is downhill at 130 mph - a very bumpy and uncomfortable chicane that turns slowly right and finally sharply right with cars down to 70 mph and 3rd gear at its tightest point. Pulling away the track swings slightly left at 100 mph.

Variante Alta is next and, coming off a short straight, it is a fast chicane that can be tackled in 3rd gear - it certainly requires a 3rd-gear exit. It is entered in 6th gear at 170 mph and speeds of 75 mph are maintained through it. Drivers tend to take more chances at this chicane because it does have a safe run-off area.

Out of the chicane and the track plunges downhill through some stunning countryside, arriving at a sharpish double left-hander called Rivazza which swings the cars through 180 degrees. This requires very hard braking, down from 6th (180 mph) to 3rd gear (60 mph) at its entrance where a massive -3.8 g really tests the driver's strength. Shifting up briefly before changing down to tackle the final turn, which is taken at 80 mph, the cars arrive on a curving right-hand line and fly through the Variante Bassa, accelerating all the time up to 170 mph. The Tragurdo then looms up as a left-right chicane that feeds the pits and is taken in 2nd gear at around 55 mph. Cars then accelerate to 185 mph across the Start-Finish line.
>>



Now, the same description for a NASCAR circuit would go something like this:

Turn 1, left-hand turn cars enter at 195mph, and exit at 195mph into a completely open straightaway.

Turn 2, see Turn 1.

Turn 3, see Turn 1.

Turn 4, see Turn 1.

Note: Actually, the turns are slightly different and the angles of the banked curves are also different, but these differences can be easily offset by fine-tuning the tire setup.

NASCAR = Elementary school track meet

F1 = Ironman

Now, as far as fun factor goes, NASCAR may be your cup of tea, but don't try to say it's the pinnacle of racing because it is not. The WWF may be fun to watch but nobody's kidding themselves and trying to argue that those guys are the epitome of great athletes.

-GL

 

[Pacfanweb]

<<At any given time, there are only two or three people capable of driving (riding) the best equipment on the earth to full capability.>>

Wrong. Do you think the car owners in F1 have come over here and checked out every driver in Nascar, Cart, IRL, IMSA, SCCA, etc, and decided who was the best for F1? Of course they haven't. They don't pick and choose what drivers they want, and leave the rest for other types of racing.
That's like saying that the only people in the world capable of playing in the NFL are over here playing right now. That isn't the case, it's just that people in other countries don't play football, so you don't know what they can do.
People here don't even try to race F1 for the most part. It's not that drivers here aren't capable. They are doing what they love, and probably what they have grown up loving. European drivers grow up watching F1, so that's what they want to do. Some of them would probably be good round track drivers if given the chance. I'd say there are at least 5 drivers in Winston Cup that could be competitive in F1 if they chose to seek a ride there. There are multiple drivers in Cart and Indy cars that could race there and do well. There is nothing mystical about F1 cars. F1 racing is just like any other form of road racing; only the car is different. F1 cars aren't vastly more powerful than Cart cars, just different. F1 cars may have a little bit more horsepower, but not enough to make them a whole different world of driving.

<<Just because 43 drivers can stay fairly close to each other for 500 miles on a banked oval does not mean a single one of them could even qualify for an F1 event>>

Doesn't mean they couldn't qualify either. I'd bet my house that the top, say, 5 Nascar drivers could adapt to F1 racing and qualify with no problem in the same amount of time that the top 5 F1 drivers could consistently qualify in Nascar.
F1 cars are no doubt have the most cutting edge technology, but they have the same humans driving them that other top series do. To say the drivers there are the best just because they drive the best cars, well, there is no fact there...just opinion.

 

[GL]

Slap

I saw the Sly Stallone movie being shot here in Toronto. It looks wicked. They had Indy cars racing down University Ave. in our downtown business district and pulling skids and donuts through &quot;traffic&quot; at intersections. I actually would have signed up to be an extra and drive my car in the traffic if I had known about the movie before hand. They actually had the stunt car drivers weaving in and out of traffic at about 100km/h (~60mph) and then pulling the skids at intersections. All of this was being shot by cameras on either side of the road, a helicopter camera and another camera 150 feet up on a crane.

The movie wreaked havoc on traffic though The reason I saw the movie is cuz I had headed downtown on a Friday night but got stuck in major traffic (University Ave. runs north-south and effectively cuts off all east-west traffic through the left-portion of Toronto). I decided to ditch the car at a parking lot after going about 1 km (0.6 mile I think) in half an hour. I heard the echo of Indy car drivers off some of the buildings and decided to go take a look...and low and behold it was the Stallone flick being shot. Geez, that week they were also shooting the Mariah Carey movie, and like 5 others in about a 10km square block of the city...not so nice for traffic!

-GL

 

[Pacfanweb]

<F1 drivers are phenomenally talented and athletic. The same cannot be said about a NASCAR driver and I'd dare anyone to prove me wrong. The amount of heat, G-forces and mind-numbing noise that an F1 driver must deal with during a race puts about 99% of the human population out of contention for their job. These people are athletes, and that's why you don't see overweight F1 drivers <>>

I don't recall seeing many fat Nascar drivers, either, at least not any good ones.
Prove you wrong? No problem. On hot days at Bristol, drivers have been known to lose 15-20 POUNDS during a race. You don't think that's hard? The heat, G-forces, and mind numbing noise of an F1 car pale in comparison to a Winston Cup car. Maybe the G-forces favor the F1 car, but the Cup car is way ahead in the other 2. First of all, turbo cars aren't as loud as high compression, normally aspirated cars. Heat-wise, you have no facts to back you up. I'd say a closed in, full-bodied car is hotter than an open wheel car.
One other thing...I'd like to see an F1 driver more physically fit then Mark Martin.

I actually like F1, but totally disagree with the elitist point of view that it is better simply because the cars are faster. That simply isn't true. If you like F1 better, that's great, but the fact that you like it doesn't make all the drivers there better than all the other drivers in the world. You are basically saying all the drivers everywhere aspire to race F1, but can't because they aren't good enough. That is totally wrong.
Nascar is the major league of stock car racing, Cart/Indy cars are the major league of American open-wheel racing, and F1 is the major league of European open-wheel racing. They all have different rules that have evolved along the way, and cars are built accordingly. Drivers are drivers. A good driver can drive most any car well if given time to get used to it.

 

[Pacfanweb]

damn, first time I ever double posted.

 

[GL]

Pacfanweb

Good God who are you kidding...let's pull out some specs for a comparison of cars:

Let's take a look at Team Jordan's Honda:



<< Technical Specifications

CHASSIS Full carbon fibre composite monocoque.

FRONT SUSPENSION Composite pushrods activating chassis mounted Penske dampers and torsion bars, unequal length aerodynamic wishbones, composite top and bottom wishbones, titanium fabricated uprights and front anti-roll bar.

REAR SUSPENSION Composite pushrods activating gearbox mounted Penske dampers, unequal length aerodynamic wishbones, composite wishbones, titanium fabricated uprights and rear anti-roll bar.

TRANSMISSION In-house Jordan Grand Prix design.6 speed + reverse longitudinal gearbox with electrohydraulic sequential gear change.

WHEEL BASE 3050mm
FRONT TRACK 1500mm
REAR TRACK 1418mm
OVERALL HEIGHT 950mm
OVERALL LENGTH 4550mm
OVERALL WEIGHT 600kg with driver
CLUTCH Triple plate Jordan/Sachs racing clutch
BRAKES Brembo braking system
WHEELS Forged OZ Racing to Jordan GP specification
TYRE Bridgestone
FUEL CAPACITY Over 100kg

Engine Specifications

ENGINE Mugen-Honda MF-301 HE
TYPE OF ENGINE V10 Normal aspiration
CAPACITY 3.0 litres
BRAKE HORSEPOWER Over 770ps
OVERALL LENGTH Under 620mm
OVERALL WIDTH Under 520mm
OVERALL HEIGHT Under 400mm
CYLINDER HEADS 4 valves per cylinder
INJECTION SYSTEM Honda PGM-F1
IGNITION SYSTEM Honda PGM-1G
>>



..or how about Ferrari F1 specs:



<< Chassis: Ferrari F310B
Engine: Ferrari 046/2 V10
Tyres: Bridgestone
Fuel/oil: Shell
Brakes (discs): Carbone Industrie
Brakes (calipers): Brembo
Transmission: Ferrari 7 gears
Plugs: NGK
Electronic mgt: Magneti Marelli
Wheels: BBS
Suspensions: push rods (ft/bk)
Dry weight: 600kg, including driver
Wheelbase: 2935mm
Total length: 4358mm
Total height: 968mm
Front track: 1690mm
Rear track: 1605mm

Engine Specification:

Output: 760 hp at 14800 rpm
Max speed: 15300 rpm
Weight: 140 kilos
Capacity: 2998.1 cc
Configuration: 75 degrees V10
Material: iron block
Valves: 4 per cylinde
>>



And now let's take a look at Winston Cup Car specifications for a Chevy:



<<
Chevrolet
HEIGHT (inches) 51
WEIGHT (pounds) 3400
WHEEL BASE (inches) 110
ENGINE 358 c.i
INDUCTION Holley 750-830 CFM 4-Barrell Carburetor
HORSEPOWER @ (RPM) 720@8500
TORQUE (ft/lb @ RPM) 525 @ 6000
TRANSMISSION 4spd. man.
WHEELS (inches) 9.5 x 15
FUEL AND FUEL CELL 104 octane gasoline / 22 gallon capacity fuel cell
BRAKES Four-wheel disc brakes on all NASCAR Winston Cup Series cars
CHASSIS Fabricated rectangular steel tubing with integral roll cage
FRONT SUSPENSION Independent coil springs/twin control (A) arms
REAR SUSPENSION Trailing arms, coil springs, panhard rod, full floating axle
>>



Comparing the cars simply by the horsepower is like comparing CPUs by MHz. Goodness, the F1 car is so much more lighter and still has more horsepower! Plus the engine reaches about 8000 more rpm, there are up to 3 more gears in the transmission, 2 more cylinders...and these are only differences in the engine and not just the car itself.

 

[GL]

Pacfanweb



<< First of all, turbo cars aren't as loud as high compression, normally aspirated cars. >>



I'm glad we got that out of the way. F1 cars are normally aspirated and do not incorporate turbos. They also have higher compression ratios than NASCAR engines.



<< I don't recall seeing many fat Nascar drivers, either, at least not any good ones. >>



I don't recall seeing any fat F1 drivers. In fact, their weight is quite significant to the design of the car and any respectable F1 car specs will note the weight of the car including the driver's weight.



<< I actually like F1, but totally disagree with the elitist point of view that it is better simply because the cars are faster. >>



Actually, I don't think it is better because the cars are faster. The average speeds of a NASCAR during a race is always faster than that of a F1 car during a race. Look at the course description I provided above to give you a bit of an idea of what an F1 driver must cope with. The drivers are better because they must cope with a much more dynamic and complex race environment, and they do so at breakneck speed. NASCAR drivers cope well with their uni-dimensional racing, but F1 is much more complex than that. I think F1 drivers are better than NASCAR drivers because they must deal with this complexity and they do so remarkably well.

And F1 is not all about the car. Every season a totally new car is developed. And every season F1 drivers must become accustomed to this new car. Everyone knows how technically superior the F1 cars are to NASCAR, and this superiority usually lends itself to drastic changes from season to season. You can have the best car in the series, but if your driver hasn't gotten used to that car, your team isn't going anywhere.

-GL

 

[lupin]

F1 is NOT about who drives the best car.

Although passing has become a rarity in today's F1, I think it's still the most important aspect of it. Let's see what an F1 driver has to do to pass a car:
1. Brake as late as possible. So you'll gain the speed advantage you need to pass the next car.

How do you know where's the optimum braking point?? With the number of variables out there, an optimum brake point in one lap will be different in the next lap. With ~50 laps or more, and multiple corners in a lap, that translates to ~200 brake points in a race. Again, in that ~200 brake points, you'll have to keep your braking point at the optimum.

This is driving AT the car's limits. If you make a mistake just once, there are a great chance of injury, or fatality.

You need to have the GUTS to brake late. And you need to have the BRAIN to calculate the variables and come up with the brake point.

If you don't drive at the limits, there is no way for you to win.

2. Mental pressure. In order to pass somebody, you have to pressure your opponent so that he'll miss his racing line, or you have to take over his racing line. You are closing up on the next car, trying to squeeze him to the outside bank, or even the grass.

What if he doesn't give in??
- You might have to brake, which might result in your car understeering, spin, and BAM!!
- You might be forced out to the grass yourself. Spin, and BAM!
- You might run into his car. Spin, BAM!

Although in NASCAR have mental games similar to this, I don't think the consequences are as fatal.

 

[Futuramatic]

GL, you should think before you speak. I would love to hear you spout that rhetoric at 190MPH. Take a RIDE in one of these machines and tell me it isn't challenging.

You get out into a NASCAR race car in the middle of August at Darlington, wiht the oil, exhaust, and brakes heating the inside of tha car to nearly 130 degrees and tell me it sint physically demanding. NASCAR drivers drive with broken limbs, torn muscles, 105 degree fevers, and the list goes on. I would put Mark Martin up against any of your F1 drivers anyday of the week in a physical challenge. That man is a fanatic about his physical condition, as many of the NASCAR drivers are. NASCAR requires alot of both the drivers AND the pit crew. Do you think that F1 pit crews could change 4 tires w/ 5 lugs a piece and dump 22 gallons of fuel in the car in 14.1 seconds? Haha... not a chance. Many of the team shops have weight rooms. No scratch that, I bet ALL of them do.

As far as complexity... sure, F1 has more twists and turns. So? They can't bump-n-grind like NASCAR's can. That is what makes it exciting. You touch wheels in an open wheel car at 190 MPH, you have at least 2 cars outta the race. NASCAR was built around >GUESS WHAT?!?!< CARS!! True it has evolved from its original form, but all racing does that. NASCAR is an art, just as F1. NASCAR drivers would have to adjust to F1 if they were to try it, but so would F1 drivers if they switched to NASCAR.

NASCAR has road races at Sears Point and Watkins Glen. Only 2, and I would like to see more, but that isn't what the sport revolves around. The sport was established so that the Big 3 automakers could show off their cars. It is has evolved into a showcase of speed and talent (both in the driver and in the crews).

NASCAR's evolve from season to season also. Hell, they have multiple cars for multiple tracks. just this year there have been DRASTIC changes in the rules, many of which occured for just the LAST RACE. These changes were announced the DAY BEFORE the event. Don't tell me NASCAR drivers don't have to adapt. In reference to your power numbers... Do you know that in SOME races, NASCAR has to use restrictor plates to REDUCE power cause the cars go so fast?

NASCAR may not be the &quot;pinnacle&quot; of automotive racing, but that doesn't meant F1 is. I am not crapping on F1 because it has its place and that is fine. But NASCAR is also a complex sport deserving of respect.

And yet still NOBODY has answered my question. Why do open wheel drivers (Indy/CART/etc.) move TO NASCAR, but I have yet to hear of a modern era NASCAR driver to switch to open wheel? Don't tell me its cause the open wheel drivers that switched werent any good, because they are prominent names in open wheel.

lupin-
You don't think driving it to the brink in NASCAR can prove fatal!?!? Want me to name 3 drivers that have DIED this year doing just that? And one just this last Saturday? hve you ever seen a NASCAR BURST into flames? the deaths in NASCAR are fewer becuase they don't try to strip the car down to four tires, and engine, and a seat. They build in A LOT of safety, even at the cost of performance.

You don't think that NASCAR drivers don't have to do all those things that you just decribed? Are you NUTS?? Have you ever SEEN a NASCAR race?

 

[lupin]

oh,
and in NASCAR, the cars itself might be pretty hi-tech. The problem is, it's TOTALLY different than the production car. So, the NASCAR cars become faster and faster. The production cars still sucks in performance.

in Touring Car racing, when there is a need for a faster car, the manufacturer have to upgrade the specs of the production cars. This is how sports sedans are born.

No offense, but the only significant thing about American sedans are its size.

-edit-


<< The sport was established so that the Big 3 automakers could show off their cars. It is has evolved into a showcase of speed and talent (both in the driver and in the crews). >>



Showcase of speed and talent?? Giant left turning billboards you mean??

 

[trmiv]

GL: What do all of those specs you posted about the engines of F1 cars vs. Winston cup cars have to the talent of the drivers? Pacfanweb freely admitted that F1 cars are the most technologically advanced in the world. His point is about the drivers, same as mine. Great race car drivers are great race car drivers, period. I don't care if their driving F1, Indy Cars, Stock cars, Sprint cars, or sports cars. If someone is a talented race car driver, they can drive and win in anything. You have absolutely no idea what it takes to strap on a helmet and race competitively in anything, so the fact that you even try to say Winston Cup drivers don't have the talent of F1 drivers is absurd.



Futuramatic: I'd say the reason you don't see NASCAR drivers going to Indy Cars, IRL, or (gasp) F1, is, why would they leave a good thing? Good Winston Cup drivers make a ton of money, have a very large and extremely loyal fanbase, and they race in a series where there are 10-15 guys that have a legit shot at winning every week. Plus, for most of these guys, stock car racing is where they grew up (except for guys like Jeff Gordon, Tony Stewart and Ken Schrader), so it's what they love doing.

 

[lupin]

<< They build in A LOT of safety, even at the cost of performance. >>



So what's those grooved tires in F1 for??

 

[Futuramatic]

Your not American are you? Just observing...

-edit- Why yes you are... just saw your profile

Hmm. Could you AFFORD the production cars that they put together though? I do not know anything about the Touring Car series. I would have to argue that the Monte Carlo SS isn't junk though... While I am a Ford guy, I do like that car and it can haul...

 

[Futuramatic]

I would assume that they are for traction on both wet and dry. Is this a trick question?

lupin - Your from Indiana? Where? I'm Ft. Wayne

 

[Futuramatic]

trmiv-

Tony Stewart I knwo didnt grow up in NASCAR, but Gordon started Winston Cup full-time in 1993 when he was 22.. .and he drove Busch before that. I know he did some dirt track, but over 1/3 of his life has been in NASCAR.

If you saw today's... err... yesteray's race, you would revise that 10-15 number. 27 different leaders!! Over 50 lead changes!! Mighty fine race!

 

[lupin]

<< You don't think driving it to the brink in NASCAR can prove fatal!?!? >>



DID I EVER SAY THAT?? Dammit.

I said F1 is more fatal than NASCAR.

Think about this: which can take more impact: Full body cars with roll cages, or Carbon Fiber?? Take a material class.


Listen,
I'm not bashing NASCAR drivers. EVERY form of motorsport are DANGEROUS and can be FATAL.

I'm just responding to the idiot who says F1 is only about cars. I don't even remember his name now.

My second post, is just a slightly off topic post with nothing to do with the drivers.

 

[lupin]

Futuramatic:


<< I would assume that they are for traction on both wet and dry. >>



Hint: F1 cars have the choice of running on wet tires, or dry tires or combination of both in a race.



Peace man.
I go to Purdue.

-edit-


<< Hmm. Could you AFFORD the production cars that they put together though? I do not know anything about the Touring Car series. I would have to argue that the Monte Carlo SS isn't junk though... While I am a Ford guy, I do like that car and it can haul... >>



Maybe you're right. Let's not get into an American vs. European vs. Japanese cars.

It's sickening.

 

[GL]

Futuramatic

I'd sure spout my rhetoric. Taking 4 turns per track at 190mph doesn't even compare to taking several twists and turns, each at varying speeds, sometimes getting -4g of force applied to you. Just look at it from a technical standpoint. If you were to design a robot to drive both cars...which robot would require more programming? You could say that the NASCAR driver robot would have to handle bumps ....like the F1 driver robot wouldn't have to either? I've seen plenty of F1 drivers racing while part or all of their front spoiler has been torn off from a minor bump.

And the fact that F1 cars don't touch is what makes it exciting. When you have a pack of open-wheel cars, touching can be a death spell. The fact that they can drive so closely and pass without making contact makes it exciting.

trmiv

This is why I posted the specs...here's a quote from Futuramatic:



<< F1 cars may have a little bit more horsepower, but not enough to make them a whole different world of driving >>



The specs I posted show that the cars are indeed a whole different world of driving. Futuramatic implied that since the cars aren't that different, then Winston Cup car drivers could drive F1 cars. I correctly pointed out that the cars are indeed completely different so he couldn't make that assumption.

And how can you make such sweeping statements like the one you made about me not ever strapping on a helmet so I don't know what racing is like? I'm a fricken member of a go-kart club here in Toronto. That's racing, albeit on a smaller scale although the scale speeds are high.

-GL

 

[Futuramatic]

Yeah, NASCAR doesn't run on wet, so its basically one tire

I do not try to take anything away from F1 as a sport or its drivers. It is a great racing circuit. F1 requires wicked cars with drivers to match. NASCAR requires no less. It just requires it in different ways. My preference lies with NASCAR. Yours is obviously with F1/road racing circuits.

Anyhow... its way past my bedtime... Good Luck at Purdue!! Go Boilers!!

 

[Futuramatic]

GL-

That isn't my quote. Sorry.

 

[lupin]

This is funny:



<< Slap, Futuramatic: Arguing with NSF4 about racing is completely pointless. As someone pointed out in a previous thread, if it isn't cool in Road and Track or Car and Driver, it isn't cool with him. I've already tried to explain to him what great drivers the Winston Cup guys are, but since their not driving sports cars or F1 he doesn't want to listen. >>



Hehe...
Sorry NFS4, but after reading your posts for a while now, I think he's right.

Sell your camry and buy a go-kart.

That'll really change the way you think.

It's not too late man... Just Do It.

 

[GL]

Sorry Futuramatic...got your quote mixed up with Pacfanweb's So in response to Trmiv, I posted those specs because of Pacfanweb's assertion...

-GL

 

[trmiv]

Futuramatic:


<< Tony Stewart I knwo didnt grow up in NASCAR, but Gordon started Winston Cup full-time in 1993 when he was 22.. .and he drove Busch before that. I know he did some dirt track, but over 1/3 of his life has been in NASCAR. >>



You are missing a good portion of Jeff Gordon's career there. He started racing in quarter midgets when he was a kid, then moved to Sprint Cars when he was 13(!!). Before he got into Busch cars he won championships in USAC Midgets, and USAC Silver Crown cars at age 19 (youngest ever to do so). Plus he won a lot of races in USAC sprint cars. All open wheel cars, on dirt and pavement. I first saw him race when he was 16, down at Ascot park in Gardena(I also met him that weekend too). He's always been able to stand on the gas, and comes from open wheel dirt track racing, that's why I have always had a ton of respect for Jeff even though a lot of people don't like him

 

[Futuramatic]

NP buddy

I really mean it when I say I do not take anything from F1 racing. I will, however, defend NASCAR to my grave. I just plain love it, as I am sure you love F1. Like I said earlier, I would LOVE for NASCAR to put more road courses on their schedule. Anyway... it is now really way past my bedtime....