Coulthard on NASCAR

[bhall]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/ind ... name=autos

DOVER, Del. -- The latest who-would-believe-it moment for NASCAR was seeing Formula One driver and proper Scottish chap David Coulthard in Dover to watch the Best Buy 400.

Coulthard is a NASCAR admirer. Who knew?

What's next? Queen Elizabeth having dinner at White Castle?

Coulthard knows that many Formula One fans turn down their noses at NASCAR, believing it's inferior racing to F1. But Coulthard says the F1 drivers don't see it that way.

"I don't think any of us look down at the driving talent here," Coulthard said. "If we poked fun in the past, it was the athletic side of it. There's a bigger spread in age and [physical] shape of the drivers here. But it had nothing to do with talent.''

Coulthard also doesn't buy the prevailing logic in Europe that no NASCAR driver could compete successfully in F1.

"I believe a NASCAR driver could adapt to a single-seater F1 car more quickly than we could in NASCAR," he said. "And I'm not just saying that to be nice because I'm here. The NASCAR drivers have to fight these heavy cars around these ovals. Any F1 driver understands how difficult that is. I have great respect for these guys.

Coulthard said the respect level for NASCAR is growing in Europe because of how difficult the Sprint Cup Series has been for open-wheelers Juan Pablo Montoya and Dario Franchitti.

"We've watched them very closely," Coulthard said. "People look at it and say, 'I know that guy is a credible driver, so the championship must be credible.'

"It would appear to be extremely difficult to come into NASCAR without oval experience and have any success. You either grow up racing ovals or you need to commit a long time to getting up to speed."

Coulthard said he has admired NASCAR for a long time because he likes the close competition in many events.

"For pure racing, NASCAR is as good as it gets," he said. "It's racing wheel-to-wheel for 36 weekends. We have half that many races, but I'd gladly do twice as many races if we could swap that out with the amount of testing we do in front of empty stands."

Coulthard drives for the Red Bull team in F1. He came to Dover to watch Brian Vickers and A.J. Allmendinger race for Red Bull's Cup team. Coulthard also is doing Red Bull promotions in conjunction with the F1 event in Montreal next weekend.

Coulthard sat in a Cup car Sunday morning.

"I felt like I'd never been in a race car before," he said. "You can't see anything. And it was hot not even running. The awareness the guys have to have is incredible.

"I would be extremely nervous jumping into NASCAR, never having driven an oval. I would be much more comfortable in a sports car on a road course."

Other than the cars, Coulthard was asked what he thought were the biggest differences between NASCAR and F1.

"F1 is a little less fan friendly," Coulthard said. "The NASCAR model succeeds because of the fan access. Fans can relate to the cars and drivers.

"F1 is a bit more aspiration oriented. Clearly, there's not as much access. You can't buy passes to be in the paddock area. Even people involved in the sport for many years can't get them for family and friends. But making it more difficult means more people want them."

Hmm.

[WhiteBlue]

So nothing we did not knew before except perhaps the preference for sports cars. with the battle between Audi and Peugeot shaping up teams are certainly looking more towards F1 drivers than they have done before. So it wouldn't be a surprise to see David in a Le Mans car when he calls it a day in F1.

One other good point is the race schedule he mentions. why he can have only 20 races and all this testing and sponsor duties is not easy to understand. it doesn't do much for F1. reliability is at unprecedented levels anyway and the teams could use the additional income from more races instead of cost for testing.

[Carlos]

IMO Coulthard is right - NASCAR take skills ... aspirations and access? He had best be careful with definitions, distinctions, ideas , being intelligent and earnest could be bad for his image as a nonchalant ordinary guy.
____________
Rand Gibbons

[Ray]

I've been saying all the things DC said for years. NASCAR gets no respect from other series worldwide. Everybody thinks it's for no talent hacks who can't race sports cars or do anything other than turn left. While the cars are basically spec cars, there is quite a bit of old school ingenuity in them, and over 900 horsepower from 358CI the revs to 10k for three hours or more is pretty advanced, in my book anyway. Maybe the F1 snobbery will be abated somewhat after a guy of DCs' caliber gives it props for being a good racing series that completely caters to the fans. It may seem they are to harsh or not harsh enough for infractions, but it's all about the show. They want to give the fans a good race week in and week out. Thanks DC for the kind words!

[donskar]

DC said:

"For pure racing, NASCAR is as good as it gets,"

That says a great deal.

I had the choice of a NASCAR race and an IndyCar race on TV yesterday and spent half my time jumping between the two races and the rest of my time watching the movie, The Thing. I much prefer F1 to any other kind of racing, but there is more RACING in the other series.

One other point usually overlooked: oval track racing requires surgical precision. Go a little wide on most F1 tracks and you're in the run-off area. Probably out of the race, but that's all. On an oval, get into the marbles and you're into the concrete wall; serious damage. Every corner on an oval is like that infamous corner at the Canadian GP. Just a little off line and you're done.

[ConsFW]

One other point usually overlooked: oval track racing requires surgical precision. Go a little wide on most F1 tracks and you're in the run-off area. Probably out of the race, but that's all. On an oval, get into the marbles and you're into the concrete wall; serious damage. Every corner on an oval is like that infamous corner at the Canadian GP. Just a little off line and you're done.

Yeah but for ovals there's only like two corners. In terms of walls and guardrails, Monaco looks pretty tough. The run-off areas are really for safety though.

[Ray]

One other point usually overlooked: oval track racing requires surgical precision. Go a little wide on most F1 tracks and you're in the run-off area. Probably out of the race, but that's all. On an oval, get into the marbles and you're into the concrete wall; serious damage. Every corner on an oval is like that infamous corner at the Canadian GP. Just a little off line and you're done.

Yeah but for ovals there's only like two corners. In terms of walls and guardrails, Monaco looks pretty tough. The run-off areas are really for safety though.

And Monaco is one race out of 18. There are 34 races like that in the NASCAR tour, leaving out the two road races. DC saying that NASCAR racing is as good as it gets says alot. F1 has what, a couple hundred million fans? NASCAR has way less than that and th racing is much better. I love F1, but from a pure spectator perspective, NASCARs treatment of fans is second to no one. It was sad to see Humpy Wheeler finally retire. H is a great showman and a vital part of NASCAR history. Every rookie that raced at Charlotte was invited to box Humpy, a twelve time Golden Glove boxer. Not many took up the offer. Can you imagine Bernie doing that?

[flynfrog]

I bet DC would take down Bernnie out with one punch

[Scotracer]

I bet DC would take down Bernnie out with one punch

All DC has to do is let them punch his chin, they'd break their hand and it's an easy win for DC -- no matter his opponent!

[Belatti]

... jumping between the two races and the rest of my time watching the movie, The Thing ...

... While the cars are basically spec cars, there is quite a bit of old school ingenuity in them, and over 900 horsepower from 358CI the revs to 10k for three hours or more is pretty advanced, in my book anyway...

mmm... 900hp seems too much, I have heard of 750hp and 9000rpm

The interesting thing is that they are all mechanical (distributor, carburator) and with camshaft being placed at the bottom of the engine (implies using push rods, no overhead camshaft)
Does somebody knows how many valves per cylinder they have?

If they have 2, its just like TC...

NASCAR: 750hp/5.8L = 129 hp/l
TC: 380hp/3.1L = 122 hp/l

They have very respectable values for engine blocks designed in the 70s... (even in the 60s for TC)

Sory for bothering everywhere with TC ...

A final thought... is DC cotnsidering to follow JPM?

[flynfrog]

they are two valve heads

and those engines were developed in the 50s

although I don't think there is a part on them that you could find in one of the original engines

[Belatti]

they are two valve heads

and those engines were developed in the 50s

although I don't think there is a part on them that you could find in one of the original engines

Yep, you are right, but then have been continously developed till 70´s.
Here they have been trying to reach 500hp on those 6cyl 3liter monsters by using aluminum cylinder heads with 4 valves, but it has been quite hard and reliability not as expected.

[Jersey Tom]

For a long time I thought Nascar was just oval after oval every weekend, boring crap turning left. All I watched was F1.

But I've gotten a lot more interested in Nascar as of late. Once you get to know the drivers a bit better, and the tracks.. its much more interesting. Even though the cars almost always "just turn left", there's a lot of variety in the tracks.

Road course (RARE but there's a couple)
Super speedway (a bit boring IMO, but it does take some real precision to really corner and keep on the line without scrubbing off any speed)
Martinsville is its own beast.. shaped like a paperclip. Drag race, hard braking zone, corner, power-down, drag race.
Pocono is shaped like a billiards ball rack..

It's interesting stuff. Can't say I'm a fan of the commentators or fans bein mostly redneck though

[RacingManiac]

AFAIK NASCAR motor do rev to 10k and sometimes beyond, which is pretty incredible consider it is still a pushrod OHV engine.....

And for an engine that's ~6 liter displacement, they make next to no usable torque at low rev......

[donskar]

Yes, the engines are V8s with 2 overhead valves operate by cam-in-block through push rods.

But they were not really developed in the 50s. The Toyota V8 is a very recent design; the Chevy is just a few years old (the current Chevy small block V8 has few if any parts that interchange with earlier generations) and the Ford is a little older.

BUT, yes, the basic design goes back to the 50s, when Cadillac and Chevy broke new ground. Imagine a ~ 6 liter V8 running 9,000 RPM + with PUSHRODS! And all that HP with a carburetor! Those guys have developed carburetors to the point where the new Chrysler "Hemi" develops more power with a carb than the same engine with FI. Superior development of an outmoded design.