No, they explain why IndyCar is faster.Originally Posted by PenelopePitstop
They are, but you refuse to accept it.Wouldn't it be easier to just be faster on Race Day?
Not since 1976 or so, but I didn't exactly commit that to memoryLike NASCAR has done all season.
"Each day well lived makes every yesterday a dream of happiness and every tomorrow a vision of hope. Look well therefore to this one day for it, and it alone, is life"
~ Sanskrit poem attributed to Kalidasa, "Salutation to the Dawn"
Brian's Wish
Maybe we can get the two on the same track on the same day. Or superimpose them with CGI think it would be impressive, but IndyCar has of course always been afraid to burn that bridge.
Why? They (F1) did that with Jeff Gordon and Juan. Then they Did it with Tony and Lewis.Maybe we can get the two on the same track on the same day. Or superimpose them with CG
Look, quit with it. We all know, IC is faster, quicker. This campaign would be aimed at the casuals. THEY wont give a sh**.
All your trying to do, is tell %98 of the fans were faster, and "cooler". They wont give a sh**. They have all their favorite drivers and personalities, saying your faster wont do jack sh**.
Why doesn't the NHRA run this campaign, they'd dust this argument, "who's faster". They dont. Its over T-13.
The days of bragging and showing the world, of closed course records are over. If this were the era with Gil and PT yes. Its not.
Speed doesn't sell. Its one part of it.
Somebody sold them cigarettes that could kill them, I think we should be able to sell some speed.This campaign would be aimed at the casuals. THEY wont give a sh**.
On which green-flag lap in Sunday's race did any Indycar exceed 165mph? On which green-flag lap in Sunday's race did Cup cars fail to exceed 165mph?
On which green-flag lap in Sunday's race did any Indycar exceed 165mph? On which green-flag lap in Sunday's race did Cup cars fail to exceed 165mph?They are, but you refuse to accept it.
Rational viewers understand why indycar turned slower laps as well as my rational 2 year old understands that applesauce and orange juice are different.
The new cars are lighterweight pigs that don't impress, but the battle of semantics doesn't seem to have a point. Indycars run at a lower mean velocity during street and road courses than NASCAR does on ovals. Indycars can run at higher mean speeds than NASCAR on ovals. Where is the point?
On which green-flag lap in Sunday's race did any Indycar make a lap on a 2.0 mile oval?
On which green-flag lap in Sunday's race did Cup cars make a lap on a 1.8 mile road/street course?
Which runs faster average laps at Fontana?
Martinsville vs Barber this weekend. Apples and bananas.
25?
new sig pending
Is the truth painful? Last Sunday INDYCAR lapped at less than 103mph while NASCAR lapped at 175+mph. The choice of tracks was unfortunate, but INDYCAR made that choice, not me. Your pain is misdirected.
Yes, they ran slower because they chose to do so.
Laps, shmaps, IndyCar was topping 160 mph on city streets last weekend.
They were also accelerating, decelerating, and cornering faster than NASCAR ever has. By the standard of most rational, informed people, that's being faster.
Meanwhile, My Honda went 70 mph on I-74 again, and NASCAR went 0. By your logic, I'm faster. Pretty meaningless standard.
Last edited by Turn13; 03-31-2012 at 10:34 PM.
They ran the speed they did because of the laws of physics. The same laws make NASCAR slower, in every situation.
IndyCar always performs at a greater capacity of being fast, performs at a higher percentage of the physical limits of speed. They choose tracks that showcase and demonstrate that (and, uh, where they can attract enough of the people who appreciate it)
NASCAR always performs at a lesser capacity.
We need more people who can appreciate that. Sometimes, we need to help them understand it. Sometimes, we just need to remind them.
You are helping us do a wonderful job
NASCAR Martinsville Pole: 97.128 mph
IndyCar Barber Pole: 117.485 mph
The fact that Indycar can go far faster on a road course than NASCAR does on an oval (albeit, their slowest) just shows how much faster they are.
This business of comparing 'week to week' is completely pointless. Indycar ran a road race this weekend, F1 didn't. Does that make Indycar's faster around a RC than F1? Of course not, not reasonable (or just sane) fan is ever going to try and claim "but Indycar won the speed contest this weekend" based simply on the fact that F1 cars weren't racing.
If you went only an F1 forum and tried, I think you would get laughed out of the place.
I agree:
I've already acknowledged NHRA and F1 for being faster at what they do. No problem
Yep. INDYCAR raced faster than NASCAR this weekend.
Comparing the head to head offerings of both series this year the score is 1-1.
Fortunately, only my detractors have offered that claim as reasonable. I think their analysis is laughable, too.
My claim is that NASCAR presents a faster "product" more often to the general racing fan base than does INDYCAR without excuses. If you want to dispute that claim you are welcome to join the party.
As to providing a faster product for the fans on weekends that the competition is idle, are we to discount the fact that their product was available on the market while the others were experiencing supply issues? If your product isn't on the shelf it isn't going to sell.
Physics. It works every time...
... it's tried.
(Sorry, couldn't resist...)
Even when NASCAR is faster on Race Day.
Trouble is, nobody wants a physics lesson on Sunday, they just want to know who was faster. And the answer to that question, more often than not this year, will be "NASCAR".
I notice you don't have to list your long list of excuses when INDYCAR actually runs faster on Race Day. No diatribes about banking angles or curve radius of who braked faster or any other reasons as to why INDYCAR was actually slower. Please also notice that I offer no excuses or any type of reasons as to why NASCAR was slower on Sunday - they were, plain and simple. Faster is faster, slower is slower. No excuses.
See you next Race Day. Try to keep your whining to a minimum that day, OK?
Well, it's partly true. NASCAR offers a "product" (oval track races) more often than IndyCar.My claim is that NASCAR presents a faster "product" more often to the general racing fan base than does INDYCAR without excuses. If you want to dispute that claim you are welcome to join the party.
BTW:
NASCAR pole speed (fastest car) at Martinsville: 97.128 mph
IndyCar 26th place qualifier (slowest car) at Barber: 112.907 mph
IndyCar Barber race: Winners average speed: 102.081
I'm sure NASCAR will correct this, but right now the website shows average race speed at Martinsville was 0.000 mph (for reference, the record average race speed is 82.223 - 09/22/96)
I think many of us would consider that 'head to head' offering would include the participants competing on comparable playing fields, not just the same date.Comparing the head to head offerings of both series this year the score is 1-1.
Well played.
IndyCar will always be faster on race day.
Of course, the only time you can compare the two is when they are compete on the same track - even if it is at different times. And so far that has only happened at Fontana this year.
And not surprisingly, the only whining in this thread is your own.
Last Sunday (3/25) NASCAR raced at a much faster pace than INDYCAR. That ain't whining, it's FACT.
The whining will be in the negative responses that follow.
Last edited by PenelopePitstop; 04-02-2012 at 11:50 AM.
surely penelopepitstop has a bet with one of his buddies to see how long he can continue to argue completely unsupportable positions.
...that's the only thing i can figure
Since this was posted today, 4/2/2012, that would be an incorrect statement. "Last Sunday", 4/1/12, IndyCar raced at a faster pace than NASCAR, and once again the 2 series raced on dramatically different tracks.
I'm sure you meant Sunday, March 25th, when NASCAR raced on a 2 mile oval while IndyCar raced on a 1.8 mile road/street course.
25?
That is correct. I just returned to make that correction.
INDYCAR raced at a far slower pace than NASCAR that day.
Or "he" is a she.
Was right about the first race, and was right about the secondGive April 1'st to IC.
So you agree that INDYCAR was incapable of matching NASCAR's speeds of 180mph that weekend. Thank you.
As for that car you own - it seems very appropriate that you are the one having a Fit.
No, IndyCars are quite CAPABLE of matching NASCAR's speeds...but we'll have to wait until later this year for IndyCars to race on that particular 2.0 mile oval.So you agree that INDYCAR was incapable of matching NASCAR's speeds of 180mph that weekend.
In your example, the track defines the pole speed and average race speed much more than the cars that race on it.
26?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks