Live vs On Time (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter clwill
- Start date
my friends call me Zappy
Nitro Member
No, thats true, but is 200mph fast enough...??
I watched the nascar race last weekend (there I said it). They've got a wall that absorbs the impact. Little damage to race car, no harm to driver, no repair needed to the wall. If we had that wall then I would say fine.
But to put a cement wall, an imoveable object, right next to the race cars is wrong. We've all seen the result, the driver has to absorb the impact. Most tracks have plenty of room on both sides of the track, I'm just saying lets use it, for the safety of our drivers.
Was'nt it Brandon that rolled over a wall a couple years ago, (broke back?) ask him if he would have liked another 50 or 75 ft to reel it in before hitting a wall. It can't hurt, but it may help.
I watched the nascar race last weekend (there I said it). They've got a wall that absorbs the impact. Little damage to race car, no harm to driver, no repair needed to the wall. If we had that wall then I would say fine.
But to put a cement wall, an imoveable object, right next to the race cars is wrong. We've all seen the result, the driver has to absorb the impact. Most tracks have plenty of room on both sides of the track, I'm just saying lets use it, for the safety of our drivers.
Was'nt it Brandon that rolled over a wall a couple years ago, (broke back?) ask him if he would have liked another 50 or 75 ft to reel it in before hitting a wall. It can't hurt, but it may help.
vegasnitro
Nitro Member
The safer barriers attach to existing walls. They are steel with foam inserted between the barrier and the existing concrete wall. So there is nothing to take down, but it does still cost money.
For a lot of tracks, I am assuming that the existing walls would have to be moved out to account for the depth of the safer barriers (to maintain the same lane width and distance to the wall).
However, my guess is that the thickness of the foam needed for NHRA would be less than that used at NASCAR tracks, given that the risk of a perpendicular impact to the wall is much greater in NASCAR.
vegasnitro
Nitro Member
I am not aware of any track where the walls were moved. The addition of the barriers at Daytona,Talladega and all of the cookie-cutter 1.5 mile tri-ovals was a non-issue cuz no one runs that high. The addition of the barriers was a HUGE deal at Darlington as it dramatically altered the racing line, many drivers complained that eliminated the "fast way" around the corners. It also altered the exit line of the corners at the first track to have them installed, Indanapolis Motor Speedway, more so for stock cars than Indy cars, though during qualifying Indy cars do like to run that wide sometimes.
I would also assume that more foam would need to be installed for drag racing, as a car going 300+ miles an hour has exponentially more energy than one travelling 200 MPH.
Last edited:
I wasn't referring to walls on NASCAR tracks being moved (they had plenty of room to work with, and like you say, cars don't usually run that high), I was saying that given the lane width to the wall at some NHRA tracks, some walls may need to be moved back to accomodate the thickness of the safer barrier.
As for the amount of foam, I guess I'm thinking about it differently than you. Although drag racing has much higher speeds, my guess is that NHRA wall impacts are at a lower angle (if we are measuring from 0 to 90 degrees) than the typical NASCAR impact, thus the need for less foam. Just my opinion of course.....I don't have the data to back it up
DrRocket
Nitro Member
True enough. But if they want to maintain the same track width, they'll need to move the existing walls back at least 3-4 feet. I saw a cross section of one at the Indianapolis Speedway museum last year. There may be a foam cushion absorbing the impact, but the face of it is made of 6" square steel tubing. Better than concrete, but I still wouldnt want to smack into it.
T.Smith
Nitro Member
It's been proven over and over that grass and race cars don't mix. Tony Shoe, Shirley Muldowney, Jerry Caminito & Greg Moore come to mind first...and I'm sure I could come up with more.
Moving the walls back won't solve anything, I've seen on some wider drag strips were the wider track would give a driver a false sense of security and they would overdrive the car even more, and like what Virgil said, you would increase the chances of hitting a wall at a more acute angel.
The oval track owners would make the walls closer if they could, but the racing would suck.
The Safer Barrier is used in combination with other safety improvements to help save drivers, but you still can be killed by hitting it and it does not save race cars.
There was nothing to reel in with Bernstein's crash, as the car was already on it's side before it hit the wall.
Last edited:
Larry jr.
Nitro Member
Ok several years ago, like two decades ago, I crashed my injected rear motored car into the wall, the said track had the K wall installed on both sides, it was the fact however that I was in the right lane and crossed into the left hitting the wall head on that turned My 235 inch dragster into a 90 inch dragster, shatering My right foot and dislocating my knee requiring several surgerys and keeping me off my feet unable to walk for 4 1/2 months in 1998. I have pins and screws that make it possible to even have a right foot as a result of the accident.
Now if I had been in the right lane when this happend, the car would have slung the motor in the chassis and bent up the headers and front end, but Not distroyed the car and hurt me as bad as it did , or more likely not at all.
From the driver point of view, I like the walls right where they are.
Now inmagine how may spectators would have been hurt or worse if there was grass and My car would have been going faster then the estimated 130 mph it was going, with pieces of or even the car flying into the stands.
Last edited:
