OT: Are CART cars faster than F1?

I know it's been asked a thousand times but which is faster, CART, IRL,or F1 - I've never seen any data on this. If they were all side-to-side which would win on an: OVAL (maybe Michigan) Road Course (say Laguna) 0-60 0-100 Top End Lateral g's Anyone? Thanks, Parke Cochran Talladega, AL "At a slow, lumbering 200mph"

"Parke Cochran" <post for address> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I know it's been asked a thousand times but which is faster, CART, IRL,or > F1 - > I've never seen any data on this. If they were all side-to-side whichwould > win on an: > Faster yes, quicker? Probably not even close. A F1 car would be much quicker.

On an oval the CART CHamp car would pull away. on a road course the F1 cars would also be much faster. on a short oval...the F1 cars would do well. The only category listed below which the CART Champcars would be superior to the F1 cars is top speed. dave henrie "Parke Cochran" <post for address> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I know it's been asked a thousand times but which is faster, CART, IRL,or > F1 - > I've never seen any data on this. If they were all side-to-side whichwould

Quoted text (20 lines)

> win on an: > > OVAL (maybe Michigan) > Road Course (say Laguna) > 0-60 > 0-100 > Top End > Lateral g's > > Anyone? > > Thanks, > > Parke Cochran > Talladega, AL > "At a slow, lumbering 200mph" > > > >

Wonder if you could run an F1 into a bridge and get of with a precautionary CAT scan and bruised knees. Jan. =--- "Pay attention when I'm talking to you boy!" -Foghorn Leghorn. "Dave Henrie" wrote... > On an oval the CART CHamp car would pull away. > on a road course the F1 cars would also be much faster. > on a short oval...the F1 cars would do well. > The only category listed below which the CART Champcars > would be superior to the F1 cars is top speed.

-- -------------------------------------------- From the mind of Douglas Ellison http://www.douglasellison.co.uk mailto:[email hidden] ICQ:- 127619558 MS:- [email hidden] -------------------------------------------- "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Wonder if you could run an F1 into a bridge and get of with a precautionary > CAT scan and bruised knees. > > Jan The safety standards would make sure that it's not possible to do so Doug

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Wonder if you could run an F1 into a bridge and get of with aprecautionary > CAT scan and bruised knees. Sure you can - I do it at GPL Monza all the time.....

"Douglas Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote > > The safety standards would make sure that it's not possible to do so > Yep, the concrete bridge simply wouldn't have been there in F1. I can't believe how the owners of Road America got away with it's course layout. They were lucky this time. I think they need to do some serious modifications to turn 13 before the next race or they'll have a death on their hands. Cheers Phil Lee Legends Central Admin http://www.legendscentral.com

"Douglas Ellison" wrote... > The safety standards would make sure that it's not > possible to do so Speaking hypothetically, of course. I do not wish for anyone to run into a bridge to find out. Generally, F1's are seen as more frail (in car to car contact)than champcars. I just wondered if this extended to collisions with solid objects as well. Just wondering. I agree a couple of rows of tyres or better still some of that impact cushioning stuff they use F1 wouldn't have gone amiss there. Jan. =---

You have bruised knees and need a CAT scan after running into the bridge in GPL? That must be some force feedback setup you've got! ;o) "Colin Harris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:JSVf7.16197$[email hidden]... > > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote inmessage

Quoted text (8 lines)

> news:[email hidden]... > > Wonder if you could run an F1 into a bridge and get of with a > precautionary > > CAT scan and bruised knees. > > Sure you can - I do it at GPL Monza all the time..... > >

Well isn't the bridge support just as bad as a concrete wall on a temp street course? -- Sean Higgins Redline Racing League www.rrlnrs.com Redline BGN Division http://home.sprintmail.com/~higgy/RRL/ "Phil Lee" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:w1Wf7.11726$[email hidden]... > "Douglas Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > > The safety standards would make sure that it's not possible to do so > > > > Yep, the concrete bridge simply wouldn't have been there in F1. I can't > believe how the owners of Road America got away with it's course layout. > They were lucky this time. I think they need to do some serious > modifications to turn 13 before the next race or they'll have a death on > their hands. > > Cheers > > Phil Lee > > Legends Central Admin > http://www.legendscentral.com > > >

"Sean Higgins" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Well isn't the bridge support just as bad as a concrete wall on a temp > street course? > I don't think it is. On temporary road courses speeds are generally lower, particularly cornering speeds. Turn 13 at Road America is a relatively high speed corner with absolutely no run off before the bridge abutment. Cheers Phil Lee Legends Central Admin http://www.legendscentral.com

> OVAL (maybe Michigan)CART series will be faster, because of higher topspeed A F1 is topped out at about 220-225 mph at Monza (the fastest F1-track in the circus) > Road Course (say Laguna)F1 will be fastest, because of better roadgrip and MUCH shorter braking distance. ( F1 can go from 0 to 125 to 0 mph in 6,2 second) Try to put a CART on a European Racetrack like Silverstone or Spa, a F1 will win big on these tracks. > 0-60I'm not sure > 0-100I think F1 will win this one, because an F1 is not so heavy (520 kilo + driver + fuel <> 850 hp) > Lateral g'sAt Magny Cour in France a F1 is reaching 4 g for 4-5 second a long righthand turn Exact data on these cars is very difficult to find, but the CART-data is more open to people than the F1. Also IMO the CART serie is more fun to watch, because there are lot more overtaking than in F1. A F1 has so much downforce, that it becomes unstable to drive when it is close to other cars, so real infight in F1 is rare to se. Sorry for my English. -- -- Sven

In article <y4Yf7.13110$[email hidden]>, "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> writes: >You have bruised knees and need a CAT scan after running into the bridge >in GPL? That must be some force feedback setup you've got! > >;o) I was in a VROC race once with a guy who also raced in real life. At one point, he went off course and crashed into the wall. His racer's reflexes made him draw up his legs before impact...he cracked his knees on the computer table... :-) <----I only put that there because he was ok in the end, so it was funny... Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +16.36...Monster +366.59... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

at Monza, F1s only have 1-2 km of straight between each corner ... (slow ones) Give F1s a longer straight [Michigan :)] and we will see ... Sven <[email hidden]> escribi� en el mensaje de noticias 3b8114af$0$717$[email hidden]... > > OVAL (maybe Michigan) > CART series will be faster, because of higher topspeed > A F1 is topped out at about 220-225 mph at Monza (the fastest F1-track in > the circus) >

F1 cars can do 0-100 in 4.3 seconds. F1 car's brakes are stronger than the others. They can brake from 150mph in 80m while an IRL car needs twice that distance. David G Fisher "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:98Uf7.36384$[email hidden]... > On an oval the CART CHamp car would pull away. > on a road course the F1 cars would also be much faster. > on a short oval...the F1 cars would do well. > The only category listed below which the CART Champcars would be superiorto > the F1 cars is top speed. > dave henrie

"Sven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3b8114af$0$717$[email hidden]... > At Magny Cour in France a F1 is reaching 4 g for 4-5 second a longrighthand > turn I just read the other day that Frentzen experienced 5.99 g's at Imola a few years ago. David G Fisher

"Sven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3b8114af$0$717$[email hidden]... > Exact data on these cars is very difficult to find, but the CART-data is > more open to people than the F1. Also IMO the CART serie is more fun to > watch, because there are lot more overtaking than in F1. A F1 has so much Perhaps you didn't see the latest CART race? -- [email hidden] > downforce, that it becomes unstable to drive when it is close to other cars, > so real infight in F1 is rare to se. > > Sorry for my English. > -- > > -- > Sven > > > >

"Parke Cochran" <post for address> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I know it's been asked a thousand times but which is faster, CART, IRL,or > F1 - > I've never seen any data on this. If they were all side-to-side whichwould > win on an: It's hard to say really. I think the CART cars have more horsepower, but I think they are heavier though. CART cars have slicks (although Firestone), were F1 cars have grooved tires (personally I would take a grooved michelin over a slick Firestone any day, but that is just my preferance). The one area that F1 is superior is the aerodynamics. This can be seen by watching the last F1 race, as the BMW had the most powerful engine, but did not compete against the Ferrari very well, due to either aerodynamics or handling performace of the Ferrari. F1 cars can have more downforce though. I'm pretty sure the Ferrari has better aerodynamics than any of the CART cars. So, all that being said, I think the F1 cars are vastly superior. Except on ovals. I think on a large oval course, the CART cars with the more horsepower would win. But every other course on the CART calender an F1 car would win. I don't think a CART car could win any F1 race though. Even Germany, because the speeds at Germany are not sustained, they are peek after accelleration.

On Sun, 19 Aug 2001 13:01:00 -0500, "Parke Cochran" <post for address> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>I know it's been asked a thousand times but which is faster, CART, IRL,or >F1 - >I've never seen any data on this. If they were all side-to-side which would >win on an: > >OVAL (maybe Michigan) >Road Course (say Laguna)

We'll see next year when both F1 and CART race at Montreal. Does anybody know if this has happened before, CART and F1 racing on the same circuit at the same time?

<[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 19 Aug 2001 13:01:00 -0500, "Parke Cochran" <post for address> > wrote: > > >I know it's been asked a thousand times but which is faster, CART, IRL,or > >F1 - > >I've never seen any data on this. If they were all side-to-side whichwould

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >win on an: > > > >OVAL (maybe Michigan) > >Road Course (say Laguna) > > We'll see next year when both F1 and CART race at Montreal. > > Does anybody know if this has happened before, CART and F1 racing on > the same circuit at the same time?

At the same time? now that would be something ;) Seriously though I don`t believe the CART course at the GV circuit in Montreal will follow the exact same layout as the F1 cars use. Lorne

F1 undisputedly. F1 car weights 1/2 of what a CART car weights and produces 2x the downforce that CART car does. Engine-wise the CART cars produce more power but not that much more .... BMW in F1 produces 900hp+ and CART car does not produce that much more. What that means is that even though in the straighline acceleration the difference is not that great, but the F1 car stop in 2x the distance (not literaly) that a CART car does and can carry a lot more speed through corners (because of the downforce). Last of all, currently CART cars reach higher top speeds than F1 cars but that has everything to do with the tracks and very little to do with the cars. Top speed of an F1 (as well as CART) car is limited by the amount of downforce that it's got dialed in. Because F1 cars race on tracks with resasonably short straights and a lot of corners - they have high-downforce configurations (though at Hockenheim they still reach 360kph/225mph). On the other hand CART cars on ovals have a low-downforce configuration. If CART cars would run on the F1 tracks then they would run high-downforce configuration as well and their top speed would be nothing like what they reach on the ovals. On the other hand if an F1 car was run on an oval then it would be set up with a low-downforce configuration and would run the high speeds that CART cars do. To my knowledge, if you put an F1 and CART cars on an roar course then the difference would be good 3 - 5sec per lap in F1s favour. On the other hand on the ovals things would be pretty close .... the CART car might even win because it's got longer wheelbase and is wider. All of F1's speed is attributed to the insane 'power to weight' ratio and the fact that this kind of 'power to weight' allows it to run the insane downforce configuration that it does (ie. unbelievable braking and cornering speeds). Just for example - when an F1 car is travelling at 250kph and the driver lifts off the the throttle, the car will be generating 4G of braking force (that's 4x the braking force of the best road cars) ... and that is without him touching the brake!!! ps. F1s raced in Montreal good 10 - 15 years ago. regards, David Mocnay [email hidden] wrote in message <[email hidden]>... >On Sun, 19 Aug 2001 13:01:00 -0500, "Parke Cochran" <post for address> >wrote: > >>I know it's been asked a thousand times but which is faster, CART, IRL,or >>F1 - >>I've never seen any data on this. If they were all side-to-side whichwould

Quoted text (9 lines)

>>win on an: >> >>OVAL (maybe Michigan) >>Road Course (say Laguna) > >We'll see next year when both F1 and CART race at Montreal. > >Does anybody know if this has happened before, CART and F1 racing on >the same circuit at the same time?

"David Mocnay" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> difference would be good 3 - 5sec per lap in F1s favour. On the other hand > on the ovals things would be pretty close .... the CART car might even win > because it's got longer wheelbase and is wider. All of F1's speed is > attributed to the insane 'power to weight' ratio and the fact that this kind > of 'power to weight' allows it to run the insane downforce configuration > that it does (ie. unbelievable braking and cornering speeds). Just for > example - when an F1 car is travelling at 250kph and the driver lifts off > the the throttle, the car will be generating 4G of braking force (that's 4x > the braking force of the best road cars) ... and that is without him > touching the brake!!!

that sounds incredible. not calling you a liar or anything, but do you know this, or is it something you've heard? -- Gunnar #31 SUCKS#015 Tupperware MC#002 DoD#0x1B DoDRT#003 DoD:CT#4,8 Kibo�: 2 myk, trygg og god.

I thought I read/heard F1 won't be racing at Montreal in future? Jan. =--- "Pay attention when I'm talking to you boy!" -Foghorn Leghorn. <[email hidden]> wrote...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> <snip> > We'll see next year when both F1 and CART race > at Montreal. > > Does anybody know if this has happened before, > CART and F1 racing on the same circuit at the > same time?

On Wed, 22 Aug 2001 08:09:29 GMT, Gunnar Horrigmo <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>"David Mocnay" <[email hidden]> writes: > >> difference would be good 3 - 5sec per lap in F1s favour. On the other hand >> on the ovals things would be pretty close .... the CART car might even win >> because it's got longer wheelbase and is wider. All of F1's speed is >> attributed to the insane 'power to weight' ratio and the fact that this kind >> of 'power to weight' allows it to run the insane downforce configuration >> that it does (ie. unbelievable braking and cornering speeds). Just for >> example - when an F1 car is travelling at 250kph and the driver lifts off >> the the throttle, the car will be generating 4G of braking force (that's 4x >> the braking force of the best road cars) ... and that is without him >> touching the brake!!! > >that sounds incredible. not calling you a liar or anything, but do >you know this, or is it something you've heard?

Not sure about 4g, but I've heard that just lifting off at top speed gives 2 or 3 g's of braking. BTW, one other point to consider is that CART run slicks. Admittedly, they are pretty hard since Firestone is in a monopoly. But with Goodyear maybe returning, that would be a BIG advantage on low downforce configurations (like Michigan or Hockenheim) Rafe Mc

"Lorne Glustein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:d0Jg7.32053$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Sun, 19 Aug 2001 13:01:00 -0500, "Parke Cochran" <post for address> > > wrote: > > > > >I know it's been asked a thousand times but which is faster, CART,

IRL,or

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > >F1 - > > >I've never seen any data on this. If they were all side-to-side which > would > > >win on an: > > > > > >OVAL (maybe Michigan) > > >Road Course (say Laguna) > > > > We'll see next year when both F1 and CART race at Montreal. > > > > Does anybody know if this has happened before, CART and F1 racing on > > the same circuit at the same time? > > At the same time? now that would be something ;)

lol! I'd pay to see that! Course, between Paul Tracy and Takagi I'm not sure how well those relatively fragile F1 cars would fare in collisions. :-) > Seriously though I don`t believe the CART course at the GV circuit in > Montreal will follow the exact same layout as the F1 cars use. Maybe one of the experts here will step in, but I'm fairly certain there's an agreement that the course layout will be changed slightly at least to prevent this sort of comparison. Crafty devils.

"Gunnar Horrigmo" <[email hidden]> skrev i meddelandet news:[email hidden]... > "David Mocnay" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > difference would be good 3 - 5sec per lap in F1s favour. On the otherhand > > on the ovals things would be pretty close .... the CART car might evenwin > > because it's got longer wheelbase and is wider. All of F1's speed is > > attributed to the insane 'power to weight' ratio and the fact that thiskind > > of 'power to weight' allows it to run the insane downforce configuration > > that it does (ie. unbelievable braking and cornering speeds). Just for > > example - when an F1 car is travelling at 250kph and the driver liftsoff > > the the throttle, the car will be generating 4G of braking force (that's4x > > the braking force of the best road cars) ... and that is without him > > touching the brake!!! > > that sounds incredible. not calling you a liar or anything, but do > you know this, or is it something you've heard? >From F1 Racing magazine August 2001: "Taking your foot off the accelerator at full speed in F1 means 1.2g of longitudinal deceleration, which is the equivalent of a saloon braking heavily." 4g is a massive force, perhaps what you get under full braking. \�l

> lol! I'd pay to see that! Course, between Paul Tracy and Takagi I'm not > sure how well those relatively fragile F1 cars would fare in collisions. Hehe, they'd put cast iron suspension parts on takagi's car and tell him to do his thing!

"> > difference would be good 3 - 5sec per lap in F1s favour. On the other hand > > on the ovals things would be pretty close .... the CART car might evenwin > > because it's got longer wheelbase and is wider. All of F1's speed is > > attributed to the insane 'power to weight' ratio and the fact that thiskind > > of 'power to weight' allows it to run the insane downforce configuration > > that it does (ie. unbelievable braking and cornering speeds). Just for > > example - when an F1 car is travelling at 250kph and the driver liftsoff > > the the throttle, the car will be generating 4G of braking force (that's4x > > the braking force of the best road cars) ... and that is without him > > touching the brake!!! Actually they talked about this in the Hungary race, modern F1 cars have 4G's on force under braking. Not just lifting the foot off the throttle. The stats they gave are: 4G under braking. 3G under cornerning. 2G under accleration.

one thing's for sure - the best thrills would come from the CART side of things. As Murray Walker said at the Hungaroring - passing here is possible, remember Mansell winning from 12th on the grid? Yeah, about 10-15 years ago. Yet every single CART race has graphics of "started 18th, currently 2nd" appearing, even at places like Elkhart Lake and Mid-Ohio, not just the ovals. In fact, the Road America 200 has just become the 220 because the 5 more laps will screw up the fuel strategies - meaning 2 stops on ultra lean turbo or three with a richer setting. thats a good idea. a shame that this years race was ruined by some tw@ deciding to get the race going even though there was a river (and I mean a River) just after the kink at one of the fastest places on the track. watching one car overtake another by driving over him may be funny for a fat american layperson, but not for motorsport enthusiasts.

. watching one car overtake another by driving > over him may be funny for a fat american layperson, but not for motorsport > enthusiasts. > Where to begin....first the cars ol NIGE was drivng back then only resemble the modern F1 cars in paint color. The active suspensions et all aren't there these days. Neither are the wide slicks. Nor the wider triple layered rear wings. However, I will note that with all the restrictions FIA has tried to mandate, the lap times are right back down there. You can't regulate progress. btw....ask Murray to remember a similiar drive in the past 4 or 5 years....I can...off the top of my head....think of one...Mika's drive through the pack after getting shunted off the road by his teammate....there's been a lot of miles raced since Nigel's drive, but not a lot of racing. 2nd...FAT AMERICAN LAYPERSON....while I have taken liberties with language as much or more than anyone here, I don't believe I have resorted to outright insults. I suppose you beleive we were all crowding our TEE VEE's and high-fiving everybody when the flying car's wheel came dangerously close to Herta's helmet. Your comments weaken everything else your post attempted to convey. I think I could agree with some of your comments, but since I'm an DANG FAT AMERICAN, I choose NOT TO.... dave henrie

(snipped) > 2nd...FAT AMERICAN LAYPERSON....while I have taken liberties withlanguage > as much or more than anyone here, I don't believe I have resorted to > outright insults. I suppose you beleive we were all crowding our TEEVEE's > and high-fiving everybody when the flying car's wheel came dangerouslyclose > to Herta's helmet. Your comments weaken everything else your post > attempted to convey. > I think I could agree with some of your comments, but since I'm an DANG > FAT AMERICAN, I choose NOT TO.... Say, does my ass look big in this Nomex? :-)

"�ke Larsson" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (26 lines)

> "Gunnar Horrigmo" <[email hidden]> skrev i meddelandet > news:[email hidden]... > > "David Mocnay" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > > > difference would be good 3 - 5sec per lap in F1s favour. On the other > hand > > > on the ovals things would be pretty close .... the CART car might even > win > > > because it's got longer wheelbase and is wider. All of F1's speed is > > > attributed to the insane 'power to weight' ratio and the fact that this > kind > > > of 'power to weight' allows it to run the insane downforce configuration > > > that it does (ie. unbelievable braking and cornering speeds). Just for > > > example - when an F1 car is travelling at 250kph and the driver lifts > off > > > the the throttle, the car will be generating 4G of braking force (that's > 4x > > > the braking force of the best road cars) ... and that is without him > > > touching the brake!!! > > > > that sounds incredible. not calling you a liar or anything, but do > > you know this, or is it something you've heard? > > > From F1 Racing magazine August 2001: "Taking your foot off the > accelerator at full speed in F1 means 1.2g of longitudinal deceleration, > which is the equivalent of a saloon braking heavily."

I've heard that the limit of good sports (not racing) tyres is around 1 G, so I'd say that's braking heavily, yes. :) anyway; I guess most of these 1.2G come from drag? > 4g is a massive force, perhaps what you get under full braking. I believe 4G is 0.5G more than the requirement for what fighter pilots are supposed to take withouth pressure suits. -- Gunnar #31 SUCKS#015 Tupperware MC#002 DoD#0x1B DoDRT#003 DoD:CT#4,8 Kibo�: 2 myk, trygg og god.

> F1 car weights 1/2 of what a CART car weights I looked at the F1 rules downloaded from FIA, and the CART rules downloaded from CART. F1 minimum weight was listed as 600Kg = 1320lbs. CART minimum weight varied by track but was 1525-1550lbs. Norman "David Mocnay" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:jjJg7.903$[email hidden]... > F1 undisputedly. > > F1 car weights 1/2 of what a CART car weights and produces 2x thedownforce > that CART car does. Engine-wise the CART cars produce more power but not > that much more .... BMW in F1 produces 900hp+ and CART car does notproduce

Quoted text (12 lines)

> that much more. > > What that means is that even though in the straighline acceleration the > difference is not that great, but the F1 car stop in 2x the distance (not > literaly) that a CART car does and can carry a lot more speed through > corners (because of the downforce). > > Last of all, currently CART cars reach higher top speeds than F1 cars but > that has everything to do with the tracks and very little to do with the > cars. Top speed of an F1 (as well as CART) car is limited by the amount of > downforce that it's got dialed in. Because F1 cars race on tracks with > resasonably short straights and a lot of corners - they have

high-downforce > configurations (though at Hockenheim they still reach 360kph/225mph). Onthe > other hand CART cars on ovals have a low-downforce configuration. If CART > cars would run on the F1 tracks then they would run high-downforce > configuration as well and their top speed would be nothing like what they > reach on the ovals. On the other hand if an F1 car was run on an oval then > it would be set up with a low-downforce configuration and would run thehigh

Quoted text (7 lines)

> speeds that CART cars do. > > To my knowledge, if you put an F1 and CART cars on an roar course then the > difference would be good 3 - 5sec per lap in F1s favour. On the other hand > on the ovals things would be pretty close .... the CART car might even win > because it's got longer wheelbase and is wider. All of F1's speed is > attributed to the insane 'power to weight' ratio and the fact that this

kind > of 'power to weight' allows it to run the insane downforce configuration > that it does (ie. unbelievable braking and cornering speeds). Just for > example - when an F1 car is travelling at 250kph and the driver lifts off > the the throttle, the car will be generating 4G of braking force (that's4x

Quoted text (15 lines)

> the braking force of the best road cars) ... and that is without him > touching the brake!!! > > ps. F1s raced in Montreal good 10 - 15 years ago. > > regards, > David Mocnay > > > [email hidden] wrote in message > <[email hidden]>... > >On Sun, 19 Aug 2001 13:01:00 -0500, "Parke Cochran" <post for address> > >wrote: > > > >>I know it's been asked a thousand times but which is faster, CART,

IRL,or

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >>F1 - > >>I've never seen any data on this. If they were all side-to-side which > would > >>win on an: > >> > >>OVAL (maybe Michigan) > >>Road Course (say Laguna) > > > >We'll see next year when both F1 and CART race at Montreal. > > > >Does anybody know if this has happened before, CART and F1 racing on > >the same circuit at the same time? > >

>"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote > I thought I read/heard F1 won't be racing at Montreal in future? No no, the date is set in stone. The 2002 CART schedule has the Gilles Villeneuve circuit as an event. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

sorry mate, i was referring to the ultimate Homer Simpsons over there - you know, here in England the stereotypical American is fat, stupid, calls lager 'beer' and has no sense of sarcasm. Just as you think we are all stiff-upper-lipped lah-dee-dah tea-drinking cricket-playing people. No offence, but thats life.

In article <mVMg7.4977$[email hidden]>, "nobodyspecial" <[email hidden]> writes: > > Maybe one of the experts here will step in, but I'm fairly certain there's > an agreement that the course layout will be changed slightly at least to > prevent this sort of comparison. Crafty devils. > Ah, but they need to use care here. *How* will the course be changed? One or the other of them will end up with lower lap times as a result, and to the majority of folks, this will appear to mean that those cars/drivers/whatever are faster. Because I suspect most people won't realize that a slightly different course was used. This is like Sears Point, where I believe NASCAR uses a modified version compared to everyone else. They're always announcing a "new track record" during NASCAR qualifying, but I guarantee you there is no way on Earth that those pig-iron lunks they drive in NASCAR could beat an Audi R8 around Sears Point (or around any circuit for that matter). So maybe the track is slightly different, or maybe the announcers just meant to say a "new (NASCAR) track record", not really being aware that there is other racing than NASCAR.... Marc

Quoted text (8 lines)

> This is like Sears Point, where I believe NASCAR uses a modified > version compared to everyone else. They're always announcing a "new > track record" during NASCAR qualifying, but I guarantee you there is no > way on Earth that those pig-iron lunks they drive in NASCAR could beat > an Audi R8 around Sears Point (or around any circuit for that matter). > So maybe the track is slightly different, or maybe the announcers just > meant to say a "new (NASCAR) track record", not really being aware that > there is other racing than NASCAR....

All racing series all have their own track records at each track. If you want to know an absolute record then look at track record for each series and take the lowest time. Yes, this year Nascar started running a shortened Seard point course. It takes out the "infield section". This is a section that is somewhat invisible because of the hill the course drives around. The carousel turn is the corner that goes around the hill, and then it goes back up the dragstrip and the short and long course meet above the Ss. Norman "Marc Fraioli" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:9m604d$8qi$[email hidden]... > In article <mVMg7.4977$[email hidden]>, > "nobodyspecial" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > > Maybe one of the experts here will step in, but I'm fairly certainthere's

Quoted text (20 lines)

> > an agreement that the course layout will be changed slightly at least to > > prevent this sort of comparison. Crafty devils. > > > > Ah, but they need to use care here. *How* will the course be changed? > One or the other of them will end up with lower lap times as a result, > and to the majority of folks, this will appear to mean that those > cars/drivers/whatever are faster. Because I suspect most people won't > realize that a slightly different course was used. > > This is like Sears Point, where I believe NASCAR uses a modified > version compared to everyone else. They're always announcing a "new > track record" during NASCAR qualifying, but I guarantee you there is no > way on Earth that those pig-iron lunks they drive in NASCAR could beat > an Audi R8 around Sears Point (or around any circuit for that matter). > So maybe the track is slightly different, or maybe the announcers just > meant to say a "new (NASCAR) track record", not really being aware that > there is other racing than NASCAR.... > > Marc

CART sim would be awesome!

CART!!!!!! hahaha See now you'll get me in trouble her too.. "O" My!! :o)~ "TRUSRS85" wrote: | CART sim would be awesome! --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.276 / Virus Database: 145 - Release Date: 9/3/2001