Tyre Wear In N4

Not being a NASCAR conniseur (I get to see it occassionally on cable in Aus) I'm wondering if the tyres are as weak in RL as they are in N4. If I spin at Daytona, I'll usually always end up with at least 2 blown tyres. If I spin at a slower paced oval, I'll have to pit immediately due to badly damaged tyres. Bravo if it mimics real life, but they seem very susceptible to failure. Cheers, Rod.

If you watch a Nascar race and a car spins or locks up his tires, you will always notice that they come in and change the tires because of Flat Spotting them. Alot of times yes, you will notice that by spinning a car will end up with a flat tire and have to change it also. "Rod Prince" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:MPG.14f3ca97237578a39897ba@news-server...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > Not being a NASCAR conniseur (I get to see it occassionally > on cable in Aus) I'm wondering if the tyres are as weak in > RL as they are in N4. > > If I spin at Daytona, I'll usually always end up with at > least 2 blown tyres. If I spin at a slower paced oval, I'll > have to pit immediately due to badly damaged tyres. > > Bravo if it mimics real life, but they seem very susceptible > to failure. > > Cheers, > Rod.

It might be a touch overstated in N4, but not off by much. Part of the issue will be setup, another part driving style and finally, how hard are you on the brakes? Spinning and slamming on the brakes at high speed will shred your rubber faster than you'd think. Remember there's about 3/32 of rubber on the tire. (It pays to watch RPM2nite... :) ) Rod Prince wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Not being a NASCAR conniseur (I get to see it occassionally > on cable in Aus) I'm wondering if the tyres are as weak in > RL as they are in N4. > > If I spin at Daytona, I'll usually always end up with at > least 2 blown tyres. If I spin at a slower paced oval, I'll > have to pit immediately due to badly damaged tyres. > > Bravo if it mimics real life, but they seem very susceptible > to failure. > > Cheers, > Rod.

On Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:57:35 GMT, Rod Prince <[email hidden]> wrote: > >Not being a NASCAR conniseur (I get to see it occassionally >on cable in Aus) I'm wondering if the tyres are as weak in >RL as they are in N4. Obviously you are not a NASCAR conniseur, or you would know they do not have "tyres" or even "tires", but "tars." >If I spin at Daytona, I'll usually always end up with at >least 2 blown tyres. If I spin at a slower paced oval, I'll >have to pit immediately due to badly damaged tyres. Your pit crew will probably shrug and give you vacant look, since they have no idea what "tyres" are. >Bravo if it mimics real life, but they seem very susceptible >to failure. What I really want to know is if they filled with simulated nitrogen or not. ~daxe

> Not being a NASCAR conniseur (I get to see it occassionally > on cable in Aus) I'm wondering if the tyres are as weak in > RL as they are in N4. > If I spin at Daytona, I'll usually always end up with at > least 2 blown tyres. If I spin at a slower paced oval, I'll > have to pit immediately due to badly damaged tyres. Ohhhhh Yeah! (g) 3500 pounds of racecar sideways at 180 really ruins a tire's social life! > > Bravo if it mimics real life, but they seem very susceptible > to failure. I used hate dragging car sideways down the length of the backstretch knowing I could pull right back out and go back to work. Watch a real WC race and what happens immediately after ANY kind of smoke creating incident on the track. You guessed it! Pit! -- ========================================= Control, Vision, Determination... These are the 3 fundamental components of the new generation race car driver Speed is a By Product...Goin Fast But Remember... The Car is You...You are the Car... Okay? ... ... Let's RIIIIIIIIIIIDE! Mark McCuen #35 Hooters Monte Carlo//#35 F150 (TNT Series) www.hooters-racing.com =========================================

Scrub yer head along the ground at 190mph for 1/2 mile. Stings, don't it :) -Larry "Rod Prince" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:MPG.14f3ca97237578a39897ba@news-server...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > Not being a NASCAR conniseur (I get to see it occassionally > on cable in Aus) I'm wondering if the tyres are as weak in > RL as they are in N4. > > If I spin at Daytona, I'll usually always end up with at > least 2 blown tyres. If I spin at a slower paced oval, I'll > have to pit immediately due to badly damaged tyres. > > Bravo if it mimics real life, but they seem very susceptible > to failure. > > Cheers, > Rod.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > Your pit crew will probably shrug and give you vacant look, since they > have no idea what "tyres" are. Sorry, but I refuse to use the bastardised version of the English language. Cheers, Rod.

In article <Qxji6.20548$[email hidden]>, markmc@hooters- racing.com says... > I used hate dragging car sideways down the length of the backstretch knowing > I could pull right back out and go back to work. Watch a real WC race and > what happens immediately after ANY kind of smoke creating incident on the > track. You guessed it! Pit! The coverage we get on Nascar over here is very limited and usually at 4am in the morning, so I don't often get the luxury. ;( You have to search far and wide to find any TV coverage other than the odd race being broadcast on cable. Seen a few instances where a driver will stay out after a small incident where they've smoked tyres and try and feel as to whether there was any damage or flatspotting. Always had an interest, but we're dominated by V8 supercar races who don't appear to be as prone to a blown tyre, but admittedly, they are a lighter car. I've seen a tyre put through what would appear alot more abuse than that of a stockcar and come out without a blowout. It's not considered a safety risk having tyres blowout so readily in such a manner? Cheers, Rod.

Rod Prince wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> In article <Qxji6.20548$[email hidden]>, markmc@hooters- > racing.com says... > > > I used hate dragging car sideways down the length of the backstretch knowing > > I could pull right back out and go back to work. Watch a real WC race and > > what happens immediately after ANY kind of smoke creating incident on the > > track. You guessed it! Pit! > > The coverage we get on Nascar over here is very limited and usually at > 4am in the morning, so I don't often get the luxury. ;( You have to > search far and wide to find any TV coverage other than the odd race > being broadcast on cable. Seen a few instances where a driver will > stay out after a small incident where they've smoked tyres and try > and feel as to whether there was any damage or flatspotting.

Depends largely on the track, where they're running, how early/late you are in the race. If you're on the lead lap and it doesn't bring out the caution, you run until the caution comes out or you get lapped (unless you hit your pit window first). At a track like Rockingham or Darlington, you get new tires as soon as you can. The surface is just too abrasive to run around on bad rubber. The restrictor plate tracks you *try* to stay out, but for an entirely different reason: once you lose the draft it's a matter of time until you're lapped. BUT, if you pit right away, with the amount of time it take to go down pit lane and get back up to speed, it's going to cost you at least one lap, possibly two or more. OTOH, if you flat spot it a Pocono, you want to get in and get new rubber fast because you *can* do it without going a lap down. Also, if it happens early enough in the event, you get rubber to be safe. It may cost you a lap or two, but a shredded tire that takes out a quarterpanel can ruin your day. Early in an event you've got time that can be made up on a caution/restart. With ten to go, chuck everything I said out the window. It's time to go and you have to use what you have. Unless the caution comes out. Then duck in and get rubber and beat them with fresh rubber. (THIS is definitely a judgement call and why the crew chiefs are paid so well.)

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Always had an interest, but we're dominated by V8 supercar races who > don't appear to be as prone to a blown tyre, but admittedly, they are > a lighter car. > > I've seen a tyre put through what would appear alot more abuse than > that of a stockcar and come out without a blowout. It's not considered > a safety risk having tyres blowout so readily in such a manner?

Yes, it is. But, since there's only one tire manufacturer in NASCAR, they're more worried about the saftey aspect of the tire than getting the cars to go faster. That said, the tire made are made to precise specifications to make them fairly durable (or as durable as you can get racing in the sandhills of North Carolina), yet there's only 3/32 of an inch of rubber on the radial tires. You *can* manufacture them thicker, but then you're looking at an entirely different operating enviroment (where operating tire temperatures *must* be lower to avoid 'cooking' the tire). At the big tracks they use an 'inner liner' - basically a tire within the tire to prevent a catostrophic failure from being a tragedy.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... <snip lots of great info> Thanks Mike, taking time out to explain is really appreciated. Knowing more about the sport helps you appreciate the sim alot more. One rubber manufacturer? Designed to level the playing field? We've got coverage of a race tommorrow morning at 5am, no indication of where it is and what the event is. That's the extent of coverage we get over here. (but at least we do get the odd race) Cheers, Rod.

There were two tire makers in NASCAR a couple of years ago. Prior to that there had been a long stretch with only one tire manufacturer in the series. When Hoosier began competing with Goodyear they arrived with tires that were initially significantly faster than the Goodyear product (Geoff Bodine in #7 particularly). Goodyear quickly responded and a technology race was on. The trouble with this is that NASCAR race cars are heavy vehicles travelling at very high average speeds during green light runs on steeply banked tracks. The loads and wear on the tires are very high. Since both companies were pushing the envelope of tire technology drivers started to experience severe tire degradation with consequent handling oddities: *not a good thing* when travelling close to 200 mph and 8 feet from a concrete wall. Everyone pretty much breathed a sigh of relief when Hoosier bowed out citing cost considerations. I believe Hoosier is now the sole tire choice of one of the NASCAR feeder series but the name escapes me. Now quality of rubber is pretty much taken for granted since Goodyear can build them a durable as they need to be to match up with the mandated fuel load and consequent pitting interval. Dave_Erb "Rod Prince" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:MPG.14f5b3db4cc886359897bf@news-server...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > says... > > <snip lots of great info> > > Thanks Mike, taking time out to explain is really appreciated. > > Knowing more about the sport helps you appreciate the sim > alot more. > > One rubber manufacturer? Designed to level the playing field? > > We've got coverage of a race tommorrow morning at 5am, no > indication of where it is and what the event is. That's the > extent of coverage we get over here. (but at least we do get > the odd race) > > Cheers, > Rod.

Rod Prince wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > says... > > <snip lots of great info> > > Thanks Mike, taking time out to explain is really appreciated. > > Knowing more about the sport helps you appreciate the sim > alot more. > > One rubber manufacturer? Designed to level the playing field?

Not so much for competition reasons but safety. Back in '92 (the season that N1 modeled), there were 2 manufacturers - a tire war. Both wanted to win, and wanted to with a passion. The other maker really pushed the envelope in search of grip and there were several major accidents due to this pushing of the envelope. Since the second maker was blamed for going too far they pulled out and since then, NASCAR mandated that there would be only one tire maker. > We've got coverage of a race tommorrow morning at 5am, no > indication of where it is and what the event is. That's the > extent of coverage we get over here. (but at least we do get > the odd race) Enjoy the Twin 125s then.

> citing cost considerations. I believe Hoosier is now the sole tire choice > of one of the NASCAR feeder series but the name escapes me. Probably the ARCA Re/Max series.

Nope Goodyear and Hoosier co-exist there nicely.. Mike Donnelly Jr <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > > > citing cost considerations. I believe Hoosier is now the sole tirechoice > > of one of the NASCAR feeder series but the name escapes me. > > Probably the ARCA Re/Max series. > >

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Not so much for competition reasons but safety. Back in '92 (the season that > N1 modeled), there were 2 manufacturers - a tire war. Both wanted to win, > and wanted to with a passion. The other maker really pushed the envelope in > search of grip and there were several major accidents due to this pushing of > the envelope. Since the second maker was blamed for going too far they > pulled out and since then, NASCAR mandated that there would be only one tire > maker.

Gee, a decision by an official body that put safety above commercial gain, I never though I would see the day. ;) Thanks again Mike. Cheers, Rod.

Goody's Dash series then? I know the BNS uses American Racer as their spec tire (it's good to have a friend involved in the BNS :) ). Michael Basden wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> Nope Goodyear and Hoosier co-exist there nicely.. > > Mike Donnelly Jr <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > > > > citing cost considerations. I believe Hoosier is now the sole tire > choice > > > of one of the NASCAR feeder series but the name escapes me. > > > > Probably the ARCA Re/Max series. > > > >

Call it enlightened self interest. Anyone who's been around awhile (or gets into NASCAR history) can tell you about the black years in the 60s where the drivers were dying in bunches... kinda like Marines... (had to get that one in - ex-Navy). NASCAR doesn't want it's merchandise damaged. Rod Prince wrote:

Quoted text (18 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > says... > > > Not so much for competition reasons but safety. Back in '92 (the season that > > N1 modeled), there were 2 manufacturers - a tire war. Both wanted to win, > > and wanted to with a passion. The other maker really pushed the envelope in > > search of grip and there were several major accidents due to this pushing of > > the envelope. Since the second maker was blamed for going too far they > > pulled out and since then, NASCAR mandated that there would be only one tire > > maker. > > Gee, a decision by an official body that put safety above commercial > gain, I never though I would see the day. ;) > > Thanks again Mike. > > Cheers, > Rod.

Now that was funny. "daxe" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >Not being a NASCAR conniseur (I get to see it occassionally > >on cable in Aus) I'm wondering if the tyres are as weak in > >RL as they are in N4. > > Obviously you are not a NASCAR conniseur, or you would know they do > not have "tyres" or even "tires", but "tars." > > >If I spin at Daytona, I'll usually always end up with at > >least 2 blown tyres. If I spin at a slower paced oval, I'll > >have to pit immediately due to badly damaged tyres. > > Your pit crew will probably shrug and give you vacant look, since they > have no idea what "tyres" are. >

On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 04:33:30 GMT, Rod Prince <[email hidden]> wrote: >> Your pit crew will probably shrug and give you vacant look, since they >> have no idea what "tyres" are. > >Sorry, but I refuse to use the bastardised version of the English >language. 's OK with me, but I dunno 'bout yer pit crew.... ~daxe

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 04:33:30 GMT, Rod Prince > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >> Your pit crew will probably shrug and give you vacant look, since they > >> have no idea what "tyres" are. > > > >Sorry, but I refuse to use the bastardised version of the English > >language. > > 's OK with me, but I dunno 'bout yer pit crew....

I have seen a number of races, and I'm yet to see a driver come in and hand their pitcrew a list of what he wants done to his car on a pitstop, so I'm sure I'll get new "tyres". Cheers, Rod.

On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 23:30:43 GMT, Rod Prince <[email hidden]> wrote: >I have seen a number of races, and I'm yet to see a driver come >in and hand their pitcrew a list of what he wants done to his >car on a pitstop, so I'm sure I'll get new "tyres". You can spell it any way you want, but when you're in the USA and the tires are going on a NASCAR car, they aren't "tyres". If the company that makes the freakin' things spells it "tires", then they are "tires!" And while we are at it, if you run over a little bump of pavement at the edge of a NASCAR track, you have run over a "curb", not a "kerb". :o) ~daxe

No Mas` No Mas` Zi' Pit Crew is Loco`..!! No Mas`... I guess I better get my pit crew to foreign language classes now!! Sorry couldnt resist :o)~ Cheers Thom_j. "Rod Prince" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:MPG.14f8619b201f33019897c5@news-server... | In article <[email hidden]>, | [email hidden] says... | > On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 04:33:30 GMT, Rod Prince | > <[email hidden]> wrote: | > | > >> Your pit crew will probably shrug and give you vacant look, sincethey

Quoted text (13 lines)

| > >> have no idea what "tyres" are. | > > | > >Sorry, but I refuse to use the bastardised version of the English | > >language. | > | > 's OK with me, but I dunno 'bout yer pit crew.... | | I have seen a number of races, and I'm yet to see a driver come | in and hand their pitcrew a list of what he wants done to his | car on a pitstop, so I'm sure I'll get new "tyres". | | Cheers, | Rod.

If NASCAR ever runs at Rockingham, be sure that the edge of pavement you run over will be a kerb, not a curb ;) -- Ian P <email invalid due to spam> daxe <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > And while we are at it, if you run over a little bump of pavement at > the edge of a NASCAR track, you have run over a "curb", not a "kerb". > > :o) > > ~daxe

They *do* run at Rockingham. Next week and at the tail end of the season. Funny, they're still curbs at Rockingham. :) Ian P wrote: > If NASCAR ever runs at Rockingham, be sure that the edge of pavement you run > over will be a kerb, not a curb ;)

Well, they don't have NASCAR listed as running there on their website, they do however have Champcars, and here in the UK, they are indeed kerbs ;) The track in North Carolina is just known as Rockingham or The Rock, the one in the UK is the real "Rockingham" I mean be fair, you can't have more than one name for a track, there won't be enough names to go around <G> <disclaimer> This is all meant to be taken in a lighthearted manner </disclaimer> :) -- Ian P <email invalid due to spam> Mike Donnelly Jr <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > They *do* run at Rockingham. Next week and at the tail end of the season. > Funny, they're still curbs at Rockingham. :) > > > Ian P wrote: > > > If NASCAR ever runs at Rockingham, be sure that the edge of pavement you run > > over will be a kerb, not a curb ;) >

Okay, that there does it, we had a track called Rockingham before y'all did. Don't you go try thievin' from us or we'll have ta whup ya like my gran-pappy did ta yours 200 years ago! If you're gonna take the name, ya best take how the parts are named. Or stick ta you're funny-lookin' car racin'. (Take that one in the spirit of the use of the language.) Ian P wrote:

Quoted text (26 lines)

> Well, they don't have NASCAR listed as running there on their website, they > do however have Champcars, and here in the UK, they are indeed kerbs ;) > The track in North Carolina is just known as Rockingham or The Rock, the one > in the UK is the real "Rockingham" > I mean be fair, you can't have more than one name for a track, there won't > be enough names to go around <G> > > <disclaimer> This is all meant to be taken in a lighthearted manner > </disclaimer> :) > > -- > Ian P > <email invalid due to spam> > > Mike Donnelly Jr <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > They *do* run at Rockingham. Next week and at the tail end of the season. > > Funny, they're still curbs at Rockingham. :) > > > > > > Ian P wrote: > > > > > If NASCAR ever runs at Rockingham, be sure that the edge of pavement you > run > > > over will be a kerb, not a curb ;) > >

I'm going to bed now, I'm tyred ;) -- Ian P <email invalid due to spam> Mike Donnelly Jr <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Okay, that there does it, we had a track called Rockingham before y'all did. > Don't you go try thievin' from us or we'll have ta whup ya like my gran-pappy > did ta yours 200 years ago! If you're gonna take the name, ya best take how the > parts are named. Or stick ta you're funny-lookin' car racin'. > > (Take that one in the spirit of the use of the language.) > > Ian P wrote:

In all fairness, when I wrote my first response I had no idea there was a Rockingham in USA, so rather than looking (even more) foolish, I checked up on the NASCAR website and found to my horror that we had indeed nicked the name of one of the American tracks. Though I will say that I think NASCAR should broaden their horizons a little and run at both the Rockinghams so we can see them driving over both curbs and kerbs with their respective tires and tyres :) -- Ian P <email invalid due to spam> > Mike Donnelly Jr <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Okay, that there does it, we had a track called Rockingham before y'all > did. > > Don't you go try thievin' from us or we'll have ta whup ya like my > gran-pappy > > did ta yours 200 years ago! If you're gonna take the name, ya best take > how the > > parts are named. Or stick ta you're funny-lookin' car racin'. > > > > (Take that one in the spirit of the use of the language.) > > > > Ian P wrote: > > >