What are your thoughts on the SAS NASCAR Sanction?

[Budman]

Yeah Turbo-D,

 

3 or 4 years ago, whenever it was, after about 3 tries, they ended up running "November-Fast"!

[HiTech]

THAT LADY LOOKS LIKE SHE,A BEEN DEAD FOR SIX MONTHS .SOMEONE PLEASE TILL HER ITS OK TO MOVE ON .

[fishracer]

Long time since I posted or read anything. Since Nascar sanction is the subject and our team benefited from this I will put my two cents in. WHAZZUP had a point about the rules stability issue. The rules now seem like their migrating back to the late 80's with the rules being geared for the most vocal (usually because they have a performance advantage or more money)and of course track management accomodating, not wanting to lose what car count is left. Not to knock the current management, but I believe what made the intital Nascar sanction and rules work was that the rules were a no brainer, they did not have to design the rules, just find someone technically competent to police them. If they had a problem with interpretation, they just called nascar and got a ruling. No need to look bad and just give the response, do it because I said so from the inspector. In reality, the best marketing is still word of mouth. If the mouth's thats doing the talking about a particular show says it is boring or no competition and says it enough, thats a show killer. Someone earlier made the point about the USRA show, comenting that more people come to those events and pay more,(even though the show in the last few years is very poor with very low car counts and poor competition),people still have hope that a good show will evolve based on past experience. It still shows their is possible a glimmer of hope that this series can survive.

 

As for the SAS weekly show, I don't think the Nascar sanction will even help it unless a good set of affordable and well thought out rules are drawn up and implemented. Car count is the SHOW not secondary, PRIMARY. Get the racers and you will get the crowd. One thing that the track management in the past and present has never done is market the Nascar sanction or even a good set of rules to the racers and what it means, they just left it up to assumptions. Part of it is having someone that understands WHY the rules were written to explain it to them. Half the time time the rules are monkey see monkey do, with the usual lame response "well that's the way we have always done it". That will get you a following of racers real quick.

 

I don't believe that the Nascar rules were ever really cost efficient, just consistent year in and year out. The only problem the first couple of years was the head tech had a problem with interpreting the rule book and comunicating it with nascar, that was the only reason anyone might of thought the rules were changing.

[97car]

Oh gosh,now I am going to sound like reberracewriter nascar has not been consistant in their

own sanction,the only class of theirs that can run coast to coast is the Nextel Cup cars.One part of the country their top class is the late model stock,another it is a super late model,or a modified and even if it was the same class there would be different tire rules. At least in IMCA you can take your modified or stock car and if it is a sanctioned track run at any of them with maybe the addition of a muffler. The late model classes need to come to some common ground,think about it in Houston there is the Pro and sportsman late models,then there is TSRS,USRA and the San Antonio late models,the money spent on the so called limited classes is almost as much as the super late model classes,the body rule should go back to like it was in the 80's with min and max dimensions for height,width and so forth,the purses do not justify the ABC rules,I would rather see a full field of 30 cars with 10-15 as back markers then see 12 run for 125 laps with 2 or 3 only having a chance to win.Oh Budman the Hooters girls on the back straight is good and bad,think of the accidents that would happen back there by the distraction.

[Budman]

[fishracer]

97 car has several valid points. Sometime it takes going backward to move foward.

 

 

I agree with the body situation. How many cars have been put on stands because they need a body required by some sanction 800 miles away? Why did the superlatemodels start moving towards the crate engines and all of a sudden adopt a set of rules from tracks 800 miles away? Did our Texas series gain car count from those tracks or was it to passify the few teams that could afford or were passionate up about?

 

Reality is the best weekly latemodel to maintain and have consistent car count is a super latemodel style chassis(easy to repair and work on) with a limited motor. Hell power to weight is the name of the game look at the crate late models. But the quick resolution is readily available to all sanctions, run what you brung. Just as 97 car said height,width and motor combination.

 

 

You know the cars do not have to weigh 2650, lets say to accomodate all existing latemodel chassis. Lets say 2900 lbs. 58% left Allow Big engine setback and offset on stock clip cars and nascar latemodels to get weight.

 

400 crate motor and 350 2bl motors (limited intake)2900.

 

500 2bl motors(limited intake) 2950

 

quailfying times high 18's race times mid 19.s great racing close racing

and affordable

 

shocks limited to 275.00 msrp like asa

 

mini clutch minimum 5.5

 

The only thing left is competent and knowledgable officiating.

[arts22]

Fishracer,

whats the hp difference from the 350cfm to the 500cfm? Say the motor has 425hp with 500cfm, what would it be if you put the 350cfm on that motor? Just wondering what would be best, the 50# penalty or run the smaller carb.

[HORSEPOWER]

What is the CRA Super Series rules and PASS South? Do they have several combinations of rules to maintain a high car count. This year the CRA has 15 different winner's in 16 races. Last year, they had about 15 different winners in 19 races, now they must have some good set of rules to have all these racers running pretty close or something.

 

http://www.craracing.net/index.html

http://www.racewithpass.com/

[Crazyhorse]

Just wondering what would be best, the 50# penalty or run the smaller carb.

take the 500 cfm.........that's a loaded question?

sorry i'm not fishracer.

[HiTech]

Just wondering what would be best, the 50# penalty or run the smaller carb.

take the 500 cfm.........that's a loaded question?

sorry i'm not fishracer.

your just an HAY EATING FIELD STOMPER .

[arts22]

Just wondering what would be best, the 50# penalty or run the smaller carb.

take the 500 cfm.........that's a loaded question?

sorry i'm not fishracer.

SP, I didnt understand it. For the amount of hp you loose and only give a 50# penalty..... Just wanted to find out how he came up with his figures......

[fishracer]

Have been away, The reason I feel the 350 2bl would be comparable with the 400 crate is with a performer rpm and cold air box it should be close. Based on our dyno numbers from our Nascar lm stock setup. Even it isn't just add weight to the 500's until you get parity.

 

The whole reason the crate's and 350 2bl's is for durability and consistent car counts week to week.

 

It's hard for people from Kyle, Houston or even from the longhorn days to understand(especially since the 8"tire is predominant) that at Sas weekend and weekout that extra 1/8-1/4 mile puts alot of strain on motors,especially SAS long straights with 10" tires. What you would gain with the reduced weight is you would have the same speed as with the 500 and more durabilty and less tire wear. All leads to savings for the racers long term and more teams being able to show up week to week.