my previous post is not meant to claim that nascar drivers are better than f1.
i am talking about driving the car, not the amount of skills the driver needs,etc…
get what i am saying?
if you don’t, try this… if you are very good race driver but never race in f1 or nascar, you will find f1 easier than nascar to drive, and only drive, meaning you don’t do the other 66% of your job as a race driver like setting up the car etc.
f1 is more about prep work and nascar is more about race day and adapting/changing to the race.
good nascar drivers are not going to be good f1 drivers. they might, but they don’t need to be as good as f1 drivers to be good in nascar as far as physical talent.
the main reason is that f1 pays a lot more and the best drivers in the world tend to go f1, imo.
Re NASCAR: Drivers can be well into their fifties with big potbellies, and still be at the top of their profession, just like in golf. I think that counts against either being a real sport. Open-wheel road-course drivers in F1 and CART are usually done in their mid-thirties. It does take some serious physical conditioning to withstand cyclic 4-5G lateral loads in both directions, every couple of seconds, in intense heat, and still have concentration intense enough, and reflexes quick enough, to pull off a pass after 2 hours. If stock-car racing, or golf, were actually all that tough physically, then the fat old farts wouldn’t be the winners.
Which just means that the car matters more than the driver in NASCAR to a greater degree than in other sports, and perhaps that the guys who won more in their earlier years were given better cars in their later years. But the nature of the talent required is different - clearly more mental than physical.
An ability to make make instant decisions (which is often described as “instinct”) is part of the makeup of the greatest racers. We only need to look at one driver to see exactly how much skill, talent, and quick thinking is a part of racing.
Juan Manuel Fangio, “The Maestro” may have been the greatest racer ever. His virtuosity didn’t really fully flower until he was 37 years old. And it was definitely his viruosity, not his cars’. Although he was famous for ditching his ride for whatever was the fastest, he seems to have won as many races with inferior machinery as he did with the best.
In one GP in which Fangio was racing, a deadly accident occurred on the far side of a blind turn, with a resulting grisly pile-up. Before any flags or smoke were visible, Fangio approached the turn, then inexplicably slowed down enough to pick his way through the wreckage, while others before and after him wrecked. Fangio’s own explanation was that he noticed the spectators weren’t watching him, and concluded in a fraction of a second that someting must have happened around the bend. (Drivers watch the spectators, you ask? Hell, no! But Fangio did, and it may have saved his life.)
Fangio’s masterful win at Nurburgring in the 1957 German Grand Prix may have been the finest race ever driven. With a clearly outclassed Maserati, Fangio managed to capture the pole, the fastest lap of the race, and the win. After a slow pit stop, he came from behind, using a daring straight-lining tactic through the final turns which probably would have killed anyone who wasn’t fully in tune with the very limits of his vehicle, which is where he kept things all day long. It’s the most famous example of a skill-over machinery victory ever, but it wasn’t Fangio’s only one. (Incidentally, he won this race a few years after he broke his neck at Monza–the dude definitely lived close to the edge.)
To Fangio is ascribed what I think is one of the greatest maxims of the 20th Century: “win the race–at the slowest possible speed.”
He was a genius, able to juggle thousands of variables and come up with a single, correct answer. If that isn’t skill, I don’t know what is.
Sorry for the NASCAR tangent, but the OP when liberally read can be just about talent in racing. stretched
The movie Driven and the type of race they run, don’t require any skill if you are allowed to install computers in your car. Skill as in driving skill. Cuz you can have computer timed shifts and accelerations, giving you very lil tire burn, maximizing traction.
Pro drag racing prohibits this.
Now, I want to bring this up about the movie. I don’t know much about racing, but the part about that lil guy losing to that asian guy and had to give his car to the asian guy but drove off instead. ain’t the object of drag racing to reach top seed asap? why would it be premature to hit the boost?
in the movie, it looks more like the asian guy’s car has a lot higher top speed as he sped past him like he was standing.
racinchikki,
yeah you are right, but physically f1 got the upperhand.
ElvisL1ves,
hrm… i don’t buy it.
young golfers often do better than older when comparing 20’ and 30’s to late 40’s and 50’s.
you always get freaks of nature. just take boxing. you are not going to tell me that this is not a real sport.
You get guys like George Foreman. There are a few more guys pass their prime yet very good.
Nascar is the same. The good drivers are often young. Cuz Nascar requires a lot more mind playing games, you will see that they don’t look as fit as f1 drivers.
You watch skiing? do you think that is a sport?
The italian tombo (sp?) was totally out of shape and yet very good.
Actually, being inshape not necessarily mean you look lean and mean. I know a lot of football linemen who can flat out run even tho they weigh over 300lbs with huge bellies.
I’d agree that physical conditioning is a pretty big factor. The g loads from braking, cornering and acceleration in Nascar and open-wheel are tremendous. And these races last hours. Even though these guys are sitting down the whole time, I’d say their level of conditioning for endurance has to be pretty high. If a driver becomes fatigued during a race, he’s going to be in big trouble.
I don’t pay much attention to NASCAR, but whenever I’ve seen NASCAR drivers, they seem pretty skinny and fit.
I think you’ve got bigger problems if you’re still driving in an F1 race after two hours.
I think Formula One has far tighter margins all around than any other form of racing. Due to the amount of money involved, every little thing is important.
I am shocked that a McLaren fan would (after this past season) downplay the importance of the car. Or have we forgotten the pain of Monte Carlo already? God knows I’ve been trying.
Need we mention that Formula 1 isn’t the only kind of open-wheel racing? There’s also CART (Championship Auto Racing Teams) and IRL (the Indy Racing League) F1 is primarily an international (Europe, Canada, USA and South America) league. CART and IRL are primarily American, and used to be combined as “Indy” (from Indianapolis Motor Speedway) racing until a few years ago.
Correct there are differences between the technology and cars between each of those three catagories. Quick Breakdown:
F1- Basically unlimited technical innovations are allowed. F1 engines are ALL 3.0 litre V10s . They rev up to 18k rpm and produce around 800hp. F1 cars have traction control and now have launch control for the standing start. F1 cars are generally 7 speeds with paddle shifting (shift paddles located on the steering wheel. No clutch) The cars all weigh just a shy under 1300 pounds.
IRL- These cars run on run only on oval tracks (ie. Fast fast fast… turn left) 3.5 litre V8s putting out 700hp with a 10,700rpm limiter with a 6 speed sequential shift. The cars can be no lighter than 1550 pounds.
CART- CART mixes road, street, and oval tracks. 2.65 litre V8’s reving up to 15k rpm. The engines are good for around 900hp. 6 speed standard sequential shifting. CART cars weigh 1550 pounds without gas.
CART cars are the fastest straight line cars. F1 cars are able to accelerate faster and break better. F1 cars have the lowest top speed (around 210mph or so) whereas CART can hit around 250 and IRL at 230 or so. F1 cars rule any road course.
One is real racing and the other is boring nonsense. Which is which depends on who you ask.
That’s not quite true, but it seems that way sometimes when the partisans start foaming at the mouth. I like both, so I’ll attempt to be even-handed.
NASCAR is actually a sanctioning body that operates a number of different series, each with different rules and specs. By far the most popular of these is the Winston Cup Series, and it’s the one that most casual observers think of as “stock car racing.” WC cars are covered with body panels causing them to resemble production cars, but that’s about where the similarity ends.
I’ve heard Winston Cup cars described as being “on the cutting edge of yesterday’s technology,” and it seems accurate to me. Big-block V-8 engines, pushrod-driven valves (no overhead cams), carburetors (no fuel injection), completely manual transmissions. Here is a page at howstuffworks that gives a decent overview.
Winston Cup races primarily on ovals, ranging from superspeedways like Daytona and Talladega to dinky half-mile ovals. There are currently two road courses on the WC calendar (Sears Point and Watkins Glen), where they actually have to turn right every now and then.
Formula One is sanctioned by the FIA (French acronym for…something), and is considered by its fans to be the “pinnacle of motorsport.” If budgets are the sole criterion, then that’s almost certainly true. F1 operating budgets are simply staggering, and the level of technological advancement in the cars reflects that.
F1 cars, at first glance, resemble CART and Indy Racing League cars: open wheels (no fenders); open cockpits; engines behind the driver; large airfoils on the nose and tail generating downforce for grip. 3.0 liter normally aspirated V-10’s are mandated by rule. Redlines on these puppies are in the 18,000 RPM range, giving F1 cars a shrieking sound that contrasts starkly with the throaty roar of a stock car.
F1 teams basically design and build their cars completely from scratch, although they normally partner with an engine builder for the powerplant. This is one of the things that drives the costs into the stratosphere, and it also means that the gaps between the better and poorer teams are large - at least in terms of on-track performance.
Formula One would never deign to race on an oval track. It’s road courses all the way for these guys. Actually, many F1 drivers (I’ve heard this year’s champ Michael Schumacher say this) regard oval racing as foolishly dangerous. F1 tracks tend to have large run-off areas, rather than concrete walls, on the outsides of turns.
Once the (great) differences in the cars is out of the way, the races themselves are run somewhat differently. F1 begins from a standing start, while Winston Cup, CART, and IRL all use rolling starts.
Stock car racing goes under full-course yellow when there’s a crash. Yellow flags come out, passing is forbidden, and the cars all queue up behind a pace car and slowly circle the track while the debris is cleared. Among the consequences of this is that everybody on the lead lap gets bunched right back together again for the restart - leads of less than a lap get essentially erased. Yellow flags are also commonly used for pit stops, as less time/ground is lost when the field is creeping rather than racing.
F1 prefers local yellow flags when possible. In the area surrounding a crash, yellow flags are shown and passing is forbidden, but the race goes on over the rest of the course. This lack of full-course yellows prevents re-bunching of the field during the race, and makes pit strategy a little less dependent on opportunism.
I think this is the difference that gets people’s hackles up the most. Formula One fans claim that re-bunching the field on yellows is a cheap way to create artificial “drama” by eliminating some guy’s hard-won lead. Stock car fans argue that F1 races are dreadfully boring, because the faster cars simply pull away and that’s that.
It’s true that passing is quite difficult in F1, and the race seems to degenerate into 22 cars running in isolation, with most “passes” taking place when a driver pits. All depends on what you like, I guess. I get kicks out of watching both.
:: responding to a few things I see on preview ::
F1 races are all about 190 miles, regardless of the circuit. There’s also a hard 2-hour time limit, but only Monaco (by far the slowest track on the calendar) ever flirts with it these days, unless something strange happens.
NASCAR and IRL (at least the Indy 500, I’m not really familiar with the rest of that series or CART) involve a lot more passing. One thing is that there are more cars involved, and another is that the courses are designed to allow passing. F1 courses are full of little narrow twisty bits. Oval tracks are wider and faster, with the possibility of passing on the turns.
In the aforementioned Monte Carlo F1 race, pole sitter David Coulthard’s car didn’t start for the formation lap, knocking him to the back of the pack. He then spent several laps trying to pass the guy running twelfth, despite being a far better driver and having a far better car. It was only when the guy (whose name escapes me) pitted that Coulthard passed him. That sort of thing simply doesn’t happen in NASCAR.
Finally, something I have some input for (if anyone is still reading this…)
In racing karts (a higher speed version of your carnival go-kart fare), most beginning drivers will not be able to lap very fast at all. They will go too fast into the slow corners and too slow in the fast corners. My own judgement in races has improved during 5 years of racing, but my stamina has decreased. The lateral g-forces are quite strong, and although my forearms are get the most sore, my whole body gets a workout, including an aerobic workout with an increased heart rate throughout a 10 minute sprint race.
As an avid spectator at many international karting events, I can tell you that the pros are mentally and physically fit. Last week F1 champ Michael Schumacher entered a World Championship Kart race held at his home circuit and took 3rd (later promoted to 2nd). He’s an uncommon talent, as are the relatively few who can compete, and especially win numerous races and championsips (to get to NASCAR, CART, IRL, or F1, those drivers stand out in lower formulae such as karting, Indy Lights, Formula Ford, F3, F3000, etc., etc.)
Finally, as mentioned earlier, for drivers at a professional level, superior eyesight is perhaps the most important physical attribute that allows them to move up to higher formulae.
Yeah, it’s not like it used to be 10 years ago or so. Fitness and reflexes do matter. But there are still guys in their 50’s who are still as good as the best of them. That wouldn’t be true if stock car racing were as physically punishing as open-wheel.
If you include the practice/setup sessions the same day, with little actual time available for driver recovery, there’s more than 2 hours of actual driver fatigue even without considering yellow laps.
And the amount of money available makes every little thing important, because teams can pay attention to it and do something about it. The earlier suggestion that NASCAR makes more room for teamwork than other racing circuits seriously underestimates the work that goes into designing, building, testing, and setting up an F1 car, or even a fixed-chassis, fixed-engine circuit like IRL or the soon-to-be-late CART.
Hardly. Both the car and the driver matter in any racing; only the balance is different. Coulthard could have screwed up Monaco in any car - but nobody would have noticed if he’d been in a Minardi.
Oh, btw, AS, you won’t learn anything about racing from watching “Driven”.
I disagree. If he had been in a Ferrari, the launch control would have worked, because Ferrari’s launch control worked, unlike McLaren’s. But I think we’re in agreement as far as general principles go, at least moreso than we were in agreement about that whole election thing
Anecdote hijack: I never paid much attention to racing until me and a buddy bought a Formula 1 sim in order to race against each other. This particular sim started us off on the Monza, Italy track, because it’s fairly easy to learn. Two weeks after we bought the game my buddy happened to flip past ESPN2 just as they were starting the race at Monza.
He related to me how he was able to follow the race. In fact, at one they had a shot from an in-car camera and he was thinking to himself, “That guy is waiting a lot time to brake at this corner,” and sure enough the guy spun off the corner.
Similarly, later on I got a CART sim. I was surprised to learn how much skill it takes to drive even on the ovals. For example, I was racing on the Michigan speedway and kept smacking the wall just after turn two. Later that day I watched a CART race on TV and I think two people hit that same spot that day.
Back on topic. A big part of the skill is the incredibly precise timing required. At 200 mph they’re traveling at about 100 yards per second. That means if you miss your braking spot by .1 seconds you’re 10 yards off-line. Depending on the corner, that can easily cost half a second, which is an eternity in racing.
As others have said, the lateral acceleration and the temperatures require fitness. Also, those seats aren’t padded all that well, and they’re being pounded the entire race.
