Race Car Technology

[Outdated]

I'm just interested in the results of technology, I'm not really much of a racing fan.

Between a Formula 1 car and a V8 Supercar which would be the fastest?

Naturally first off I thought the F1 car, but it turns out not by anywhere near as much as I expected. The V8 Supercar had better brakes and better handling in the corners but the F1 car had better acceleration and left the supercar for dead on the straights. This demonstration event was held at Mount Panorama, Australia's most famous touring car circuit so it's not really a suitable surface for the F1 cars either, the supercar definitely had the advantage where the road dips and bumps.

I heard somewhere that these V8 Supercars are the cars NASCAR is switching to because they're doing more road circuits these days. If you're curious to know more about them just search youtube for one word - Bathurst.

 

[Judge]

In terms of NASCAR alone, it often depends on the conditions and track relative to average top speeds. Different tracks yielding different results. Perhaps best considered in terms of the right car for the right track.

"NASCAR is faster than Australian V8 Supercars, with NASCAR cars reaching speeds close to 200 mph while drafting, while the V8 Supercars top out at around 186 mph. However, during the average NASCAR race, the top speeds are often lower than those of V8 Supercars."

NASCAR vs V8 Supercars: Which Is Faster? (7 Differences) - FLOW RACERS

NASCAR vs V8 Supercars: which is faster? Discover 7 key differences between these thrilling motorsports.

flowracers.com

Using the same considerations I'd think F1 would do better on more exotic tracks than traditional ovals. However I suppose such results ultimately depend on individual track dynamics. I'm also wondering if gear ratios play a role here as well. Interesting stuff to ponder....

 

[NB79]

I don't believe the v8 car had better brakes and handling.
F1 cars have been in crazy race to improve to win since decades, the things limiting them is that fia put rules or they would become too dangerously fast.

 

[Hypnalis]

The F1 was holding back. A lot.

You can see it very clearly near the start - the corner at 1:15.
F1 follows the V8 around at the V8's speed, then accelerates out at "F1-correct" time (earlier because F1 grip is a lot better) and loses the V8. In a race the V8 wouldn't come back after that.

OTOH they're both constrained by rules and context. F1's are allowed to be as light as 800kg (2023), I don't know what the rules are for the Oz V8's, but I bet they're way heavier than that.

It's not hard to build a car that's faster than a V8 (top speed) in actual racing trim. But when they're allowed to do whatever they like, they're faster in almost any (circuit) context.
(not against a maxxed-out dragster over 1/4 mile, maybe not that big US hill climb, etc).

Here's a car that was faster over Nurburg Nordschleife:

I'm not sure where the real limits are, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's already possible to build a hybrid that can damage the driver directly via G-force. At some point potentially within both our lifetimes we'll see crazy lap times using ""drone" cars with huge types and AI drivers.

Another cool video (F1 + a surprising drone)

The drone isn't going to be useful for that purpose IRL (with spectators) OFC. A network of big stationary drones with very smart video processing software is much more likely IMO. But the one shown would be handy for testing (with S/W controlling OFC)

 

[Hypnalis]

I just found an annoying typo in the post above.

This line:
It's not hard to build a car that's faster than a V8 (top speed) in actual racing trim.
should be:
It's not hard to build a car that's faster than an F1 (top speed) in actual racing trim.

"Hard" being relative of course - I mean using "racecar tech" and levels of funding.


Also later on: "huge types" -> "huge tires" (G-forces are constrained by tire/track friction - increase those and you can do everything faster, but at some point the driver will be injured)

 

[Outdated]

The F1 was holding back. A lot.

Neither driver was going as hard as they would in a real race situation, it was a demonstration only, a PR plug for the Red Bull team.

F1 follows the V8 around at the V8's speed, then accelerates out at "F1-correct" time (earlier because F1 grip is a lot better) and loses the V8. In a race the V8 wouldn't come back after that.

There's also a couple of times where the F1 loses traction while trying to accelerate, I think that's the bumps and dips in the road, something F1 cars aren't really designed for. I was just amazed that the V8 kept up as well as it did.

Statistics tell a different story. Current fastest Official lap time in a V8 is 2:03.8. Jensen Button took his F1 around the track solo and recorded a time of 1:48. 15 seconds is a big gap.

 

[Outdated]

OTOH they're both constrained by rules and context. F1's are allowed to be as light as 800kg (2023), I don't know what the rules are for the Oz V8's, but I bet they're way heavier than that.

They're standard production model cars with certain modifications allowed. It's a touring car championship, so they all weigh around the 1500 Kg mark.

 

[Hypnalis]

Interesting point about the loss of traction. I noticed some weird action in the F1's suspension at one point, but didn't go back to watch again. It might have been wheel bounce.

F1 tracks are really smooth. Like the "green" on a golf course compared to the "fairway" of Bathurst (**), so they'd need to tune it differently to work well on that track.

I bet that 1:48:15 lap was done with a carefully tested and perfectly tuned suspension

(**)
I've been to Bathurst NSW, but not to the car races there, so I didn't know the track name (Mount Panorama) - just looked it up on wikipedia

 

[Outdated]

For the Red Bull team it was just a PR stunt, Jensen Button wanted to see how fast he could really go. Jensen Button also had the track to himself and didn't have to try and dodge around another vehicle.

I've never been to Bathurst, passed through it in the middle of the night once but can't say I've really been there. I grew up loving that race though. I never bothered to watch the whole season, just Bathurst. It's pretty popular here.

 

[Nitro]

apples and oranges comparison

F1 is a formula car hence the name Formula 1

a specific weight, a specific engine and a specified amount of fuel
Horsepower is not always the king in racing.

At one point in time, F-1 went as far as placing a flywheel unit onboard to regenerate deceleration forces to re-inject that energy back into the drive train to boost both acceleration and increase fuel economy.

NASCAR has actually devolved into Formula racing which really took a dump on their own roots where they raced a car on Sunday then sold you that same winner on Monday

I dropped NASCAR like a hot potato when the car of tomorrow was introduced.

Basically they are all the same body now with a set of light stickers pasted on them that match the not even close to stock engine under the hood.

IMHO, what they should have done was to rewrite their rules and force the teams to going back to safety based modified production vehicles with unmodified production engines.
As in here is your two liter powered production vehicle, go have fun with it.
Sure, they would have been slower, but at this stage, there is not a single "stock" car part on a NASCAR rig.

 

[Outdated]

NASCAR has actually devolved into Formula racing which really took a dump on their own roots where they raced a car on Sunday then sold you that same winner on Monday

I miss the 70s and 80s racing where the cars really were production models that you could go in to a showroom and buy. They did make minor modifications but nothing terribly extravagant.

I like seeing the Veterans races where they bring all the old cars out. Here's an original Phase 3 GTHO going through it's paces:

 

[Neonatal RRT]

As others have pointed out, all these vehicles are purpose-built race cars. There are thick rule books regulating every aspect of the build and even the race, itself. So, it's no surprise that at any given track or race, all these cars are going to have advantages and disadvantages, and if going head-to-head, we are all going to see it.

Even within certain classes, a front engine vehicle will have handling characteristics different than a mid-engine or rear engine, most notably navigating the corners.

On the street, the same thing. I have absolutely destroyed modified 800+HP Mustangs, Camaros, Hellcats, and Corvettes, etc with my Tesla Model 3 on the street, stoplight to stoplight. They couldn't put the power to the ground on rough, gritty street pavement, and I can. The electric motor controllers adjust each wheel every 2* of rotation, so I literally cannot slip my tires on a dry surface. I can easily put a 50-100 ft or more between them. Now, had the race been from a 60mph roll on the highway, each of these cars would have left me in the dust. Had it been on a prep'd racetrack, same thing. I wouldn't have a chance.

Sometimes, it's less about the car, but more the type of race and on what type of surface or track.

 

[Forest Cat]

I would like to see those cars do this. Ice racing, that's the stuff.

Spoiler

 

[tjlxlh]

I dropped NASCAR like a hot potato when the car of tomorrow was introduced.

Basically they are all the same body now with a set of light stickers pasted on them that match the not even close to stock engine under the hood

I became a lot more interested in local circle and dirt tracks when they switched to the car of tomorrow, and stopped watching NASCAR pretty much all together. It's just a drama show as well. I wasn't even that old when it happened but it instantly became less fun to watch

 

[Outdated]

I would like to see those cars do this. Ice racing, that's the stuff.

Spoiler

I'd love to see an F1 car do a demonstration on that track.

 

[Outdated]

Sometimes, it's less about the car, but more the type of race and on what type of surface or track.

There's been a bit of hype recently about getting F1 to race Bathurst but the race fans don't want their track ruined for supercars by altering it to suit F1. As it is it's one of the most popular touring car race tracks in the world, I wouldn't want to see it altered either.

There's also a massive cost involved considering that it is just public roads near a small country town in the middle of nowhere. It's used by regular traffic including trucks almost every day of the year, maintaining it to a level suitable for F1 might be feasible in a big city but not out in places like that.

 

[Judge]

Different cars, different tracks. Different results. Especially if and when they rely on the integrity and consistency of the surface they race on. Regardless of what type of cars are compared to one another.

Occasionally I still chuckle at looking back on one of the Detroit Grand Prix races, where the pace car driver predictably elected to turn off the traction control of his Corvette with instantly disastrous results landing his car into the nearest wall. Something one would likely get away with on the streets of Monte Carlo, but not Detroit.

Too bad none of us will likely see any pod racing in the near future, which would change the equation.

 

[Forest Cat]

As others have pointed out, all these vehicles are purpose-built race cars. There are thick rule books regulating every aspect of the build and even the race, itself. So, it's no surprise that at any given track or race, all these cars are going to have advantages and disadvantages, and if going head-to-head, we are all going to see it.

Even within certain classes, a front engine vehicle will have handling characteristics different than a mid-engine or rear engine, most notably navigating the corners.

On the street, the same thing. I have absolutely destroyed modified 800+HP Mustangs, Camaros, Hellcats, and Corvettes, etc with my Tesla Model 3 on the street, stoplight to stoplight. They couldn't put the power to the ground on rough, gritty street pavement, and I can. The electric motor controllers adjust each wheel every 2* of rotation, so I literally cannot slip my tires on a dry surface. I can easily put a 50-100 ft or more between them. Now, had the race been from a 60mph roll on the highway, each of these cars would have left me in the dust. Had it been on a prep'd racetrack, same thing. I wouldn't have a chance.

Sometimes, it's less about the car, but more the type of race and on what type of surface or track.

So a Tesla beat Mustangs and Hellcats? Something about that makes me a little sad inside... It just seems wrong, something about it seems so wrong. Those poor Mustangs and Hellcats, I feel bad for them.

 

[Nitro]

w

So a Tesla beat Mustangs and Hellcats? Something about that makes me a little sad inside... It just seems wrong, something about it seems so wrong. Those poor Mustangs and Hellcats, I feel bad for them.

When I transition from the street to the strip the first thing that caught my attention was the vast difference in traction.

 

[Judge]

The thought of Teslas in a formal race on a good track.

Makes me cringe, knowing what some of our top fire department personnel think about the prospects of such a vehicle catching fire if the operator and passengers are stuck inside. And the resources required to successfully extinguish it.

Until they can figure out a way to realistically combat this type of fire in time to actually rescue the occupants, the idea of racing them seems preposterous. Hell, I don't even like seeing them on the same roads I drive on. Reminds me on occasion when local media asks the opinion of local firefighters and they just roll their eyes.

(The Panasonic Battery factory for Teslas is just down the freeway from me. Used to seeing lots of Teslas here.)