|
|
|
|
|
Topic: Alright....time for a fight! Winged Nation -- starters or no-starters?
|
Email this topic to a friend |
Subscribe to this Topic
| Report this Topic to Moderator
|
|
Page 1 of 3 of 40 replies
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
06:27:45 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
02/01/2011
|
|
Posts:
|
301
|
|
|
|
On Tuesday, we took had an open segment and decided to take phone calls. First caller succeeded in getting a fight started, I hope you heard it:
http://www.motorracingnetwork.com/Media-Center/Audio/Winged-Nation.aspx?id=b98db96cd4b04a4db05382123014dd6f
The debate is starters on sprint cars; my dear, dear friend Kendra thinks not having starters is a good thing. I think the reason for not having them (weight) is history and the time wasted pushing the cars is, well wasted.
Give a listen to the show and let us know what you think?
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
06:42:59 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
05/27/2007
|
|
Posts:
|
207
|
|
|
If there is enough support for starters to consider this a "fight" I will lose all faith in sprint car fans.
Sorry, Steve. Your buddies is NAPCAR land can keep their starters.
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
06:44:10 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
02/12/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
680
|
|
|
|
you should be banned, and Kendra should be crowned Queen. 
The greatest knowledge is to know that you know nothing
at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
06:45:01 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
02/01/2011
|
|
Posts:
|
301
|
|
|
|
The question is: why not have starters?
Only answer that I'm aware of is, "we have always done it that way before".....
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
06:59:36 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
02/12/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
680
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: Postman68 on October 14 2011 at 06:45:01 PM
The question is: why not have starters?
Only answer that I'm aware of is, "we have always done it that way before".....
|
because then the push truck guys would have to buy a ticket to get in.
because of the cost which is a stupid argument
because it would incorporate a battery and wiring system that leads to more problems
because we like push trucks and their drivers
because we really like Kendra
because we have always done it this way
and because sprint cars are not supposed to have starters
The greatest knowledge is to know that you know nothing
at all.
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
07:57:27 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
07/31/2007
|
|
Posts:
|
230
|
|
|
|
because sprint cars have always been known by their power to weight ratio, adding starters means you have to have a tranny (more weight), battery (more weight), the starter itself (more weight), wiring system means more stuff to get caught on in the cockpit, and a flywheel (more rotating weight, whick meand power loss), resutling in a racecar that weighs more, has more wires that a driver can get his foot or something else caught on while driving, and less power, so its pretty much a lose, lose situation to the fans, crews, and drivers. just my .02 cents
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
08:01:12 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
01/06/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
1872
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: Postman68 on October 14 2011 at 06:45:01 PM
The question is: why not have starters?
Only answer that I'm aware of is, "we have always done it that way before".....
|
Just shows how much (or little) you know... starters would require - in addition to the starter itself - a battery, clutch and a transmission/gears of some kind to get up to speed from a standing start. 
Phil Taylor
home-theater-systems-advice.com
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
09:18:23 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/23/2004
|
|
Posts:
|
2809
|
|
|
Sprint cars tend to flip from time to time unlike NAPCAR, Mortifieds and all other Doorbangers. It takes quite a starter, and a bit of current to turn over a sprint car engine with the compression required to make the horsepower we see with methanol. So, that being said, I wouldn't want my ass strapped into a car with 33 gallons of fuel to my back, with the battery arcing when it takes a tumble. Would you? Why not "fight" about something a bit more sensible, say.....The closing rate of expenses between fielding a competitive 360 and a 410???
Member of this message board since 1997
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
09:20:18 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/23/2004
|
|
Posts:
|
2809
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: filtalr on October 14 2011 at 08:01:12 PM
Just shows how much (or little) you know... starters would require - in addition to the starter itself - a battery, clutch and a transmission/gears of some kind to get up to speed from a standing start.
|
It was done before when we raced Supers using a POS CrowerGlide. It sucked then and it would suck now...
Member of this message board since 1997
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
09:25:46 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/08/2006
|
|
Posts:
|
100
|
|
|
|
"Because we've always done it that way..." is not that bad of an argument. We've got to hold on to what makes this sport different from the others, right?
I like BLUETEAM's suggestion that I should be Queen. Steve...remember that come Tuesday.
And Racefanigan...speaking to a former fulltime driver tonight, yes, the main concern when starters were first proposed was the weight issue. Before there was a weight rule there was NO WAY any drivers were going to put that on their cars. Now, it would actually benefit smaller drivers because that's where they could get some weight from. However, the bigger guys (I'm not going to name names...) would just have more weight on a car, meaning they'd have to find other places to shave weight from.
Again, the main reason is though that we've ALWAYS had starters. Therefore we keep them. Final Answer.
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
10:00:28 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
12/09/2008
|
|
Posts:
|
2403
|
|
|
This message was edited on
October 14, 2011 at
10:05:03 PM by minthess
Reply to:
Posted By: Kendra5 on October 14 2011 at 09:25:46 PM
"Because we've always done it that way..." is not that bad of an argument. We've got to hold on to what makes this sport different from the others, right?
I like BLUETEAM's suggestion that I should be Queen. Steve...remember that come Tuesday.
And Racefanigan...speaking to a former fulltime driver tonight, yes, the main concern when starters were first proposed was the weight issue. Before there was a weight rule there was NO WAY any drivers were going to put that on their cars. Now, it would actually benefit smaller drivers because that's where they could get some weight from. However, the bigger guys (I'm not going to name names...) would just have more weight on a car, meaning they'd have to find other places to shave weight from.
Again, the main reason is though that we've ALWAYS had starters. Therefore we keep them. Final Answer.
|
They might as well put a Powerglide or a C6 in them too. Maybe we can get them to weigh as much as a small SUV. Smaller injector tubes, lower compression, spec heads and starters. Now we're talking. They could even make all the cars the same color too. Something between turd brown and charcoal grey. Nothing polished either. Flat black wheels of coarse. Now that would be really cool.
Luna's Ford engine style that won 2 WoO titles and 3
Kings Royals before a weight rule against the best EVER
in their prime and now DOMINATES super dirt late model
racing is no longer allowed/wanted in a WoO sprint
car.... Was Luna a miracle worker?
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
10:13:03 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
02/12/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
680
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: Kendra5 on October 14 2011 at 09:25:46 PM
"Because we've always done it that way..." is not that bad of an argument. We've got to hold on to what makes this sport different from the others, right?
I like BLUETEAM's suggestion that I should be Queen. Steve...remember that come Tuesday.
And Racefanigan...speaking to a former fulltime driver tonight, yes, the main concern when starters were first proposed was the weight issue. Before there was a weight rule there was NO WAY any drivers were going to put that on their cars. Now, it would actually benefit smaller drivers because that's where they could get some weight from. However, the bigger guys (I'm not going to name names...) would just have more weight on a car, meaning they'd have to find other places to shave weight from.
Again, the main reason is though that we've ALWAYS had starters. Therefore we keep them. Final Answer.
|
I think our Queen has been sipping the Chardonnay!
I think she meant to say we have always had starters, and therefore we keep the push trucks.
The greatest knowledge is to know that you know nothing
at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
10:14:03 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
10/25/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
745
|
|
|
|
THATS JUST SILLY STARTERS DO NOTHING TO HELP A SPRINT CAR GO FAST ? SO WHY HAVE THIM SPRINT CARS ARE BUILT TO DO ONE THING GO FAST
Robert Bond San Jose Ca
|
|
|
|
|
October 14, 2011 at
11:15:42 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
10/21/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
528
|
|
|
|
As a suggestion, you might want to call up Steve Lewis or Bob East or someone else that was heavily involved with USAC midgets 5-10 years ago when they tried out starters as part of their rules package. I think it was optional, but obviously USAC wouldn't have put it in the rules if they weren't curious if it would work on a mandatory basis.
Signature here.
|
|
|
|
October 15, 2011 at
12:43:56 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/17/2006
|
|
Posts:
|
858
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: shrek2259 on October 14 2011 at 10:14:03 PM
THATS JUST SILLY STARTERS DO NOTHING TO HELP A SPRINT CAR GO FAST ? SO WHY HAVE THIM SPRINT CARS ARE BUILT TO DO ONE THING GO FAST
|
Hey now...some folks in PA think the cars are going too fast & that's why drivers are getting injured! Maybe this is the ticket to slowing them down!
I think not...just say "no" to starters!
_
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 15, 2011 at
01:08:39 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
03/01/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
277
|
|
|
If we want to go slow, we can race modifieds.
|
|
|
|
|
October 15, 2011 at
02:38:05 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
12/03/2009
|
|
Posts:
|
69
|
|
|
|
In all honesty, what would be the point of having starters?
They do not speed the show up. Look at the Modifieds and Late Models, they take just as long if, and most of the time wasted during an event is realigning the field in all forms of motorsports, not from pushing cars off. Take a look at the sportsman division in PA. They are carburated with starters and there shows are not any quicker . Also, who goes and gets the cars that are stopped on the track if they run out of fuel, or stall on the track? At least some type of push vehicle is needed.
The only thing it would really do is save from the free passes, and maybe some time during time trials and congestion in the pits.
|
|
|
|
October 15, 2011 at
09:24:43 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
12/05/2010
|
|
Posts:
|
840
|
|
|
Firstly, you do not need transmissions to put in starters. The Ford Focus Midgets and some sportsman Midgets are currently using them. Starters are not currently used by USAC mostly because of some REAL safety concerns to the drivers. Like having your feet blown apart when a clutch fails and unhooks your drive line under load. Among other concerns regarding starters, many of which were spoken of here on this post. Another reason that we should not have starters is that push trucks make us that much further removed from the norm. There is a uniqueness to this sport that is unmatched anywhere else. The push trucks do a fine job, and the show will not be that much, if at all faster without them. The Outlaws along with a couple of other clubs move their shows along pretty quickly with the trucks. Local shows just need to concentrate on organization for their trucks, and they too can get the job done quickly enough to satisfy everyone.
Never hit stationary objects!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 15, 2011 at
12:36:59 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
01/27/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
411
|
|
|
|
The Ford Focus Midgets Have starters yes but the bell housing is built into the Engine package. Look at Pictures of a Focus Midget Engine. By what I have read these are Throttle Body Constant Flow Injection. So if you spin one out you still have tobe pulled backward to unload the Engine so it will turn over.
A Sprint Car Engine is mounted to a Motor plate, and to a front Engine mount that is straight in line with the Engine. So if you put a starter on them you have to change how a Sprint Car frame is designed. Moving the front Engine mount forward the amount the Bell Housing takes up, 3 to 4 inches. That also moves the Engine forward the same amount 3 to 4 inches. So now you have more weight on the front of the car. So the car become more nasty to drive with all the weight on the front.
Also being that they are constant flow fuel injection they are hard to start at slow Engine speeds. All the Sprint Cars that have starters use a Carburetor 2 or 4 Barrel.
|
|
|
|
October 15, 2011 at
05:21:42 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/07/2006
|
|
Posts:
|
5588
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: racefanigan on October 14 2011 at 07:57:27 PM
because sprint cars have always been known by their power to weight ratio, adding starters means you have to have a tranny (more weight), battery (more weight), the starter itself (more weight), wiring system means more stuff to get caught on in the cockpit, and a flywheel (more rotating weight, whick meand power loss), resutling in a racecar that weighs more, has more wires that a driver can get his foot or something else caught on while driving, and less power, so its pretty much a lose, lose situation to the fans, crews, and drivers. just my .02 cents
|
You just described a Modified. 
Stan Meissner
|
|
|
