If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
I don't think he meant to tear the nose off like that. Normally sliding through the grass doesn't do that amount of damage, but with the rain and all it was extra squishy.
I don't think he meant to tear the nose off like that. Normally sliding through the grass doesn't do that amount of damage, but with the rain and all it was extra squishy.
You may be right but adding to the conspiracy theory, it is common knowledge a splitter acts like a shovel in grass and the nose will follow the destruction. Also, Jeff Gordon's car had a hell of a time getting through tech. i heard it was due to templet issues, but I'm not positive. We have to remember, it does not take a drastic change to produce better aerodynamics at Daytona. Chad may have been making changes to how the air flows through the car. I'm not sure about the rules on air boxes and such.
You may be right but adding to the conspiracy theory, it is common knowledge a splitter acts like a shovel in grass and the nose will follow the destruction. Also, Jeff Gordon's car had a hell of a time getting through tech. i heard it was due to templet issues, but I'm not positive. We have to remember, it does not take a drastic change to produce better aerodynamics at Daytona. Chad may have been making changes to how the air flows through the car. I'm not sure about the rules on air boxes and such.
I read somewhere that when they used adhesive numbers they would sand and smooth the edges and use clear coat all to reduce drag so I guess a little goes a long way in the world aerodynamics.
Knaus actually has the Daytona (and probably Talladega) cars Painted as opposed to decal-ed so that they can sand the edges and clear it to reduce drag. He has been doing that for a few years. He talked about it on TV a few years back. Not sure if he is still doing it or not. They gave Gordon's car the same treatment a few years back with Paint as opposed to Vinyl.
With the cars being all wrap now there's no edge to worry about anymore, but back when they were still using cut vinyl I also remember him saying about having them painted. Even if they were doing something fishy, they made it through pre-race tech. If he's smart enough to have something that passes tech but needs to removed before the post race good for him, that's called being better than the system!
Didn't Clint Boyer get fined and points taken away because the car didn't fit the templates after the race(New Hampshire)?
That's correct, back in about 2008, I believe, with the ugly-a$$ "CoT" "wing" car. The right rear got hit or something, and they were like 1/4" too high (sticking the RR up in the air produces more downforce for the rear of the car).
I'm surprised people would think the 48 car, or any of the Hendrick teams, would do anything that was against the rules. Where is this coming from?
See my post about Daytona 2006 (and the comparison of Chad and Smokey). That 2006 Hendrick car was just as cheated-up as anything Smokey coulda dreamed up.
I was being facetious. There are more questions about Hendrick cars than all other teams put together. A few examples over the years.... A lightweight front spindle breaks at Charlotte, a victory burn out is attempted numerous times but can't get the tires to spin, an intentional vacuum leak to bypass the restrictor plate, a crank to raise and lower the rear window area , etc. etc. The gentleman that posts here from the NASCAR archives could probably come up with an eye popping list of Hendrick infractions over the years.
Maybe the nose piece was fine and nothing wrong but got damaged to draw everyones attention to it so elsewhere in the car tha tmight not have entirely legal would not get as much attention. Chad Knaus is no dummy and this act of diversion if this is what it is would be something he would do.
All of them noses are bought with nascar seals built into them, they cannot be doctored without it being noticable by the competition. That is the last place they would try to cheat now... all of the composite components are pretty much untouchable by the teams except for mounting points. and the nose and about half the front fenders is all one piece.
haha you think those noses are built with seals in them??? They might have serial numbers on them but you can do an unreal amount of cheating up on those things and its so simple to do!!! I worked up there for a year about a year ago and there is an incredible amount of crap you can do with the noses and splitters to create alot of downforce and reduce drag!!! yea the nascar tech is tough with all the templates but it's easy to get away with stuff after u go thru tech!!! Its not rocket science up there even though those guys get paid millions
haha you think those noses are built with seals in them??? They might have serial numbers on them but you can do an unreal amount of cheating up on those things and its so simple to do!!! I worked up there for a year about a year ago and there is an incredible amount of crap you can do with the noses and splitters to create alot of downforce and reduce drag!!! yea the nascar tech is tough with all the templates but it's easy to get away with stuff after u go thru tech!!! Its not rocket science up there even though those guys get paid millions
Yes, they do some work on them but it is all legal, never said they didn't work on them. The only rule to the nose is it fits the template and have the seals in it and yes they have seals... something new this season. It went through tech before it went on the grid so it must have been legal. I was talking about actual modifying that would give the team an advantage, nothing molded is gonna be an exact fit, I realize this. The minor sanding and fitting for the templates is a must, you try to talk like all the teams don't do those things. Compared to a few years ago, these noses are pretty much identical and allow for allot less variance than in years passed.
Comment