Comments on: Restrictor plate racing: good or bad?

By: chuck

chuck — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:52:06 +0000

For the MOST part you have me there. But I would take he extra 10 hp than not. And that is between the major teams too. Not all the Chevy teams are making the same hp, that is obvious. The basic engines are the, so it comes to lighter weight materials and a specific engine tuners tricks to eek out any extra hp in a given engine.

By: Marc

Marc — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 02:23:02 +0000

Please… there’s is no appreciable difference in HP on restricted or non-restricted tracks. Everytime they’ve dyno’d them they have come out to less the ten HP between brands.

By: chuck

chuck — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:35:17 +0000

Very valid points sir. I think the difference in HP is more noticeable at other tracks and the plates make that difference minimal because of the restricted aitflow and loss of throttle response.

By: Marc

Marc — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:16:17 +0000

For the most part I agree with your assessment, however I will offer a dissenting voice on the following statement:

“plate racing keeps the cars in a pack since it is harder to pass with an advantage in horsepower.

On the contrary NASCAR’s race cars have had nearly identical HP between brands and regardless of tracks run on, for at least a couple decades.

The major difference between cars at restrictor-plate tracks is the loss of throttle response not in differing HP.

The best example of this for someone not in the drivers seat is how long it takes the pack of cars to reach top speed at the green flag.

At both Daytona and Talledega it takes at minimum a lap and at times a lap and a half before drivers reach qual speeds.

This loss of throttle response also contributes to drivers being “afraid” to lift the Go Peddle at times when it otherwise might be necessary.