Are the Super's too expensive?

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

The Topic // Is late models too expensive ?
How wide is a late model tire ? Im guessing 12 or 13 inches.
I have said this a couple times reduce the width down to 10 inches.
Over night fix... fair for everyone... less horse power.
Am i nuts or please tell me why this would not bring down cost.

It could. I'd prefer less aero. Then I don't need new wheels.

[racerx99]

Hey, what about changing the body so its not so aero dependent...like the bodies on the ARCA class stock cars..there pretty tough...u can beat and bang a bit and still keep the sides on it.......otherwise this class will have a hard time surviving on a LOCAL level....ole buddy used to say, " how fast you wanna go, it depends on how much you got to spend" its a bummer that it got this way, but thats the way of racing!!

[dynotimeonly]

Late models are NOT to expensive because of the body. My god people.

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

Late models are NOT to expensive because of the body. My god people.

Do you have any idea of the downforce difference from a curved roof to a flat, raked roof? How about a flat deck to a sloped one? How about a nose that's 50% taller with no splitter to what we have now? My God you are blind. The roof alone is huge. It used to generate lift. I can tell you the deck, body skew, and other differences since 2013 are worth nearly a half second at a decent speed 3/8 mile. I've tested it firsthand. I realize alot of these changes have happened slowly, while rules makers were asleep at the wheel. It's like slowly heating a frog to boil. He doesn't realize it until he's dinner.

The engine is the most expensive part. You need more of it because the car is loaded hard by the body. It's the wedge car all over again. People say we need more power "cause them fancy Bilstein shocks", but they are blind. Yes, the suspension geometry has been improved over the years and resulted in some gains. It's beyond ignorant to ignore hundreds of extra pounds of downforce. I don't mean hundreds, like 200, we are talking closer to 1000#.

Way too many people thinking like you is why this sport is dying and why every stupid rule from the last 8 years has done nothing. The real problems are ignored in a quest to make sure they look the same under the body.

[manwplan]

I know this topic has been debated before, but what can be done to help improve car counts at the Regional level? Made my 2022 dirt track debut last night at Williams Grove for the 410 sprint cars & the ULMS late models. A PERFECT doubleheader in my opinion. No extra classes, and my favorite two divisions together for a reasonable $20 admission price. Granted the weather was on the cooler side and The Grove generally does not produce exciting racing for the DLM's, but I was really disappointed with a 15 car DLM field. The purse was "decent" with $3500 to win for the late models. After a few incidents in the heats, the feature started 13 cars. A bright spot for me, was seeing Scrub, Rick Eckert get the win. His winning never gets old for me. Something needs to be done to help improve car counts. Other than Port Royal, this seems to be the norm in my neck of the woods at Hagerstown, Winchester, Delaware International, Potomac, Selinsgrove etc. Kind of sad really......

Williams Grove isn't a fair assessment of the situation. After they flipped and hurt a guy last year (almost got 2 others too) we come right back around to this year and last week they tried to do the same thing to 3 more guys at the exact same spot. Of course the car count will be less the next time because its obvious the track has no desire to fix anything.

[fastford]

the more rules you impose on a super late model class , the less it becomes a super and then becomes a crate class , which we have plenty of , I say leave them alone , if they survive , and I dont think nothing will help on the local level , they will ....JMO

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

the more rules you impose on a super late model class , the less it becomes a super and then becomes a crate class , which we have plenty of , I say leave them alone , if they survive , and I dont think nothing will help on the local level , they will ....JMO

I don't think many here are asking for new rules. I am asking for remembrance of those forgotten. And if anything, removal of all the dumb new ones from the last 8 years.

I don't want spec wedge cars. I want late models. I want freedom to be creative underneath. I want to be able to follow a guy into the corner, out-brake him, and pull off a pass on exit. I want late models back.

[fastford]

I don't think many here are asking for new rules. I am asking for remembrance of those forgotten. And if anything, removal of all the dumb new ones from the last 8 years.

I don't want spec wedge cars. I want late models. I want freedom to be creative underneath. I want to be able to follow a guy into the corner, out-brake him, and pull off a pass on exit. I want late models back.

seems to me , because of the title " are late models to expensive " that the only answer is to increase rules to decrease expense , which has never really worked , as far as " freedom underneath "decreasing expense , it want , as soon as you or some one else discovers something , it will eventually be marketed and is usually expensive to start with , I had to be innovative to compete because of lack of budget , but a lot of stuff I figured out 20 years ago is now available to be bought , I think our situations are probably very similar , but I still say , let supers be supers , the less rules the beter ....JMO,,,

[Jerky]

The reason you're getting 15 cars at the Grove is that they don't race Supers, Hagerstown doesn't race Supers weekly, Winchesters doesn't race Supers weekly, Lincoln doesn't race Supers, PPMS doesn't race Supers....where do you expect them to get the cars from?

Everyone gave the hobby racer who would be a field filler the option to throw a crate in the car and lose less money weekly, and lots of them took it. So this is what we're left with - 6-8 well funded regional guys like Eckert, Satterlee, Ziegler etc., some local good teams like Yoder and Rine, and a few guys left to fill the field.

The days of 40-50 cars for a regional race are long gone because cars 25-50 race crates instead.

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

seems to me , because of the title " are late models to expensive " that the only answer is to increase rules to decrease expense , which has never really worked , as far as " freedom underneath "decreasing expense , it want , as soon as you or some one else discovers something , it will eventually be marketed and is usually expensive to start with , I had to be innovative to compete because of lack of budget , but a lot of stuff I figured out 20 years ago is now available to be bought , I think our situations are probably very similar , but I still say , let supers be supers , the less rules the beter ....JMO,,,

Taking 1000# of downforce can be done with resetting the bodies. That's not ticky tack rules. It's getting them back where they should be. It's back to a 2 page rule book. I agree with less rules. It is less rules. We don't need Rumley rules. We don't need droop rules.

Our situations are similar, but it sounds like you think going back to a car less dependent on aero is even less appealing than our current NASCAR-lite rulebook? That confuses me to no end.

I think maybe you don't understand me. I want the 2008 rulebook restored and the 2008 noses and roofs. That is much less rules. That is a super late model. That is a car that can race in traffic. I'd consider maybe reducing the spoiler as well, but that's it. If I want to make my birdcage 5 pieces and it makes my car faster, I can. That is not expensive at all. I can make it myself. I can't build some of the stuff guys are using to maximize the droop rule. It's beyond the tools I have in my shop.

The engine is the most expensive part. You need much less of it if we aren't racing Indy cars anymore. We also don't need new rules every winter making us throw simple parts away, while guys are building exotic stuff to duck the new rule. What I propose is going back to "leaving them alone". They sure as hell aren't doing that now, and they are accomplishing nothing.

[fastford]

i do under stand what you are saying , I just dont think it will matter money wise , which is what this thread is about even if you institute oil non adjustable shocks , there will be some one out there selling the trickest shock of this description that WILL provide an advantage and will be expensive , just like every other piece mandated in those 2008 rules , now if your talking about amending those 2008 rules , well thats a different thing , which is still adding rules which makes cookie cutter cars , I do agree about the engines , but all this still spells crate or spec to me .

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

i do under stand what you are saying , I just dont think it will matter money wise , which is what this thread is about even if you institute oil non adjustable shocks , there will be some one out there selling the trickest shock of this description that WILL provide an advantage and will be expensive , just like every other piece mandated in those 2008 rules , now if your talking about amending those 2008 rules , well thats a different thing , which is still adding rules which makes cookie cutter cars , I do agree about the engines , but all this still spells crate or spec to me .

Those rules do not mandate oil shocks. They mandated very little. Wheel base, body dimensions enforceable by tape measure, weight, one carb, 2 valves per cylinder, very simple rules back then. I also don't care about trick shocks. Short of inerters, they can run whatever they want. And technically, an inerter is not a shock by definition. Shocks don't make the speed that downforce does. Shocks are very misunderstood and credited with WAY too much of the speed increases over the last 10 years. My 18 degree engine will be competitive again, with downforce removed, no matter what shock they bolt on. Shock guys have been very successful selling snake oil. There is zero reason to change brands from year to year. The technology in them is on par. There may be a new damping curve, but it can be done in any of them.

I want the exact opposite of spec. I also want the cars to race each other better, without severe aero push. If the car needs less engine to win, it is possible for it to be cheaper racing. That choice is still in the hands of the owner/racer however. We have gone so far with bodies, beyond the original rules, that today's car to 2008 is like comparing winged 410 sprints to non-wing.

[fastford]

Those rules do not mandate oil shocks. They mandated very little. Wheel base, body dimensions enforceable by tape measure, weight, one carb, 2 valves per cylinder, very simple rules back then. I also don't care about trick shocks. Short of inerters, they can run whatever they want. And technically, an inerter is not a shock by definition. Shocks don't make the speed that downforce does. Shocks are very misunderstood and credited with WAY too much of the speed increases over the last 10 years. My 18 degree engine will be competitive again, with downforce removed, no matter what shock they bolt on. Shock guys have been very successful selling snake oil. There is zero reason to change brands from year to year. The technology in them is on par. There may be a new damping curve, but it can be done in any of them.

I want the exact opposite of spec. I also want the cars to race each other better, without severe aero push. If the car needs less engine to win, it is possible for it to be cheaper racing. That choice is still in the hands of the owner/racer however. We have gone so far with bodies, beyond the original rules, that today's car to 2008 is like comparing winged 410 sprints to non-wing.

all I am saying is its not just the bodies that have gotten us to where were at , you take the car of today , do nothing but put an 08 body on it and the expensive trick parts will still have a huge advantage , you cant hold back technology and its expensive now days , but I am with you on the wishful thinking though ....

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

all I am saying is its not just the bodies that have gotten us to where were at , you take the car of today , do nothing but put an 08 body on it and the expensive trick parts will still have a huge advantage , you cant hold back technology and its expensive now days , but I am with you on the wishful thinking though ....

I couldn't disagree more strongly. Unlike most, I have some first hand experience to go with more than just a theory.

What makes a car faster is really pretty simple. More power to the ground.

That comes from more actual load on the tires without too much extra weight or drag, better load distribution at key points in the lap, less parasitic loss from any mechanical or aero contribution that can't be more than overcome by the engine performance.

Most of the "trick stuff" that exists today is because a new rule painted you into a box , you aren't allowed to make a simple geometry fix, or you simply sacrificed suspension function to load the hell out of the huge body with air. There isn't any real magic.

[fastford]

I couldn't disagree more strongly. Unlike most, I have some first hand experience to go with more than just a theory.

What makes a car faster is really pretty simple. More power to the ground.

That comes from more actual load on the tires without too much extra weight or drag, better load distribution at key points in the lap, less parasitic loss from any mechanical or aero contribution that can't be more than overcome by the engine performance.

Most of the "trick stuff" that exists today is because a new rule painted you into a box , you aren't allowed to make a simple geometry fix, or you simply sacrificed suspension function to load the hell out of the huge body with air. There isn't any real magic.

so the only way you can get extra load on a 2008 car is to add down force ??? I dont think so , maybe figuring out how to use these modern trick shocks on it could put force in a particular direction to get more traction where needed ..... either way , we will have to agree to disagree on this one MSR , and I have been doing this a good while my self......