Bristol Was A Snoozer

[tipptruck1]

I can see NASCAR if the cost would not kill them. Mandating some sort of monocock. That is what makes sports cars so safe. I don't care if its some sort of steel, or carbon fiber like DTM, open wheels, and prototypes use. I think NASCAR is the only ones that don't require that.

[Fishing Rhino]

Earnhardt should not have died in that crash.  The problem was that his seat belt tore, and he was not restrained within the driver's compartment.  The anchor mounts on the floor behind the seat had a serious flaw. 

 

The piece through which the seat belt passes should swivel on the mounting bolt.   This allows it to line up with the belt.  His was tightened down rock solid, which placed most of the stress along one edge of the belt, rather than distributing it evenly.  It's like duct tape.  If you pull at the edge, it tears like tissue paper.  If you pull evenly, it's darn near indestructible.

 

There was also a problem with the Simpson mounting hardware.  The pieces are stamped which produces a ridge on the back side of the stamping.  That ridge should be eased by chamfering, but they were not, so the forces pulled the belt against that ridge which also contributed to the catastrophic failure.

 

The same thing happened to one of my customers on a quarter mile track, for the very same reasons.  He's a big guy, but the seat belt parted at relatively low speed coming off the turn when he went into the wall.  His seat belt parted, but he was lucky, if it's possible to be lucky in a crash like that.  He slid beneath the wheel and shattered one of his ankles, but at least he survived.

 

This was in the summer of 2001, six months after Earnhardt's crash.  They sued Simpson and won.  The defense had one of the Unsers , I think it was Bobby and a couple of other experts go to Hutch's race shop and examine the car.  No doubt they were looking for any flaw in the chassis that could absolve Simpson.   They were impressed by the quality of the work and the design of the chassis.

[MCS]

So do NASCAR drivers were the HANS device?

[tipptruck1]

So do NASCAR drivers were the HANS device?

Yep they have mandated since Dales death. The FIA, ACO, SCCA, NHRA, NASA, NACAR and Indy have all mandated it since. Those are all the big names in racing. They all pretty munch follow the FIA in some way for safety.

[BrianinMD]

They wear the HANS now, sadly it took to long and multiple deaths for it to be used. I was working SCCA club events as a corner worker when those club guys were using them while Nascar was not. Nascar has always been behind in safefty.

[MCS]

Yep they have mandated since Dales death. The FIA, ACO, SCCA, NHRA, NASA, NACAR and Indy have all mandated it since. Those are all the big names in racing. They all pretty munch follow the FIA in some way for safety.

That is what I thought. Thanks.

Rhino I wasn't disrespecting the technology or craftsmanship rather I was just a little surprise NASCAR doesn't require more to be spent on their safety development/practices. A chassis that crumpled better would probably help a lot but cost the teams more $ to develop and more $ to replace a car after a wreck.

[Fishing Rhino]

FIA, as in Formula One?

 

If so, they did not mandate the use of the HANS device until 2003.

 

CART was the first to mandate its use for the 2001 season.

 

It's difficult to compare an F1 or an Indy "car" to a cup car.  I'm guessing, but I would think it's easier to build crushable, deformable sections into a car that weighs 1367 pounds than in a vehicle that weighs 3400 pounds.

 

The engine in an F1 is behind the driver, so that provides a nice cushion between the nose of the car and the driver that can be used to incorporate energy absorbing design features.  With a cup car, it has to be fabricated to keep the engine from being pushed into the driver's compartment.  Compared to an F1, it has relatively little space for energy absorption.

 

They are two really different animals.

 

Drivers in stock cars are rarely hurt when they get slammed in the rear, or spin and crash into a wall backwards.  The F1 cars have their space in the front, Sprint Cup cars in the rear.  Maybe NASCAR should have 'em race backwards. 

[tipptruck1]

Rhino the FIA the ruler of a lot of things. Here is a list of series that follow there rules. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_FIA_events If a driver screws up or cheats. They have to answer to the FIA. A lot of rule books around the world are based on the FIA rule book. Including NASA, SCCA, Grand am, and ALMS.

[MCS]

FIA, as in Formula One?

If so, they did not mandate the use of the HANS device until 2003.

CART was the first to mandate its use for the 2001 season.

It's difficult to compare an F1 or an Indy "car" to a cup car. I'm guessing, but I would think it's easier to build crushable, deformable sections into a car that weighs 1367 pounds than in a vehicle that weighs 3400 pounds.

The engine in an F1 is behind the driver, so that provides a nice cushion between the nose of the car and the driver that can be used to incorporate energy absorbing design features. With a cup car, it has to be fabricated to keep the engine from being pushed into the driver's compartment. Compared to an F1, it has relatively little space for energy absorption.

They are two really different animals.

Drivers in stock cars are rarely hurt when they get slammed in the rear, or spin and crash into a wall backwards. The F1 cars have their space in the front, Sprint Cup cars in the rear. Maybe NASCAR should have 'em race backwards.

Two different animals yes. But they both go near 200 mph. F1 cars are safer at that speed. A more comparable car to the cup car is an ALMS GT car which goes slower than a cup car and is safer. The need for speed and rubbin is racing has out grown the safety rules of NASCAR. All the things you mentioned are not reasons a car cannot be safe, they are just unwillingly to invest money and possibly break tradition while keeping the sport exciting. Build a monocoque out of space age material or make them mid engine....ooh that is too much money and not keeping with the "stock car" theme becuase who is anyone kidding those things are about as "stock" as F1 cars.

[Fishing Rhino]

Guaranteed, if NASCAR did all that, their audience, both tv and at the track, would nosedive.  They took a hit with the car of tomorrow which provided more space between the driver and the roll cage.  Fans grumbled that they may as well run IROC cars.  In the last few years of its existence IROC didn't draw flies.  Go monocoque, make them mid-engine, and make 'em weigh 1300 pounds. 

 

Bye bye factory participation.  Bye bye fans.  Bye bye sponsorships. Bye bye NASCAR.  They'll be as popular as the Indy cars.

 

That's my opinion, for what it's worth.

[MCS]

So what's your opinion on the safety of the cars/track are they safe enough or can more be done?

I think the technology now is out there to improve the safety of the cup cars with out the crazy hypotheticals like mid engine etc. They will eventually have to, especially if they want to continue to develop and push the envelope.

Just surprised me how bad that car handled the wreck.

[Fishing Rhino]

More can always be done.  If there was a known,  better way, to make the cars safer, why would they not do it?  NASCAR doesn't want their stars, who draw the fans on the sidelines.   

 

Then there are the freak accidents.  I was a Lee Speedway in Epping NH, several years ago watching a Super Modified race that was part of the show.  There was a crash in turn one.  It wasn't bad as crashes go, but a piece of sheet metal sliced open the drivers neck, killing him.

 

The only race cars I watch are stock cars, and from time to time drag racing.  An F1, and an Indy car are truly marvels of technology.  F1 has an avid fan base, but not in this country.  The only Indy race that is well attended and gets good tv ratings is the Indy 500.

 

A safer barrier on the wall Hamlin hit, might have prevented or reduced the injury Hamlin sustained.

 

If you look at the crash testing done on cars, their main goal is to absorb the energy while maintaining the integrity of the passenger compartment.

 

 

I think the current tests are done at 30 or 35 mph.  I don't know how fast Hamlin was travelling, but it was significantly faster than  that of crash tests.