|
It would be difficult to make it work because it is completely regressive. Every racer that I know, myself included, wants to go as fast as they can go, to be the fastest. Pavement cars are built for exactly that, to go as fast as they possibly can on a pavement track, with the necessary means to adjust them as conditions change. And since a pavement track inherently provides more grip than dirt and doesn't change nearly as drastically, the cars can go to the maximum dimensional limits allowed. There is nothing stopping anyone right now from doing what has been suggested, torsion rear suspension, a jacobs ladder instead of a panhard bar, left side steering gear, engine & rear end centered in the chassis, 53" front axle max, etc etc. Why doesn't anyone? Because the combination doesn't provide the fastest car possible, or at least someone hasn't consistently proven it can be faster. And when you get down to using one car for both, once you convert from dirt to pavement, you might as well have a second car for the amount of things that need changing, unless a ride-height, crank-height, set-back, and almost every single aspect of the car is mandated. And if that happens, you have a spec car which definitely isn't what sprint-car racing was founded on. The last thing racing needs is even more rules to stifle innovation.
Here's a question, there seem to be plenty of dirt-track latemodels and plenty of pavement latemodels. Those cars are completely different, and purpose built for their respective surfaces. So why do both of them seem to co-exist just fine? How many series/sanctioning bodies actually run both surfaces anymore, ASA? Anyone else?
Chad Atkinson
|