View Full Version : A Blast From the Past! GdF at Fontana 2000
Gil de Ferran's qualifying run of 241.428 mph.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DF8GTL0_rMA&feature=related
Wow, what memories. I was there and I believe five cars completed the race the next day?
How many breath mints did Junior need to stand that close to Cappy? :gomer:
Anteater
03-28-08, 10:02 PM
I was there too, and I'll never forget it! Thanks for posting.
Ozarkian
03-29-08, 12:13 AM
:cry:
-Kevin
Indeed.
oddlycalm
03-29-08, 01:07 AM
Quite a run. I don't expect to see a faster speed posted on a closed course in my lifetime, which brings with it mixed emotions...
oc
amazing isn't it? take something so good and f*** it so much. :shakehead
Wow, what memories. I was there and I believe five cars completed the race the next day?
hbz8KONVrUk
Yeah...back when Penske, Honda and 100%throttlefoottothefloorflatoutneverlift ovals were a GOOD thing. (?) Or was Gil just THAT good? Irony abounds.
Insomniac
03-29-08, 11:28 AM
Yeah...back when Penske, Honda and 100%throttlefoottothefloorflatoutneverlift ovals were a GOOD thing. (?) Or was Gil just THAT good? Irony abounds.
The cars were on the edge though. They weren't being artificially slowed and stuck to the track with excessive downforce.
WickerBill
03-29-08, 11:41 AM
That would have been such an awesome season if Chip had stuck with Honda.
Not that I'm complaining... Gil was the man.
Andrew Longman
03-29-08, 12:01 PM
The cars were on the edge though. They weren't being artificially slowed and stuck to the track with excessive downforce.
No kidding. I was at MIS earlier that year and saw Tracy keep his foot in it as the car crabbed out to the wall of T4 on his pole lap. Awesome.
Insomniac
03-29-08, 12:12 PM
No kidding. I saw at MIS earlier that year and saw Tracy keep his foot in it as the car crabbed out to the wall of T4 on his pole lap. Awesome.
:thumbup:
Artificially slowed? I should think so. Do you disagree there were good reasons for doing that? I'm an admitted technofeeb but weren't the Novis pushing 240 at the end of the back straight at Indy in the '50s? I think they were artificially slowed by flat turns a complete lift and big honkin' brakes! Gil's lap was a reasonable end to an era that began with Big Bill's construction of the high banks at Daytona in '59. Marshall Teague and George Amick ended it there almost immediately for the "Big" cars and we've seen a lot of mayhem on tracks similar to it ever since...in artificially slowed cars. Somebody always finds that edge and at 199 or 213 or 230 on the high banks results are often disasterous. Our heroes are braver as drivers than I am as a fan. I saw it, I appreciated it, I am not anxious to see it again.
Andrew Longman
03-29-08, 01:04 PM
NismoZ, I don't think anyone will disagree with you on the need to slow the cars, but I think the reference was to Hanford devices and huge wings and mandated angles to create drag and slow the cars.
These are cheap tricks taken because they avoided the tougher, smarter alternatives that might have included some combination of reduced boost, smaller displacement, narrower tires, smaller wings/less downforce, higher minimum mpg, outlaw certain engine technology, etc.
People mostly talk about how NASCAR and the split killed CART, especially on ovals, but people can't discount how these rules also destroyed the on track product.
I know the last few years CART was at Nazareth most of the local press before and after each race complained about how taking away the short oval wings ruined the racing.
This is the oval racing people wanted http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1EzfTl5R6I
hbz8KONVrUk
Not to forget that was the second motor for Billy during that race.....;)
Insomniac
03-29-08, 01:35 PM
NismoZ, I don't think anyone will disagree with you on the need to slow the cars, but I think the reference was to Hanford devices and huge wings and mandated angles to create drag and slow the cars.
These are cheap tricks taken because they avoided the tougher, smarter alternatives that might have included some combination of reduced boost, smaller displacement, narrower tires, smaller wings/less downforce, higher minimum mpg, outlaw certain engine technology, etc.
People mostly talk about how NASCAR and the split killed CART, especially on ovals, but people can't discount how these rules also destroyed the on track product.
I know the last few years CART was at Nazareth most of the local press before and after each race complained about how taking away the short oval wings ruined the racing.
This is the oval racing people wanted http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1EzfTl5R6I
Exactly. Road course wings don't belong on ovals. Slow them down with the engine formula.
NismoZ, this is what I meant. Obviously the rules will always cause an artificial limit on the top speed obtainable, but I just want it to be clear that when most people on here complain about the IRL and the pedal down the entire lap, it's really a lot different from having the pedal down for an entire lap 12-15+ years ago.
Also, where did PT come from around the 4:30 mark of that video? That was awesome (and would never happen today).
Sean O'Gorman
03-29-08, 01:35 PM
Is that Al Unser Jr. congratulating Penske after Gil crosses the line?
Andrew Longman
03-29-08, 02:01 PM
Also, where did PT come from around the 4:30 mark of that video? That was awesome (and would never happen today).
Back then tires and set up were not nearly as consistent as fuel burned off and conditions changed. As the race went on and different pit strategies played out you'd see a lot more passing through the field and more charges to the front by those who suddenly were better than others.
With so much grip coming now from aero, performance though the stint is much more consistent and the cars stay more packed together. Lately they've been backed parade style in the IRL.
Insomniac
03-29-08, 02:14 PM
Back then tires and set up were not nearly as consistent as fuel burned off and conditions changed. As the race went on and different pit strategies played out you'd see a lot more passing through the field and more charges to the front by those who suddenly were better than others.
With so much grip coming now from aero, performance though the stint is much more consistent and the cars stay more packed together. Lately they've been backed parade style in the IRL.
Ahhh, thanks for the explanation. Here's another question. Now there are tons of marbles. Back then, were there less, or was there less accumulation on track because so much more of the track was used? Last time CC was at Milwaukee, they needed the jet engines to clear marbles off the track for a 225 mile race!
No, I'm aware of all that and certainly meant no criticism. I think I was simply concerned that this wonderful joining of open wheel forces and increases in grid numbers could make an oft criticized and dangerous feature of racing the high banks even worse. Banging wheels at turn 1 in Cleveland is hardly the same as touching at 215 at Homestead. This new deal can't get to that 6-6-6 split in venues (or 7-7-7, whatever) soon enough to please me. ( And Gil WAS that good, but so was Penske and Honda and my guess is a half dozen guys could have turned that lap in the same car.)
Andrew Longman
03-29-08, 03:37 PM
Ahhh, thanks for the explanation. Here's another question. Now there are tons of marbles. Back then, were there less, or was there less accumulation on track because so much more of the track was used? Last time CC was at Milwaukee, they needed the jet engines to clear marbles off the track for a 225 mile race!
I don't have an explanation for the marbles the last trip to Milwaukee, but back when Goodyear was still in the series (<2000 IIRC) there were more because both Firestone and Goodyear were competing to make a softer, grippier tire which threw off more marbles.
It really became a problem on street courses where the line is narrow already. I don't recall it being that much of a trouble on ovals because they tend to not run up to the wall anyway.
Perhaps that last trip to Milwaukee they were more cautious because the drivers were less experienced on ovals, the equipment was in short supply, car counts already low and teams had little funding. Good to do everything they could to keep them off the wall.
I don't have an explanation for the marbles the last trip to Milwaukee, but back when Goodyear was still in the series (<2000 IIRC) there were more because both Firestone and Goodyear were competing to make a softer, grippier tire which threw off more marbles.
It really became a problem on street courses where the line is narrow already. I don't recall it being that much of a trouble on ovals because they tend to not run up to the wall anyway.
Perhaps that last trip to Milwaukee they were more cautious because the drivers were less experienced on ovals, the equipment was in short supply, car counts already low and teams had little funding. Good to do everything they could to keep them off the wall.
I remember walking in the track and the end of a Toronto race during the tire war years. The marbles were HUGE and abundant. There was barely one racing line...
oddlycalm
03-29-08, 08:33 PM
Here's another question. Now there are tons of marbles. Back then, were there less, or was there less accumulation on track because so much more of the track was used? Last time CC was at Milwaukee, they needed the jet engines to clear marbles off the track for a 225 mile race! You pretty much nailed it. There was a gray area of marbles and if you got out on that you hit the wall, but for most of the race even the shorter ovals had multiple lines. The super speedways were pretty much the same thing. There was a high ling a low line and at times a way low line. The marbles got worked out toward the wall and you didn't dare drift out onto them or your race was over.
oc
Sure it is.
Opie just looks different when he's not sweating out the previous night's fifth.
Is that Al Unser Jr. congratulating Penske after Gil crosses the line?
Insomniac
03-30-08, 01:26 PM
You pretty much nailed it. There was a gray area of marbles and if you got out on that you hit the wall, but for most of the race even the shorter ovals had multiple lines. The super speedways were pretty much the same thing. There was a high ling a low line and at times a way low line. The marbles got worked out toward the wall and you didn't dare drift out onto them or your race was over.
oc
Just continues to confirm aerodynamics AND computers == bad for racing.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.