Talk:Car of Tomorrow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Car of Tomorrow article.
Article policies
WikiProject NASCAR This article is part of WikiProject NASCAR, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to NASCAR. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, you can visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. To view recent changes to the project's articles, please check out the related changes page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Air intake

Could somebody clarify this buisness about the air intake being under the car? Is it refering to air being directed to the radiator? Is it refering to air going to the carburator? I've never even heard of this feature before, and I've read my share of articles about it. I'd like to see a refrence about that. Mustang6172 02:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

It's from the first reference article. All it says is that it is below the front bumper. I changed the "External links" section to "References", as those articles were all used as reference for this article. I hope this helps a little. Royalbroil 16:10, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Car Models" section

This section could stand to be clarified a little, since the Car of Tomorrow, by definition, has even less in common with any particular passenger car model than the current/outgoing NASCAR formula. I assume this just means these are the car models whose names and faux grill/headlight shapes will be painted on the cars? Mjj237 18:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

That's my assumption too. Sheet metal and decals to make it look somewhat like a street car, just like the current racecars. Royalbroil T : C 19:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I think that since the current generation of cars seems to look so little like something you would find on the road, that the COT should look more like a real car. Not like THE real cars, just a generic car that looks more down to Earth. Mustang6172 03:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
I think that this whole thing is unnecessarily nitpicky. Should we go around to other racing-related articles and change every reference to a manufacturer "running" a type of car because said car does not bear anything in relation to its road-going counterpart than a name? No. But, I'll hear anybody out and won't go rashly reverting the article. --TopGear 05:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Why does one person's opinion hold more "weight" than another? One person's "rash revision" is another's improvement. Isn't there a better way of handling difference of opinon rather than having a "revision war?" Can't a compromise be reached rather than going back and forth between two versions?
To say "chevrolet will run the "Impala" in the car of tomorrow races and the "Monte Carlo" in the other races is not correct - Chevrolet did not build either of these cars. To say Chevrolet is running the Impala is plain wrong and covers up the fact that all of the cars of tomorrow are the same. Cheverolet branded cars of tomorrow are CALLED "Impala," but they are common cars with Impala stickers and a front with some styling cues from an Impala. I'd LOVE to be able to buy a RWD manual transmission Impala at my Chevy dealer, but that just won't happen.
I'll delete the expository material about the cars if we can come to some sort of compromise here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.240.122.161 (talk • contribs).

I hate how this article even mentions the makes and models. It had none when I originally started it. [1] What is the relevance? I think that we should delete the entire section as irrelevant. None of the manufacturers actually make the cars. The cars don't look like any of the real models. It is just sheet metal bent to look like NASCAR's template. Just like most racecars run everywhere across the nation. What does everyone think of deleting the section as a compromise? Royalbroil T : C 19:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I like it as we had finally had it. That section should stay in there, simply because they did change some of the names when the cars changed - the names are part of the change to the car of tomorrow.
My understanding of the Wiki concept is that the article's original writer does not own the article - it is owned by everyone. By addition, discussion and revision the article is improved. I don't see how adding this material detracts from the article - it provides additional information. It's only 4 more sentences. I think the final version with "just the facts" should return. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.156.2.34 (talk • contribs).
I agree that starting the article has nothing to do with its ownership. I'll leave a message on WikiProject NASCAR to encourage more discussion. Royalbroil T : C 23:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
After re-reading, I'm okay with it as it is. Royalbroil T : C 23:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
While the manufacturers aren't directly campaigning individual cars, it's not correct to say they should be disregarded from this article. Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge, and Toyota do provide sheetmetal, engine blocks, and nosepieces to the teams that they support; only a few independent teams have to rely on cars and parts purchased secondhand. Further, the manufacturers submit car models, racing engine block designs, and carbon-fiber nosepiece designs to NASCAR for approval; without this involvement, nobody could race unapproved models. The current text probably says enough, but not all discussion of manufacturer involvement should be removed. Barno 16:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Barno, with the COT, there's no real difference between one car and the next. All the body work is identical from identical from one car to the next, the engine blocks haven't changed in about 25 years, and the models are just for advertising now. Also, the front and rear bumpers are made of fiberglass, not carbon fiber (though the wing and splitter are made of carbom fiber).Mustang6172 03:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

In fact the engine blocks have changed, although most of the basic tech is similar to 25 years ago. A new Robert Yates-developed design was submitted by Ford and approved less than a decade ago; GM got a new block approved around the same time; the Dodge block was all-new when they entered Cup in 2001; and the Toyota block is all-new, not a derivative of their Craftsman Truck Series block. While there are no street-car-based components used, and almost all parts were developed by race teams or aftermarket companies rather than factory engineers, the involvement of the factories is still notable and encylopedic. Attributable sources almost always mention the nameplate and often discuss groups of cars by their nominal manufacturer. Barno 17:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I found a source to check part of the "new blocks" point. (Gore, Doug. "Chevrolet's new SB2 Engine", Stock Car Racing, Volume 33, Number 3, March 1998.) It turns out that the new heads, intake and exhaust manifolds, pistons, camshaft, and rocker covers on the SB2.2, approved for NASCAR for the 1998 season after a couple of years in ARCA, could be fit on the existing blocks. "Special SB2 Bow Tie blocks are offered, but most teams appear to be sticking with their standard 18-degree Bow Tie blocks, at least for now." That was written in the offseason, and I haven't yet found whether teams migrated to the new blocks later. I'm not sure whether the Yates package required a new block, but I stand by my comment that the Dodge and Toyota blocks were all-new more recently than that. Those last two are what I recall reading at their respective introductions, not sources at hand at the moment. But to be clear, it was GM Motorsports people, managed at first by Ed Keating and later by Herb Fishel, who put together the SB2 program, getting technical help from Cup teams including Hendrick Motorsports and Richard Childress Racing. Barno 23:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Connection to Earnhardt Accident

The article said the changes were mainly due to the death of Dale Earnhardt, so I expected to see a discussion of the causes of the Earnhardt crash and how these causes would be corrected by the COT design. From what little I know about it, the safety issues in that crash centered around the seat belts and head restraints, and these do not seem to be part of the COT design changes. Maybe it is just the general increased concern for safety following Earnhardt's death and not specifically correcting the causes of the accident?Harold14370 21:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

That's my opinion. The death increased awareness. Another thought is that many drivers were constantly complaining that their model was worse than the others. The universal body killed the complaining, and the constant tweaking of each car model to make a leveler playing field. Royalbroil T : C 02:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
The COT changes most directly related to Earnhardt's death are: (1) The upper part of the roll cage is larger, making it less likely for a driver's head to hit a bar if his belts stretch, or if the cage is bent. (2) The driver's seat is located closer to the center of the car (same benefits as #1). (3) There are blocks of energy-absorbing foam between the side sheetmetal and the roll cage's side bars. (These are what smoldered in the Bristol and Martinsville races.) Barno 21:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Design Section

I would like to see some clarification on the design section. It mentions that the Car of Tomorrow was a response to the death of Dale Earnhardt. It then states "The then-current cars were based on Holman Moody's 1966 Ford Fairlane." Is someone trying to say that there were no changes/improvements in NASCAR technology in 35 years? I read the referenced article about Holman-Moody and could not see where this statement comes from. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Steelcitytbirds (talk • contribs) 14:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC).

The statement used as the basis for the sentence is "The 1966 Holman & Moody Fairlane is the basis for today’s NASCAR racecars." from here. The statement needed to be somewhat modified because the Motorsports Hall of Fame article was written in 2005 before the design of the Car of Tomorrow was finalized. The COT was redesigned from the ground up. I take the MSHoF statement to mean that the previous car was slowly modified and tweaked as technology increased, but there was no major redesign from scratch. Obviously the 1966 car was different in almost all respects from the 2006 car. I bet there were a few things that had only minimal modification. Please edit the article if you think that there is anything wrong with either my interpretation of the source sentence or my wording. Cheers! Royalbroil T : C 04:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Royalbroil is correct here. The basic chassis and suspension technologies from the H&M mid-sixties design have continued to be used, with NASCAR mandating a few specific changes such as adding specific bars to the structure for crash protection. The COT, while redesigned throughout, is based on the same tech, differing mainly in dimensions such as the larger roll cage and roof section. The biggest technical difference is the front splitter and rear wing replacing the previous air dams. Barno 14:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
There needs to be a source for this - "There are also a couple of new car designs being tested in hidden locations by famous stunt drivers like Tamara Flett and several others." --Carl Von Clausewitz 04:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
I removed the sentence, as it is most likely vandalism (or at least unsourced speculation). Royalbroil T : C 11:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Are all drivers forced to use it?

The article didn't answer this, are all drivers forced to use this model, or can they stay with the old models? Dionyseus 18:15, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they have to. --D-Day 18:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism

Does a criticism page backed up with references sound like a relevant and positive idea for this article? --FiftyOneWicked 20:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

It sounds too negative and unneeded. One can often critize any major change like this to death. Royalbroil T : C 19:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
My opinion is mixed. Most of the criticism that can currently be cited is "passing news items" rather than stuff with encyclopedic relevance. It's mostly singly-sourced early comments from drivers and crew chiefs after some testing, and a lot of the opinions changed after the first two COT races. Probably some brief summary of the main lines of criticism so far can be made into a short section within this article; at this point I doubt there's enough substance (not "I'm not used to it yet so I don't like it") to merit a breakout article. Barno 14:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
A Criticism section should be tops for the CoT. There are many developmental issues with the car to the point that it is becoming a safety issue with drivers. This link is an example. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/tom_bowles/04/25/car.tomorrow/index.html For the record, NASCAR could go from possibility using only the CoT in 2008 to not using the CoT at all after the two May races it will be driven. The latest problem is that the front bumper tends to drag and that will likely lead to a redesign.208.107.168.154 02:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of criticism, I was watching some race last year and they explained that the throttles need to be held down with a bungee cord, is there any evidence to back this up b/c that seems like a MAJOR setback. -- ZookPS3 (talk) 20:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

That doesn't make sense. Using a bungee cord to hold down the throttle would kill drivers. Do you mean holding down the throttle cable? That wouldn't be a big deal, although a tie down would make a lot more sense. Royalbroil 21:19, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Restricter Plates

Are they going to run restricter plates with the CoT at super-speedways? PolarisSLBM 02:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I haven't heard anything, but I would expect them to use restrictor plates. Royalbroil 13:43, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Hendrick Motorsports

Ok this article has waayyy to much talk about how Hendrick Motorsports is so good with the CoT and how they are dominating with it. I plan on editing some of that out and keeping it more neutral.KaseyKahne 06:29, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I support you. It is becoming a marketing piece. Royalbroil 12:02, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Headlights

the headlights are a decal, or not? CorvetteZ51 11:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Please remember next time that wikipedia is not a forum. Royalbroil 13:27, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] what differences are left?

are the chassis identicle? Are/will-there be more than on chassis constructor? people unfamiliar with the topic will want to know. CorvetteZ51 09:57, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

  • The chassis are not identical, but most major parameters of size and design (e.g. rear suspension must use trailing arms and a solid rear end, not independent rear suspension with coil-overs) are set by rule. There still are differences in where certain suspension and steering components are located, but I don't know whether teams are using both "front-steer" and "rear-steer" front-end designs like the previous car. Some teams are building their own chassis, so it hasn't changed to everyone being required to buy a chassis from one supplier. I agree that we need more (sourced) information on these details. Barno 14:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
where did the 'outer shape', come from? does the shape seem to resemble any production car? If there isn't a Wiki article titled 'Formula NASCAR', there should be CorvetteZ51 11:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
What is Formula NASCAR? I never heard of it. The Car of Tomorrow was a complete design from the ground up, so I'm guessing it does not resemble any specific production car. I haven't seen a highly technical article featuring the specifics of the COT. I will add these specs if I do. Royalbroil 13:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Formula NASCAR, sorta like, Fomula One, Formula Vee, Formula Ford, etc. An article where non-Nascar experts, could get an idea of the rules involved .CorvetteZ51 07:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
You must be from Europe. Most things in America do not use the "Formula" monikor. There is no such thing as Formula NASCAR. Go to the NASCAR article. We don't have the complete set of NASCAR rules anywhere in Wikipedia. Someone needs to go to NASCAR's website if they want a partial list. Royalbroil 12:02, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
how much of the CoT is a 'Spec' car? At the Sonoma race,two cheats modified some body panels, and were caught. I assume that the body panels came from Nascar. (not sure about that) So that the body panels are 'Spec'. I assume most of the rest of the car is open formula.CorvetteZ51 11:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh, the teams build pretty much everything on the car. They just have to do it according to NASCAR's blue prints. Hendrick's engineers thought that everything between the "hard points" was an open forumla. As it turns out, they were very wrong.Mustang6172 20:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
about the engines, the 'company', supplies the blocks and cyl-heads, everything else is by Fomula... or not. Also are the deck heights and cylinder spacings, the same,,, across, Chevy, Ford, Dodge, Toyota? CorvetteZ51 07:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
How exactly does this "discussion" help improve this article? Please read the note at the top of this page "This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject." Do you think we are insiders who know the inner workings of the teams? Royalbroil 14:03, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Passing

I think the tone of ther article re:passing needs to be changed. Stats say that COT races actually have *morE* passes [2] -Ravedave 14:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] the 'Car of Yesterday' consists of exactly what?

factory supplied, hood, roof, trunk,,,block, cylinder-head. and the rest by formula. with aero-hieght adjustments to maintain competition? or something elseCorvetteZ51 15:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

The teams make everything. Some teams make stuff like motors for other teams. The factory pays to have their sticker on the front. When I make these comments it's original research and it can't be used in the article. You would need to find reliable sources for this information and cite them as you add it in the article, so your time is best spent by researching. You can use us as a starting point for your research only. There has to be currently magazine articles that talk on these topics. Some of the these articles may be online... Royalbroil 16:03, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I want to stress that the teams make EVERYTHING - nothing has been factory supplied for decades. The Car of Tomorrow takes away the last thing that was related to factories: the cars no longer have any shape relationship to factory-built cars. There has been little shape resemblance to factory cars since the mid-1980s IMHO. Teams take sheet metal and bend it the "correct" shape. They control the exact shape of the car. NASCAR has rules that determine the shape at key points on the body. Some teams went to work in small areas that were not defined by NASCAR rules (and thus not measured by NASCAR templates) and did their own interpretation on how to shape the sheet metal. They were caught and have received fines and suspensions. As to the motors (block, cylinder head configurations, piston length, etc.), only the teams and NASCAR know exactly how things are done. That information is not common knowledge to NASCAR fans, but it is possible that it is published to the general public. You will have to research it yourself. NASCAR cars are VERY different than Formula One and Formula Ford cars, and there is little comparison (especially in the rules, procedures, and sanctioning bodies). Stock cars have always been on a different branch from open wheel cars on the tree of the evolution of racing cars. You need to think about things totally different. Sanctioning bodies do not provide parts for the racecars. Are you planning to add this information to the article, or are you just wondering? Royalbroil 16:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
The teams pour the engine block, or not? CorvetteZ51 00:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
As to the motors (block, cylinder head configurations, piston length, etc.), only the teams and NASCAR know exactly how things are done. (pasted from above) Royalbroil 02:23, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Here is where the blocks come from, the XXX Compny's racing division.http://sports.yahoo.com/nascar/news?slug=bm-newengines091306&prov=yhoo&type=lgns CorvetteZ51 03:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Notice that the top TEAMS are designing the blocks at the request of the manufacturer. These top teams are the same ones that for the last several years have made all of the engines that are used by all teams running for a manufacturer. So all Ford teams have been using motors made by a shop formed by combining the engine builders from the top two Ford teams Robert Yates Racing and Roush Racing. The car manufacturers (like Ford) only facilitate the motor design. Teams buy the motors directly from the engine builder. Royalbroil 04:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
This is the story, I think needs to be told.Correct me if I am wrong. Current car : GM/Ford/Dodge supply, for their teams, castings for engine-block and cyl-heads, and three pieces of factory-production sheet metal. Carb is also specified. Rest of car by their respective G/F/D Nascar formula. CoT differs in, sheet metal is now spec, and entire car, less engine, is now one formula. CorvetteZ51 01:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
They stoped using factory-production sheet metal around 2003 I believe. At the time, NASCAR called it "aero equal". Though I believe the engine block castings and cylinder heads may still be supplied by the manufacturers (however far from production).Mustang6172 03:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Mustang6172, thanks for your comment. . The current bodies, are very close to the size-shapes of their respective production car, or not. Is a type of rear-end specified?, perhaps the Ford 9 inch. Are any other parts exactly specified? Are flat crankshafts allowed?CorvetteZ51 04:39, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't know exactly how close the COT is to production car specs, but there is just one COT body. The only real difference from one brand to the next is the engine. The Ford 9" is required by NASCAR. I think most of the part requirements are in that top secret rule book only the compeditors are allowed to have.Mustang6172 02:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

the CoT is meant to resemble a two or four door sedan? Are there 'door-handle decals'? Two or four?CorvetteZ51 08:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
No, there are no decals or lines to indicate doors. The Camry is a four-door; its two-door Solara variant looks less like the COT than the Camry does. The body parts aren't the same as any of the street cars' shapes. Many components (most engine, brake, and suspension components) must be purchased from a short list of NASCAR-approved suppliers, and only the part numbers with rulebook-specified materials and dimensions, not every super-thin magnesium-alloy prototype part that a supplier might want to try. The rear end, actually from aftermarket suppliers, is the design known as the Ford nine-inch for the size of its ring gear. You can get a rulebook for Nextel Cup if you buy a Cup competitor license. If you race a Modified, Late Model Stock, etc. at a NASCAR weekly track, your license buys you a rulebook for that class. Weekly supporting divisions don't have separate rulebooks; their rules are set locally. Barno 19:58, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


I will say this about the shape/design of the COT. The Nose/Tail pieces are diffrent for each make, the Hood is supplied by the Factory (GM/FORD/DODGE/TOYOTA), it is not the full hood just the outer skin. Also the quarterpannel windows are diffrent for each make and they resemble the "street" cars reardoor window. All COT makes are 4 door sedans. The engige block is developed by the manufacture (GM performance/FORD Racing/MOPAR/TRD) the pistons are also provided by the factory. Most teams use a majority of factory supplied aftermarket parts, although some teams prefer to make their own. Toyota engines are built by TRD by a representive or two of all the Toyota teams and by TRD engineers. Toyota mandates that all Toyota teams use TRD engines. GM/FORD/DODGE teams all build their own engines, however some teams buy engines from other teams engine shops, and some teams have combined engine shops (RCR/DEI, Roush/Yates). Starting this year (2007) GM teams have been allowed to run the R07 engine, which is run in all of the GM COT cars, and some teams elect to run them in the non-cot cars. NASCAR Mandates that you have to run certain parts, but other then the wing and Restictor plate (only at 2 tracks) NASCAR does not supply any of them. The Bodies of the cars are hand built to the blueprints/rules provided by NASCAR, except the Hood(from factory) and the Nose/tail pieces are made of a composite material(not sure where they are supplied from, but I know the teams dont make them). The front Splitter is a composite material that is a "spec" part, however the teams are responsible for getting them. As far as the transmission/rearend and the suspension it is pretty much the same as in the non-cot cars. The one major diffrence is in the COT you are allowed to run shock-packers. The NASCAR cup is not a spec series but it isnt a 100% open series either. As of right now the NASCAR cup itself is a fine and delicate balance between those two types of series. I know as of right now alot of that stuff I said cant be used in this article because it is from my own knowledge of the sport from tv/web shows and from people I know that work for Cup teams. The NASCAR rule book for the cup series is only available to NASCAR members, which I am not. I will try my best to find the proper sources for the info above and as I do I will intergrate it into the article. Fisha695 08:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I'm afraid that this information is very out of date. NASCAR stopped allowing factory hoods when "aero equal" came into play. The noses of the old spec were factory designed, but not stock.Mustang6172 02:52, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] schedule

Poemisaglock 23:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC) the article didn't mention where the CoT would be raced only once in the 2007 season (assuming there are any such tracks).

[edit] Busch series COT

I will do work and get all the PR and stuff that has been announced so far about the Busch series COT car and will intergrate it into this article, and keep it up-to-date with that as best I can. Fisha695 08:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The article reads like a fan club newsletter.

The following, (currently left out), needs to be somewhere...Except for the engine, the CoT is a combination (closed) spec and formula car. The engines are believed to be 4 different formulas, with the bare castings for the block and cylinder head being supplied by the racing divisions of the four sponsoring car companies. CorvetteZ51 09:13, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Change Name

The Title should now be changed to "Car of Today" or "New Car" because the term "Car of Tomorrow" is outdated. (65.2.178.153 (talk) 03:24, 21 January 2008 (UTC))

The title will be what NASCAR wills it to be.Mustang6172 (talk) 06:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
No one knows what it will be called this year (its common name). You should not be changing the name on the article until it is certain. Let's wait to see what the media calls it after a few races.Royalbroil 06:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

On Speed Channel, they have started to call it the new car I TOLD YOU SO, TU FAI SCHIFO SEMPRE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.8.115.178 (talk) 01:13, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] New Photograph

Could we get a picture of a complete, painted car instead of just the body?Mustang6172 (talk) 02:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure a Creative Commons image will show up on flickr shortly. You might even find a practice image now if you want to check it out. None of my flickr friends have uploaded one yet. Here's one from last year Image:01ReganSmith army.mil-2007-06-25-081626.jpg. Royalbroil 03:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
I uploaded an image for nearly every driver that raced at the 2008 Daytona 500. Take your pick of the images to add to this article. Royalbroil 06:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)