Quote from de Souza :

The shape is just glass fiber (or some kind of plastic), that's why the car seems to break apart.

Ok that makes sense now. It was always my understanding that the SCB and the COT (along with the old NASCAR stock cars) are similar

My point was that stock cars should be able to handle more damage. Just look at Jeff Fuller's crash.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5sVheIcffM

Quote from lizardfolk :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... wVVT8&feature=related

They are going at about 150-160 mph, NASCAR stock cars are likely much heavier than the SCB and Gordon's car wasn't destroyed like how that car was

The actual impact speed there is probably around 30-40mph and remember that energy increases exponentially with velocity.

Cathrine Legge's crash was a high speed rearward impact into the wall, the car deformed perfectly shedding absolutely everything meaning the actual force/deformation in critical areas was minimal, very scary but not likely to be life threatening a single hard hit is always far worse. A crash like Kubica's at Montreal may not look as spectacular as Legges's crash but the individual impact was enormous and as can be clearly seen afterwards right at the limit of deformation for a F1 car, no other car I can think of would have stood a chance of keeping the driver alive in the same impact.

EDIT - that second video is a passenger side impact probably at lower speed than the original T-bone this thread is about, the actual damage to that car is pretty much the same as what happened to the Brazilian stock car, it didn't look as bad because the sheet steel didn't fly off like the fiberglass, but that offers no extra protection in a crash like that. Had that been a driver side impact there's no way he'd have survived it. I know you seem to think that stock cars can survive impacts at speeds the media likes to say they do but the simple fact is they don't, most crashes in all forms of motorsport ether have a lot of energy dispersal due to good track and car designs and are actually a lot slower/less direct than people think. Only when you've seem in person the difference between a fast crash and a fast impact can you truly comprehend the difference.

Quote from ajp71 :

The actual impact speed there is probably around 30-40mph and remember that energy increases exponentially with velocity.

Cathrine Legge's crash was a high speed rearward impact into the wall, the car deformed perfectly shedding absolutely everything meaning the actual force/deformation in critical areas was minimal, very scary but not likely to be life threatening a single hard hit is always far worse. A crash like Kubica's at Montreal may not look as spectacular as Legges's crash but the individual impact was enormous and as can be clearly seen afterwards right at the limit of deformation for a F1 car, no other car I can think of would have stood a chance of keeping the driver alive in the same
impact.

Fuller's crash (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5sVheIcffM) was with much more velocity and Fuller hit the curbed inside wall straight into the driver's door. That is more serious than Gordon's T-Bone (and keep in mind that crash was heavy enough to lift Gordon's car off the ground). Also, both Gordon's and Fuller's cars were not disintegrated by the impact (which makes it looks scarier).

I fail to see how Gordon's crash was only at 30-40 mph when Allmendinger was going 160 mph around the time he T-Boned Gordon

Ouch, that was nasty. Anyway, brazilian Stock Cars don't ever race in such speeds (top speed is about 240-250kph/150-156mph) and they don't race in ovals, so speeds over 200kph don't happen every time.

Quote from de Souza :

Ouch, that was nasty. Anyway, brazilian Stock Cars don't ever race in such speeds (top speed is about 240-250kph/150-156mph) and they don't race in ovals, so speeds over 200kph don't happen every time.

Hey, Souza, can you tell me exactly how the SCB is built? (I would like specific specs) I'm quite curious about it

Quote from lizardfolk :

Fuller's crash (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5sVheIcffM) was with much more velocity and Fuller hit the curbed inside wall straight into the driver's door. That is more serious than Gordon's T-Bone (and keep in mind that crash was heavy enough to lift Gordon's car off the ground). Also, both Gordon's and Fuller's cars were not disintegrated by the impact (which makes it looks scarier).

It was passenger side.

Quote :

I fail to see how Gordon's crash was only at 30-40 mph when Allmendinger was going 160 mph around the time he T-Boned Gordon

Gordon's car was still moving having only lost a small amount of speed going across the grass. You get that if a car doing 70mph hits a car doing 65mph on the motorway it's a 5mph impact?

Quote from ajp71 :

It was passenger side.

That's my mistake

Quote from ajp71 :

Gordon's car was still moving having only lost a small amount of speed going across the grass. You get that if a car doing 70mph hits a car doing 65mph on the motorway it's a 5mph impact?

There's a indicator of Raines (the car that spun Gordon) as being 81 mph. Considering that he was way past Gordon (for Gordon didn't stay long in the grass) I'd say Gordon was going 60-75. Since Allmendinger was going 160+. It would be more accurate to say that the impact was 80 mph

Quote from lizardfolk :

There's a indicator of Raines (the car that spun Gordon) as being 81 mph. Considering that he was way past Gordon (for Gordon didn't stay long in the grass) I'd say Gordon was going 60-75. Since Allmendinger was going 160+. It would be more accurate to say that the impact was 80 mph

Most likely a transmission reading (in that case completely inaccurate in anything other than forward motion without wheelspin) or a radar sensor or speed trap? All speed measurements are pretty vague anyway and can hardly be considered accurate in a spin.

Quote from ajp71 :

Most likely a transmission reading (in that case completely inaccurate in anything other than forward motion without wheelspin) or a radar sensor or speed trap? All speed measurements are pretty vague anyway and can hardly be considered accurate in a spin.

We'll just leave it at that. There's no need to argue any furthur

Quote from ajp71 :

most crashes in all forms of motorsport ether have a lot of energy dispersal due to good track and car designs and are actually a lot slower/less direct than people think. Only when you've seem in person the difference between a fast crash and a fast impact can you truly comprehend the difference.

I will agree here, the major reason why NASCAR does not have fatalities everyday is due to the safer barrier designs around the ovals (something other stock car series should consider) as well as an improvement in safety with the COT after the Fuller crash

Hey Lizard this should provide more information about the Brazilian Stock Cars. click

It's an accident from the Buenos Aires (Argentina) round, the guy fell on a road below the track. But you can see the fiber breaking apart again and the rollcage clearly. He didn't suffer any injury.

And you can see that someone took him off the track as well. Noobs.

Can someone explain to me why the stock cars used in Nascar always catch fire after an impact? You very rarely see that happen these days in European racing series, is it something to do with the way the cars are built or the type of fuel?

This is a crash thats been used in advertising race spec fuel tanks, the guy was perfectly ok and not a drop of fuel was spilt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmobVaUgix0

Rafael was a Stock Car LIGHT driver... (not the main Stock Car V8 class)

Lizard, the specs of the car (in portuguese, no time to translate, sorry):

http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_Car_Light

Quote from ATC Quicksilver :

Can someone explain to me why the stock cars used in Nascar always catch fire after an impact? You very rarely see that happen these days in European racing series, is it something to do with the way the cars are built or the type of fuel?

This is a crash thats been used in advertising race spec fuel tanks, the guy was perfectly ok and not a drop of fuel was spilt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmobVaUgix0

Jet fuel..After an accident if it touches air it causes fire that is usally safe enough for them to just waltz away from.

Looked like a pretty routine crash until the other car came in contact.

Poor guy what a way to go.

R.I.P.

It's long time since we sow someone got killed in race

R.I.P
Thats shocking video material, the car gets totally..demolished

Quote from ATC Quicksilver :

Can someone explain to me why the stock cars used in Nascar always catch fire after an impact? You very rarely see that happen these days in European racing series, is it something to do with the way the cars are built or the type of fuel?

It's normally caused by the fuel filler being broken, there's not a lot one can do if you insist on having the filler on the outside of the car. AFAIK they run exactly the same ATL fuel cells that the majority of European racing cars manage to without blowing up every other crash, so my guess is that it's bad installation and car design that cause them, they actually carry less fuel (about 85 litres) than most GT cars, which when they catch fire are often more spectacular. The actual fuel used makes minimal difference though to a fuel cell fire, if the cell itself is ignited all hell will break loose pretty much regardless of how much and what type of fuel is in there.

As for the sprint/dirt cars I'm pretty sure that's down to crappy cheap fuel cells and exceptionally poor installation, there shouldn't be an exposed filler on a car that doesn't have to refuel so there should be absolutely no excuse for fires unless the car is literally ripped in half. Stock car and dirt track fires that are not caused by the fuel cell often look far worse because they are allowed to grow before they're put out, either through slow response or not having the appropriate equipment, where in Europe when they do occur fires are dealt with very quickly.

I can recall a similar crash in ALMS or Grand Am... can't remember exactly which. Car basically broke in half after being t-boned while stationary in that one. Happened a few years ago in Canada, iirc.

edit: it was Mike Gagliardo at Mosport in the Trans Am series.

Two "T-bone" crashes:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BekTUQELbGA

Who was this driver? It must be ALMS and the track is Road Atlanta. I guess it wasn't fatal because I couldn't find anything in Motorsportmemorial.org. I hate guys who upload crash videos to youtube with zero information about it.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=SG6V8MmsU3s

Year ago in Bathurst (V8 Supercars) there was a similar fatal accident to this Sperafico's crash.


.

Yikes, that ALMS Road Atlanta one is sick.

Stock Car V8 Light Specs (translated but lacking the technical slang):

Suspension
Independent with double triangles, helicoidal[?] springs with stabilizing bars. The dampers are hidraulic, unique and sealed, provided with the car.
Steering
Pinion and ratchet[??] with hidraulic assistance through electrical pump.
Wheels
Binno 10,5 x 18 inches.
Tyres
Pirelli. Front and rear 285/645 VR 18. D-3 compound.
Brakes
Disk on 4 wheels.
Engine
Chevrolet V8 with 350 HP, 5.500 rpm e 5.700 cc (5,7 l), aluminium engine head, quadruple carburator(quadrijet), dry cranckcase.
Transmission
Eaton, 5 gears forward, 1 reverse.
Fuel
Gasoline
Fuel Tank
Race-specific, rubber container filled with high density foam (optional) and steel container with safety valves. Capacity: 85 litres.
Chassi
Tubular, with steel sheets, aluminium sheets, with anti-fire cover.
Body
Reinforced glass fiber, Astra Hatchback.
Minimum weight
1.250 kg with driver inside wearing suit, gloves, shoes, helmet and with remaining fluids (oil, water, fuel, etc.). The weighting[?] is done at the end of the race.
Max speed
240 km/h (Curitiba)



Those are the specs for SCB light. The main version has a 450hp v8.

1st post!