Battle of the Race cars, NASCAR vs. Prototype

[kendallcschm]

im seeing the monte carlo... its a muscle car.. it has a way bigger displacement..

[Witty]

Im going with the Porsche sense the people around there know how to make good race cars.

[Numbchux]

I voted porsche since it has more power, less weight, better aero, revs higher (doesn't say, but bore/stroke are closer to the same, which typically means higher rev limit).



But, the chevy has the advantage in top speed due to gearing. at their hp peak rpm (redline not listed), due to the larger tires on the monte carlo, the porsche is almost 35mph slower. if the straights on the track in question are long enough to allow the monte carlo to get up beyond ~230mph (7800 rpm in 5th is 226...), the porsche probably won't be able to post a higher maximum speed, since it really was designed for short, technical courses, not top speed runs.

although, even if the monte carlo can reach a higher max, I bet the porsche still puts down a faster lap time. Wider tires, lighter wheels, bigger brakes, better suspension....yea.

[texan_idiot25]

Originally Posted by THE EDJ

A true performance vehicle is good at everything; acceleration, speed, braking, and cornering. The stock car can go fast in circles and in a straight line... big deal, I can make a Honda Civic do that. True performance shines in the bends, and the Porsche will take that one hands down.

The Porsche gets my vote.

But that is not the point of this poll, discussion, or article.

While NASCAR race cars are primarily setup for circle track, they are not lacking in the handling department on road courses. Just, mainly driver skill when they bring the series off the oval track.

[XMDrifter]

the porsche i think would hold its speed better on the oval than the monte carlo because the monte carlo is so heavy, has less grip budget (smaller tires with a higher weight), is less powerful in both terms of torque and hp, and aerodynamically speaking, the monte carlo would not be able to hit its 240mph topspeed(it'd only get to around 210 before the engine can't push it any faster) while the porsche's lower topspeed (215-220) would be reached more easily (to about 212mph after aerodynamic reductions) because the porsche has better aerodynamics, along with better power and slightly shorter gearing.

[texan_idiot25]

My I ask where you get these theoretical top speed numbers, based on the .Co of each car?

[2jack3jack]

From hogwarts school of witchcraft texan I thought you knew that

[firebird999]

i picked the monte carlo. if it's in a magazine, the obvious answer is wrong. that's my reasoning.

[XMDrifter]

well i didn't get actual topspeed numbers, but the theoretical numbers are always a lot higher than the actual numbers, but the more aero a car is, the less of a difference there is between theoretical and actual. since the monte carlo is so not aerodynamic, it would hit a speed limiting wall of air so to speak. the drag would equalize with the accelerating force and the topeed wouldn't go any higher. but since the drag force is lower for the porsche, the porsche would get waaay closer to its theoretical numbers than the monte carlo, making the porsche faster even on the straights

[texan_idiot25]

But lets talk about other aerodynamic factors, like drag and the frontal area. While the Monte is a brick in shape, it's frontal area is very small compared to the wide and low Porsche. Frontal area has much to do with how air strikes and moves around the nose of the car.

Drag, and down force are very related. The two cars are built with different things in mind. While yes, the Monte has less down force, and skinnier tires, it is because it does not need the same levels of grip to go around the oval that the Porche needs to go around a road course. Thus, it is created with top speed in mind, not down force. Down force, creates drag.

[spitfire]

Ya i agree with texan. The porshe needs more down force because its liter.

I do think the monte would win because of the how fast muscle cars can accelerate. Plus the monte is maid for an oval track.

[firebird999]

you know, i never really thought about it, but downforce is almost useless. just save money and stick rocks in the car to have actual weight, not artificial. jk, but it makes you think, don't it?

[Numbchux]

Originally Posted by texan_idiot25

But lets talk about other aerodynamic factors, like drag and the frontal area. While the Monte is a brick in shape, it's frontal area is very small compared to the wide and low Porsche. Frontal area has much to do with how air strikes and moves around the nose of the car.

Drag, and down force are very related. The two cars are built with different things in mind. While yes, the Monte has less down force, and skinnier tires, it is because it does not need the same levels of grip to go around the oval that the Porche needs to go around a road course. Thus, it is created with top speed in mind, not down force. Down force, creates drag.

yep, hard to say which one would be "slipperier" as far as aero is concerned. you are definitely right, the nascar doesn't need the same levels of downforce, so while there's a lot more going into the design of the porsche, it may have a similar amount of drag.

either way, I don't think the porsche will have any trouble reaching it's top speed. I think it's really just a question of weather the monte carlo will.

Originally Posted by firebird999

you know, i never really thought about it, but downforce is almost useless. just save money and stick rocks in the car to have actual weight, not artificial. jk, but it makes you think, don't it?

no. it doesn't. weight means slower acceleration and more lateral Gs (slower cornering speeds). downforce gives you the traction without the downsides.

[Action B]

Porsche. I don't really like either greatly. Porsches are overpriced rich ***** cars for business executives to park in their reserved spots at work to bloat up their ego. Musclecars like the montecarlo are so heavy and most dont really don't have that much power stock, especially considering the weight and their handling is usually borderline pathetic.

[jimmythekid1]

Originally Posted by Action B

Porsche. I don't really like either greatly. Porsches are overpriced rich ***** cars for business executives to park in their reserved spots at work to bloat up their ego. Musclecars like the montecarlo are so heavy and most dont really don't have that much power stock, especially considering the weight and their handling is usually borderline pathetic.

power is not a question with this montecarlo concidering it has a nascar drivetrain

[texan_idiot25]

Originally Posted by Action B

Porsche. I don't really like either greatly. Porsches are overpriced rich ***** cars for business executives to park in their reserved spots at work to bloat up their ego. Musclecars like the montecarlo are so heavy and most dont really don't have that much power stock, especially considering the weight and their handling is usually borderline pathetic.

Realize that Porsche has a long standing race heritage, with some incredible cars and suicide machines. And the Monte shares nothing mechanically with it's production based car.

So, your stereotypical opinions have nothing to do with the point of this thread.

[kendallcschm]

Originally Posted by Numbchux

I voted porsche since it has more power, less weight, better aero, revs higher (doesn't say, but bore/stroke are closer to the same, which typically means higher rev limit).



But, the chevy has the advantage in top speed due to gearing. at their hp peak rpm (redline not listed), due to the larger tires on the monte carlo, the porsche is almost 35mph slower. if the straights on the track in question are long enough to allow the monte carlo to get up beyond ~230mph (7800 rpm in 5th is 226...), the porsche probably won't be able to post a higher maximum speed, since it really was designed for short, technical courses, not top speed runs.

although, even if the monte carlo can reach a higher max, I bet the porsche still puts down a faster lap time. Wider tires, lighter wheels, bigger brakes, better suspension....yea.

if the track wasn't an oval .. if it was weavier then the porsche would own.. but cause its an oval.. i think the monte carlo will win

[AJB32690]

Originally Posted by firebird999

i picked the monte carlo. if it's in a magazine, the obvious answer is wrong. that's my reasoning.

+1

Nobody mentioned handling yet? The magazine doesn't post actual suspension settings, but I think the Porsche will have a harder time staying straight and the steering response will be too snappy for an oval track.

[ling427ttvette]

Why in the name of god do all of you think the Monte is a muscle car?

Newsflash: IT'S NOT!

I am rooting for the Monte myself though.

[jimmythekid1]

Originally Posted by ling427ttvette

Why in the name of god do all of you think the Monte is a muscle car?

Newsflash: IT'S NOT!

I am rooting for the Monte myself though.

true these kids need to do some history reading. They quit building muscle cars after 1969ish. However you might consider a 1994-96 Impala SS as modern muscle.