Daytona 500 Winner: A Camry?

  • #1
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
302
... For the first time, the Japanese-made Toyota Camry is entered in what NASCAR proudly calls "the great American race."

It's not the first foreign influence on the event. Dodge is made by Daimler-Chrysler, a German manufacturer, but the brand is still viewed as American.

With Toyota, the Japanese introduction to the great race is creating controversy, to say the least.

"If Toyota wins the Daytona 500," said Eddie Wood, co-owner of Wood Brothers, "That'll be a little hard to swallow." [continued]
http://www.abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2835134&page=1

The day had to come. As far as I'm concerned, on the average, Toyota has made a superior product for twenty years. Even as a kid, I remember noticing that Toyota's small pick-ups always seemed better made than the rest. If fact, somewhere I once heard that the 22R was the most successful [miles per engine] engine ever produced. Having owned one I can believe it.
 
Last edited:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Oh no, another country can make a product that doesn't stink? The world is going to end!

Can't we stop with this "my region bounded by imaginary lines is better than your region bounded by imaginary lines" contest? We're all human beings, why would be surprised that someone in a different geological area would be able to produce a product better than those in another area?

Honestly, I can't see the big deal in this.
 
  • #3
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,812
6
Yes the toyota pick ups are renound.

(Warning: Contains Australian language!)

Can't say i'm a fan of NASCAR but surely some foreign influence is a good thing?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
2,985
15
Yes the toyota pick ups are renound.

(Warning: Contains Australian language!)

Can't say i'm a fan of NASCAR but surely some foreign influence is a good thing?
YES, that clip is a classic!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
353
1
That is the funniest thing I have seen all day. "Oh that'll buff out" haha

I remember that first commercial they showed, I remember it being on tv a few years ago.
 
  • #6
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,812
6
YES, that clip is a classic!!
Is it in the youtube classics? I never have a look. Suppose I better from now on.
 
  • #7
2,985
15
I donno, im saying its a personal classic. I loved that clip the first time I saw it.
 
  • #8
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,812
6
I donno, im saying its a personal classic. I loved that clip the first time I saw it.
Oh right :biggrin: You gotta love top gear.
 
  • #9
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
302
Oh no, another country can make a product that doesn't stink? The world is going to end!
Just wait until a biodiesel powered Hyundai hybrid wins!!! :tongue2: :biggrin:
 
  • #10
16
0
That car is no more a camry than the chevy's and ford are production models. Full tube chassis, what looks like a ford v8. I think the only toyota parts are the gauges. Ever seen a camry with a pushrod v8 and a holly?

Nascar hasnt been stock cars since the 60's

http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z11176/default.aspx
 
  • #11
80
0
its good to see toyota upgrading to a v8 for a change... none of these v6's anymore! If toyota do win the 500, well good on them i dont think its too much of a problem... seeing as pontiac have dropped out now NASCAR needs another manufacturer... unless u plan on becoming like us Aussie's out here and having a two manufacturer series. makes for a great rivalry and draws the crowds :)
 
  • #12
brewnog
Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,711
7
I was going to suggest Toyota enter a Diesel car and really shock the viewers. Then I saw Ivan's wonderful suggestion. Top notch! Upgrade to a V8? Why not upgrade to a well-thought out 4 cylinder Diesel and really make some headlines?! :smile:
 
  • #13
I was going to suggest Toyota enter a Diesel car and really shock the viewers. Then I saw Ivan's wonderful suggestion. Top notch! Upgrade to a V8? Why not upgrade to a well-thought out 4 cylinder Diesel and really make some headlines?! :smile:
They should use gas turbine/jet engines, now that would be a laugh:devil: :smile:

Cars travelling around a circuit at close to or above the speed of sound would be a little hazardous though, but hey what the hell :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • #14
turbo
Gold Member
3,077
50
That car is no more a camry than the chevy's and ford are production models. Full tube chassis, what looks like a ford v8. I think the only toyota parts are the gauges. Ever seen a camry with a pushrod v8 and a holly?

Nascar hasnt been stock cars since the 60's

http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z11176/default.aspx
I had that discussion with the two boneheads in the parts department at a local car dealership. One is a die-hard Ford fan and one is a die-hard Chevy fan, despite the fact that they worked in a Nissan dealership, and they were rabid NASCAR guys to the point that they had their favorite drivers' numbers on their vehicles, and kept little model cars on the parts counter. They would argue endlessly about how this race or that race "proved" that Ford or Chevy is the best car to own. Now they could sell both their cars and not afford to pay for the tires that one of their heroes would go through in a single race, and though they seemed aware that these machines bear no resemblance to their cars apart from the rough shape of the shell, they still insisted on making brand comparisons on the basis of race results. I hope that team Toyota wins, to give some of these guys something to think about.
 
  • #15
I had that discussion with the two boneheads in the parts department at a local car dealership. One is a die-hard Ford fan and one is a die-hard Chevy fan, despite the fact that they worked in a Nissan dealership, and they were rabid NASCAR guys to the point that they had their favorite drivers' numbers on their vehicles, and kept little model cars on the parts counter. They would argue endlessly about how this race or that race "proved" that Ford or Chevy is the best car to own. Now they could sell both their cars and not afford to pay for the tires that one of their heroes would go through in a single race, and though they seemed aware that these machines bear no resemblance to their cars apart from the rough shape of the shell, they still insisted on making brand comparisons on the basis of race results. I hope that team Toyota wins, to give some of these guys something to think about.
The best drivers are in rally or formula one(because the tracks involve many variables not just going round in circles) They retire once there reflexes start going to indie 500 :smile:

But that's beside the point. Car manufacturers will always claim x is better but if you have Michael Schumacker in the car how much of that is due to his supreme skill, and how much due to the engine? Now if you take both into account you get an answer. Who has won the grand prix the most times? It's Williams, is this a combination of good drivers, Jaquez Villeneuve et al, or just blind luck, or the car or both?

The point is Michael Shcumacker in his prime would of eaten any indie driver for breakfast, what was the combination? The best drivers get the best cars. Simple as that.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
302
They should use gas turbine/jet engines, now that would be a laugh:devil: :smile:
... In 1967, engineer and STP team owner Andy Granatelli brough a revolutionary new turbine-powered car to Indianapolis. Driver Parnelli Jones dominated the entire field for the majority of the race on race day. During the last few laps, a small $6 bearing failed, and the turbine died. With four laps to go, A.J. Foyt passed Jones for the lead and eventual victory . However, the turbine had demonstrated its potential.

... Granatelli's car, driven by Mario Andretti, would win the 1969 Indianapolis 500. After the 1969 race season, turbine-powered cars were banned. [continued]
http://shrike.erc.msstate.edu/raspet/raspet/pages/burt.html [Broken]

http://shrike.erc.msstate.edu/raspet/raspet/pics/burt/turbine1.jpg [Broken]

More pics at the link above
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #17
http://shrike.erc.msstate.edu/raspet/raspet/pages/burt.html [Broken]

http://shrike.erc.msstate.edu/raspet/raspet/pics/burt/turbine1.jpg [Broken]

More pics at the link above
I'm not sure what the point is here, the reason gas turbine engines aren't used is they are too dangerous, ie their speed is so great that it is impossible to safely control the car,even when you are just going round and round in circles, on a cicuit if you used not that car but a modern gas turbine engine car with say a top speed of 240 mph, on average you'd win more than you lost, jet engines are far more reliable than combustion engines anyway.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #18
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
302
The point? Do you mean my point or theirs? I was just pointing out that what you suggested has already been done.
 
  • #19
The point? Do you mean my point or theirs? I was just pointing out that what you suggested has already been done.
Oh my mistake, my apologies, I misconstrued your intent.
 
  • #20
Astronuc
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
19,040
2,425
Even before that, Chrysler was experimenting with turbine powered cars - as early as 1960, and maybe as early as 1955.

http://aardvark.co.nz/pjet/chrysler.shtml

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Turbine_Car

http://www.turbinecar.com/history.htm

http://www.imperialclub.com/Yr/1963/Turbine/Turbine2/index.htm

There was a movie (The Lively Set (1964) starring James Darren, Doug McLure and Pamela Tiffin :tongue2:) in which the car was featured.
Casey Owens (James Darren), a young mechanic, has developed a design for a turbine car engine, paving the way for a jet-powered auto certain to set a new land speed record. Wealthy playboy Stanford Rogers (Peter Mann) hires Casey to build the car for him to race in the Tri-State Endurance Run. Chuck Manning (Doug McClure), an engineering student Casey met in a drag race, discovers potential flaws in the car's design. After an unsuccessful test run, Rogers abandons the turbine-powered car for a traditional racing model, but Casey and Chuck rework the turbine vehicle to compete with Rogers in the endurance run. Pamela Tiffin plays Eadie, Chuck's sister who becomes Casey's love interest.
Clips from the movie - http://www.imperialclub.com/Movies/Lively/index.htm
 
Last edited:
  • #21
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,812
6
I remember Rover had a turbine powered car in 1955, made with the jet technology aquired from the Germans.


I like the fact that 0-60 in 14 seconds made it worthy of the name whippet. :rofl:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #22
I remember Rover had a turbine powered car in 1955, made with the jet technology aquired from the Germans.


I like the fact that 0-60 in 14 seconds made it worthy of the name whippet. :rofl:
Ah yeah but what's the time of fuel light formula 1 car from 0-60, and from 0-140 and from 0-220? :smile: This is why formula one is more technically skillful apart from the tracks of course, because the acceleration is ridiculous. 0-60 in less than 3 seconds I think? and 0-100 in less than 4 seconds, top speed is I think somewhere around 15 seconds.

Sorry it's nought to 60 in less than 2 seconds.

The whippet more like the tortoise :smile:

The 2006 F1 cars have a power-to-weight ratio of 1,250 hp/tonne (930 W/kg). Theoretically this would allow the car to reach 100 km/h in less than 1 second. However the massive power cannot be converted to motion at low speeds due to traction loss, and the usual figure is 2 seconds to reach 100 km/h. After about 130 km/h traction loss is minimal due to the combined effect of the car moving faster and the downforce, hence the car continues accelerating at a very high rate. The figures are (for the 2005 Renault R25):

0 to 62.1 mph:100 km/h: 1.9 seconds
0 to 124.3 mph:200 km/h: 3.9 seconds
0 to 186 mph:300 km/h: 8.4 seconds, may be slightly more or less depending on the aerodynamic setup.

The acceleration figure is usually 1.4 g (14 m/s²) up to 200 km/h, which means the driver is pushed back in the seat with 1.4 times his bodyweight.
Top speed at Monza 232 mph. With V10 engines.

Drivers are regularly subjected to between 1 and 5g(highest is 6g.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #23
55
9
The more impressive figure is from 0-100 and back to 0 again. The braking is phenomenol. The cars also provide enough downforce to be able to stick to the ceiling of a tunnel, now that would make for an interesting race.
 
  • #24
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,812
6
The more impressive figure is from 0-100 and back to 0 again. The braking is phenomenol. The cars also provide enough downforce to be able to stick to the ceiling of a tunnel, now that would make for an interesting race.
I'm surprised nobodies tried it. Would make for a spectacular stunt.
 
  • #25
I'm surprised nobodies tried it. Would make for a spectacular stunt.
Have you thought about the technical problems here, if it slowed down or didn't quite get it's descent from the ceiling right it'd be carnage, but I suppose you could try it with smaller models and then with remote controlled cars, I certainly wouldn't pilot a car like that.
 

Related Threads on Daytona 500 Winner: A Camry?

  • Last Post
2
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
3
Replies
51
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Sticky
21
Replies
521
Views
82K
Replies
24
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
34
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
42
Views
5K
Top