# Green racing: Should people know, or even care(somewhat Audi related)



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

On Sunday night, on Wind Tunnel, Dave Despain gave his take on "green" racing. Here's the transcript of what Dave said:
http://www.speedtv.com/windtun...39600
Of course, there have been several attempts to go "green" in racing. It was mostly until recently by fuel consuption restictions. First, it happened in CanAm in 1974. However, one can construe that it had every bit as much to do with curbing Penske's/Porsche's dominace of the series as anything else. CanAm fans wanted to see American(or cars powered by American engines) win. The only true American team in CanAm at the time was UOP Shadow. Though the cars were(like the F1 cars that they were based on) were built in England, Chapperal built the 8.1 liter Chevrolet big blocks that Shadow used, and the team was offically an American entrant.
Was the intent to screw Porsche and make them angry enough to leave CanAm? That point is argumentative at best, but if that was the intent, it worked-all too well infact-as Shadow and McLaren pulled out to focus on F1, and no one was left really to carry the series. Besides, it's doubtful that Shadow used the UOP lead free gasoline that they advertized anyways.
And then there was Le Mans '75, described by many as the worst Le Mans as far as ontrack action, as the cars had to go 20 laps per stint on fuel.
Then there was Group C, where teams were given a certian amount of fuel during the race, and they had to find the best way to go fast, while averaging 4.7 mpg. Group C had some of the best racing in sports car history, until the FIA screwed it up and killed it.
Even F1 tried to jump on the band wagon, as for a couple of races in 1985, they put fuel consuption restictions on F1 cars with reduced tank sizes-which Nigel Mansell didn't describe as real racing(as refueling during pit stops was banned from 1984-94).
But now, the ingrediants are in place to make such ideas to work long term it seems. Everyone is b****ing about the cost of gas, and the concerns about the enviroment, the time is right to intergrate "green" into racing by popular demand.
Take the ALMS, as they're the leader in this deal. IMSA want's to get into major metropolitan areas to advertize their series. However, that means either street courses, or "rovals". Well, IMSA has tried their damnedest to stay away from the "rovals"(the last one of those races being at Texas Motor Speedway in March, 2001, as the Charlotte/Lowe's Motor Speedway event was cancelled after 9/11), so that means street courses.
The problem with that is restrictions on noise and the like(including the resultant fact that the races are usually on Saturdays-good thing- and have to be over by city curfew(because of noise)-bad thing).
As was noted in George's "Diesel-the new unfair advantage" article, such enviromental concerns have pretty much outweighed the money and tourism that the races can bring. Only NASCAR and F1 can get around such things, becuase of their popularity and money-inspite of the fact that NASCAR has only switched to unleaded fuel this year, and that an F1 car is god know how many times louder than a Aston Martin DBR9 or Porsche RS Spyder-let alone an Audi R8 or R10. I mean, the once and done RFK airport race was cancelled because of noise issues-and it's a friggin' airport for pete's sake!
But with the E10 fuel, and diesel powered Audis, as well a mandating that all cars(other than the R10s) use mufflers, maybe IMSA will have more varied races in the future(and maybe some not on street circuits, buy maybe airports, which are more suited for the type of racing the ALMS does).
What's your take on "green" racing, Dave's article, or anything typed here.


_Modified by chernaudi at 10:49 PM 8-21-2007_


----------



## grmncarfan (Jul 21, 2003)

*Re: Green racing: Should people know, or even care(somewhat Audi related) (chernaudi)*

My take is that racing and green don't belong in the same sentence.
Your usual sunday race is only a few hours long. The traffic that comes to the race does more damage than the race itself. If you really wanna save the earth, take the bus or ride a bike, but please, leave motor racing alone.


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: Green racing: Should people know, or even care(somewhat Audi related) (grmncarfan)*

I dont think its bad to do something that wont screw with the series. Things like a little muffling of noise (like in the ALMS now and they're far from quiet) and using a fuel like the ethanol mix they currently do, allows for some green consideration without screwing with the racing or the enjoyment. But there will be a point where its too much, not sure where yet, but they will need to find it and make sure they dont cross it.
Also, Dave is highly mistaken about the DC race. RFK is NOT in any way shape or form an airport. Its a sports stadium that is right in the heart of downtown with residences right across the street. Now, while I agree that the noise thing was a lame excuse and the people were sad for complaining about something like that one weekend a year, Dave really needs to get his facts right before complaining like that. Its not an airport, there are people that lived within about a 100 yards of the track and there was also more to it than noise, that was just the main public excuse.


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: Green racing: Should people know, or even care(somewhat Audi related) (.:RDriver)*

Actually, in Dave's article, he says nothing about the Washington DC ALMS race getting scrapped in '03. George mentioned it in the Diesel Unfair Advantage article. And I'm the one who said that RFK was an airport. That was my mistake.
And I don't understand why so many people complain about an Auto race held once a year, for a few hours a day for 2-3 days(testing, qualifying, practice, and the race proper). Especally considering that there are older cars that make more noise than some of the ALMS cars. My Father's old Ford Rachero had a 351 Cleveland in it, and even with mufflers, it was louder than a Corvette, and for sure an Audi R10.
But then again, it depends on what's making the noise that's a lot of it, as well as how much. I was dumb enough to fire a 12 gauge shotgun without ear plugs-never do that again!








Granted, it didn't do any permanent damage, but you'll thank god that most people playing WWII video games have the luxury of having the volume as loud/quiet as they want, instead of turning it up like they're actually there.
Back on the topic of racing car noise. That's worse than any firearms noise, as it's sustained for a long period of time. Ask Mike Fuller(owner of the http://www.mulsannescorner.com site) if 113 dbs is plenty loud. The guy's been around racing cars most of his life, and has worked on or with them probably most of his adult life. If you want to loose your hearing or get ringing in your ears, that's one of the best ways to do it.
My father has worked with racing cars for much of his life, and he's 51 years old.
By the way, the ALMS' site has an article about their leadership in the alternative fuel's arena.
Link: http://www.americanlemans.com/...=3528


----------



## lostonapebble (Apr 6, 2007)

*Re: Green racing: Should people know, or even care(somewhat Audi related) (chernaudi)*

The only thing green should be the flag. If you want low fuel consumption watch AMA, or Moto GP, as for lifting aero ristrictions, running less than 2.0L cars and lightening; ideas brought up in discussions about the future of F1. I think the R&D would help environmental causes but it would probably lose popularity and money, causing they F1 to fail. Whats next noise restrictions.


----------

