texastrophies Posted October 1, 2005 Report Share Posted October 1, 2005 The 48 & 5 run race with devices to add rear downforce, no penalty. The 29 qualifies with what NASCAR determines adds downforce and send him to the rear of the field. Harvick's front-row time disallowed at 'Dega Three rear-end violations send No. 29 Chevy to the rear Sunday By Marty Smith, NASCAR.COM September 30, 2005 09:18 PM EDT (01:18 GMT) TALLADEGA, Ala. -- Kevin Harvick qualified on the outside of the front row Friday at Talladega Superspeedway, but his time was disallowed after the No. 29 Chevrolet failed post-qualifying inspection. Following Harvick's qualifying run, the No. 29 Chevrolet was found to have a trio of illegalities in the rear end, sending him to rear of the field to start Sunday's UAW-Ford 500. According to NASCAR officials, the trunk area of the race car was not properly sealed, nor was it properly vented to the outside as prescribed in the Nextel Cup Series rule book. Also, the shock doors inside the trunk area were open, rather than secured as required. Added together, the three illegalities added rear downforce and less aerodynamic drag. NASCAR spokesman Jim Hunter said penalties likely would be levied early next week. Harvick had little to say other than "Ask (NASCAR). They don't know what they're doing from day to day." When asked to clarify the differences between the Nos. 48 and 5 Chevrolets initially failing post-race inspection at Dover with no penalties, and the No. 29's illegality at Talladega, Hunter said NASCAR looks at each transgression singularly. "I could understand that (sentiment), but I think every penalty is viewed as an independent penalty," Hunter said. "We've been consistent in saying that over a period of time. "Today's penalty has nothing to do with something that happens in another race at another time." He said the same goes for crew chief Todd Berrier, who is still serving season-long probation. According to Hunter, Berrier's prior transgressions had no bearing on NASCAR's decision. The penalty creates an all-Yates front row for Sunday's UAW-Ford 500, as pole-sitter Elliott Sadler will now share the front row with Dale Jarrett. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VermontHunter Posted October 1, 2005 Report Share Posted October 1, 2005 Re: NASCAR\'s Inconsistencies Not to keep beating the dog here but shouldn't your first sentence [ QUOTE ] The 48 & 5 run race with devices to add rear downforce, no penalty. [/ QUOTE ] also include these teams ( Penske Racing teammates Ryan Newman and Rusty Wallace; and the Roush Racing cars of Mark Martin and Greg Biffle. ) Really my friend lets pass around this cheating thing to everyone involved not just the Hendrick Team... I think everyone of them should sit out a race or 2, then maybe this stuff will go away once and for all....When they realize NASCAR has had enough of this shady stuff from all of them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest deldeer Posted October 1, 2005 Report Share Posted October 1, 2005 Re: NASCAR\'s Inconsistencies i don't think it is fair to look the other way on this!!!!!!! you can't say it's ok for one and not the other!!!! nascar has always been unfair in the way they handle these matters.....im a 48 fan & disagree with this mess!!!!!!.......what a black eye nascar is getting!!!!.....but you can't blame the teams for pushing the issue, & bending the rules.......they may get away with it.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texastrophies Posted October 1, 2005 Author Report Share Posted October 1, 2005 Re: NASCAR\'s Inconsistencies [ QUOTE ] Not to keep beating the dog here but shouldn't your first sentence [ QUOTE ] The 48 & 5 run race with devices to add rear downforce, no penalty. [/ QUOTE ] also include these teams ( Penske Racing teammates Ryan Newman and Rusty Wallace; and the Roush Racing cars of Mark Martin and Greg Biffle. ) [/ QUOTE ] You keep saying that, but I can't find anywhere where it says the other cars did not pass inspection. I did see where it said they took their shocks also, but not why. Maybe just to compare the Hendrick shocks to????? Please correct me if I am wrong on that, but everything I have seen just said that the 5 & 48 had difficulties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJL Posted October 1, 2005 Report Share Posted October 1, 2005 Re: NASCAR\'s Inconsistencies There's a story in the paper here today about Nascar rule changes based upon the shocks that Johnson and Busch used in the last race. They apparently let the rear of the car ride higher and thusly created more downward force................BUT...........THEY WERE LEGAL........at the time. So, as Nascar does so often, let's change the rules in the middle of the game. WHY???????????? To get more money............. A wise old man once said.............. If you can't figure it out...it's about money. The #8 car is gone.The #24 car is gone. And there are only 341 people in the rest of the country who cheer for the rest of these guys............... let's create a little controversy. That'll get us some more MONEY. Can you imagine Baseball-Football-Basketball changing RULES in Mid-Season?????????? Go JJ Have good day JJL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slugshooter Posted October 2, 2005 Report Share Posted October 2, 2005 Re: NASCAR\'s Inconsistencies Basically what jjl is saying above me. From what I read in USA Today about the matter, the shocks that the 48 and 5 were using caused the rear of the car to raise when going over a bump and then settle in a matter of seconds, thats why the car "appeared" high before post race inspection and then was legal when they actually measured it. The shocks, to quote Geoff Smith of Roush Racing, are "ingenious", but as of prior to Monday, were not illegal, but now they are. Technically, what the Hendrick cars had on their car, and presumably the other cars, weren't illegal because they weren't specifically ruled out in the rule book. What Harvicks team did was a violation of specs in the rule book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James7xChamp3 Posted October 2, 2005 Report Share Posted October 2, 2005 Re: NASCAR\'s Inconsistencies Go Patriots! lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTF Posted October 2, 2005 Report Share Posted October 2, 2005 Re: NASCAR\'s Inconsistencies [ QUOTE ] Technically, what the Hendrick cars had on their car, and presumably the other cars, weren't illegal because they weren't specifically ruled out in the rule book. What Harvicks team did was a violation of specs in the rule book. [/ QUOTE ] Exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrud Posted October 2, 2005 Report Share Posted October 2, 2005 Re: NASCAR\'s Inconsistencies The part on the Hendrick cars wasn't illegal. But, when it went through tech, the car was out of spec which means it is illegal. But, NASCAR gave that car a ton of time and several times before it settled into spec. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VermontHunter Posted October 2, 2005 Report Share Posted October 2, 2005 Re: NASCAR\'s Inconsistencies [ QUOTE ] Please correct me if I am wrong on that, but everything I have seen just said that the 5 & 48 had difficulties. [/ QUOTE ] You aren't wrong at all,,,,, but the only reason why the other teams weren't mentioned to having diffuclties is that they were mainly focusing on the #48 & #5 because they finished 1&2.... But to me to meantion the fact that they confiscated the shocks from these other teams was to infer that they also had shocks that weren't approved by nascar,,,,I really don't think nascar needs shocks from other teams to draw comparison conclusions from.....and I don't think you do either,,am I wrong here..... I really think this all falls on nascar's shoulders for being so inconsistant with their rule book...I think you and I both can agree on that..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VtBowhunter Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 Re: NASCAR\'s Inconsistencies [ QUOTE ] Go Patriots! lol [/ QUOTE ] YEah, LMAO........how did that one go this weekend again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James7xChamp3 Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 Re: NASCAR\'s Inconsistencies [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Go Patriots! lol [/ QUOTE ] YEah, LMAO........how did that one go this weekend again? [/ QUOTE ] Lol! Not as good as last weekend. Lots of work to do. The Bosox made my weekend though. Still better than a Tally wreckfest! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.