At the time that car was built there was a lot of crazyshit American consumerism going on... (Almost as much as there is today.) If you care about these things, go look at Leno's Garage, where machinery like this is considered with the perfect mix of sentiment and detachment.

There was a car race in China this weekend. Did you hear about it? It rained. That's not important now. The important thing is this...

Formula One racing, an essentially European racing series, is predicated on a NASA-like fundament of big investment and high technology. Compare this to American racing as typified by Nascar, which is what comes to a 51-year-old's mind when looking at a car like the one pictured.

In Nascar, clumsy restrictor plates govern the performance of the contenders. This is why those very big, burly avowedly heterosexual men bundle up so close together in packs as they go around in stupid circles. No. There's nothing gay about it at all. Why do you ask?

It's a completely different kind of technology. In (post-WWII) America, little lady, if you say you want some more horsepower, why, we'll jus' find you a bigger piece of steel and punch bigger pistons into it. Gas is cheap, and horsepower is not a problem. That's the American way! Simple, brutal POWER.

In Europe, things were different. After WWII, finances were tighter there, so they taxed BORE, not stroke. If you had a clever technology that could deliver more horses with fewer cylinders, then you could sell more cars for greater profit.

Which is why, to this day, F1 cars sound so much cooler than Nascar or Indy cars. Their engines are running, literally, almost twice as fast.

(Also, they make right hand turns. Nutty, ain't it?)

The person who taught me this was comedian Jay Leno.

If you're young or old enough to look at car like that and think of something besides the Viet Nam war, there are still lessons to be learned.

Sorry. Leno's here.

Interesting about the taxes. I didn't know that. I also agree that the cars do sound different. I drive a car that sounds different as well. My car has a rotary engine. Very intersting technology and very few moving parts, especially compared to a piston engine.

Now that's a green car!

In ANY color, that's a sweet machine!

*drools*

perdy.. perdy car...

Sweet, sweet Challenger. I always kind of preferred the 'Cuda, though. Maybe because I learned to drive in my Dad's funny looking '65 model, with the bubble back window.

What - no tail fins?
Call that American?

By the early 70s, the only cars with tailfins were some of the Cadillacs, and the fins on those were comparitively subdued.

My dream muscle car (and muscle girl)....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh4q2rwHAXk&feature=related

Crid, I'm afraid your narrative is busted by a casual look at the history of the SCCA's Formula A and especially the original Can-Am series. When Bruce McLaren needed the ultimate horsepower to stuff into his Can-Am cars, he didn't use a F1 engine; instead, he turned to the NASCAR big-block Chevy. Big American iron (redone in aluminum, natch) stuffed into light, highly-aerodynamic British-concept sports cars, were the ultimate in automotive performance in the era. The results were alternately astounding and terrifying.

As for Indy cars, the long-dominant Offenhauser was a four-cylinder which, in its final incarnation, displaced a mere 3 liters (with a you-don't-want-to-know amount of turbo boost). And then there was the four-cam Ford, with which Foyt and Al Under notched their most famous Indy victories. At the museum at Barber last weekend, I saw both a four-cam Ford Indy engine, and an F1 SOHC Ford Cosworth. Each a thing of beauty in its own way.

A Chicago video from California... That's the LA River, not Lake Shore Drive.

> My car has a rotary engine.

In the early seventies we were told that one day everyone would drive a Wankel. Also, car batteries were going to cost $5.

My understanding is that Wankel's have always had issues with blowing gaskets. Even if this wasn't, or is no longer true, they have not been as fuel efficient as piston engines.

> When Bruce McLaren needed the ultimate
> horsepower to stuff into his Can-Am cars,
> he didn't use a F1 engine; instead, he
> turned to the NASCAR big-block Chevy.

That's my point exactly. Postwar European economics were about delicate solutions, perhaps by satisfying one's sporting needs with elegant coupes and minis. In America, we went straight for the big blocks, and put them under hoods as wide as the one pictured above, as big as your front lawn (and even greener).

There was more experimentation in Britain along these lines —

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-wheeled_car

— because a 3-wheeler was taxed and licensed like a motorcycle. America gave the world the Winnebago.

Amy:
as a Detroit girl I can tell you
- - - - - - - -
Well then I defer to your expert opinion.

Just tell the folks back home that bagels should have neither cinnamon nor blueberries in them... that's *my* expertise. :)

That tthing got a Hemi in it? (Remember the Mopar 440 with a six-pack?) Ah, I miss the muscle cars of the '60's & '70's ... some of which I have had the pleaure of driving ... For you fellow gearheads, I highly recommend the Woodward Dream Cruise in Amy's native Detroit (mid-August).

Wankels never quite made it as noted above; mazda still plugs away with the RX-8 ... but they're awesome boat motors, due to their almost-non-existent redlines ...

Ahhh....

BTW - if I recall correctly, the green pictured was called "Sub-lime.' Groovy, man. Remember Mopar's "Mod Tops" - the paisley-pattern vinyl roofs?

When I was young, the Indy 500 was mandatory in my house, even if it was only on the radio.

When the Europeans came over to play, a lot of people said they will never be able to beat the Offenhauser motors, which had dominated the Indy. Yeah, right.

But, even though I can't tell you which decade it was, I remember the sports caster screaming his head off, when the European turned right and passed the Offenhauser in front of him. The US entries were sit up to turn exactly one direction, around and around the same direction. To turn right was indeed a big deal. I point this out for anyone who might not realize turning right was an important issue.

It has been quite a while since an Offenhauser ran in that race. Last time I checked, it was almost all Honda motors, before that it was a mixture of Honda and Toyota.

In 1962, I owned for a while a 1937 Chevrolet which I bought for $35 and sold a year or so later for $35. I thought it was a very old car.

1962 - 1937 = 25 years old.

Does a 1985 Chevrolet seem ancient to you young people today?

My 2002 Sienna is by far the best car I've ever owned to date. I travel a lot and everything goes in there. It gets 24 mpg at 70 mph. At 166,000 miles it goes and goes and goes. I realize some young folks think the mini-van is clunky, but I like it fine. In the rare case I am in Western Texas it runs out fine at 80 or 85.

Please. If you're going to compare auto racing by genre, remember that the rule book still dominates, and in ways you may not even suspect unless you're both a car nut and into physics. For instance, grossly speaking, NHRA Top Fuel Dragster is limited by fuel type, concentration of nitromethane, final drive gear ratio and displacement - all to avoid overspeeding track shutdown areas and lessen crash risk. NASCAR ended up with The Car of Tomorrow, thinking it would drive costs down, apparently, and now they're losing fans who are catching on that they can't buy one anywhere. MotoGP dropped engine size to get their gasoline-fueled, 260HP 990cc bikes down to just 220 or so from 800cc, and then stated you can only use six engines all year in an attempt to "be safer" and "save money" - but the smaller engines led to higher corner speeds (more dangerous) and the need for speed and reliability still means that nobody can afford to build or lease more than about eight bikes, total, from any manufacturer. And these guys draw 250,000 spectators overseas.

The rule books try to make people forget that speed costs effort, which is paid for with money. Don't buy that bull while you celebrate the success of those guys winning.

The part the tickles me today is that if that Challenger isn't a part-number-matching collector's treasure, it can be built to burn half the fuel and put out twice the reliable power that it could from the factory.

For grins, check out the Summitt Racing catalog. Don't miss the "crate" engines.

Hello and excuse me. In Preview, my post looked OK. the link is to Summit Racing. I've blown a gasket somewhere!

Formula One racing, an essentially European racing series, is predicated on a NASA-like fundament of big investment and high technology. Compare this to American racing as typified by Nascar, which is what comes to a 51-year-old's mind when looking at a car like the one pictured.

NASCAR still uses live axles and carburetors.

For pete's sake, you can buy a showroom car that will get around Watkins Glen faster than a NASCAR whale can.

And here's Sir Malcolm Campbell's Bluebird:

http://www.sirmalcolmcampbell.com/sir35.html

First car on earth to go faster than 300 mph.

In 1935.

When I was a little boy in Indiana, this car came to race. It was exciting as hell.

It's important to remember that it was designed to turn left, so the power plant was on the inward, protected side of the vehicle, and the driver would be expected to to deal first with the wall. (The wall, OK? At Indianapolis. THAT wall.)

I wish I could find better pictures. It looked bulbous and futuristic as Hell compared to the skinny chassis that guys had in those days. The whole world was like that when I was a little boy: There were supersonic planes and ovens without heat and it went on an on.

I sometimes wish Indy would fall on hard-enough times that they'd try some innovations... They could announce, today, that from 2014 to 2019, only turbine engines would be allowed. It would give manufacturers some time to play with designs, maybe increase the efficiency, and create some interest.

... the driver would be expected to to deal first with the wall.

And that was when guys regularly got killed there.

And they still be hurt terribly.

I got a ride around the track at about 85 mph in a convertible once for a TV thing. It's a place that Indiana boys dream about their whole lives... But it's absolutely insane, completely inexcusable... In a land of righteous justice, the State Police would issue tickets and shut it down.

"In a land of righteous justice, the State Police would issue tickets and shut it down."

Oh, heck, no. In a land of righteous justice, busybodies and fools wouldn't be so quick with the litigation and they'd learn what to do with a gas pedal or twistgrip. Schools like this would be common.

But few elect to know what they are doing, preferring to bumble along!

When I had that ride around the track I was assisting an ABC team doing preparation pieces. It was Al Jr's first year, and (if memory serves) he played a big role in the race, spoiling traffic for his father. But neighborhood restaurants in Speedway wouldn't serve him lunch, because he was too young for a place where they served beer! Years later it seemed a little ironic when he confessed to drinking problems... But I suppose you'd say race driving is thrill-seeking behavior in the same continuum that summons alcoholism.

See also, this old comment. I have no new anecdotes.

When I finally rule this planet (or at least Indiana), many, many new turns will be added so that every approach to the wall happens at 32 mph. It will still be entertaining.

Anyone still out there? C'mon, I can hear you breathing.