HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dans@rehab1.UUCP (Dan Schein)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: Dover Eyewitness Wanted (NASCAR)
Date: 2 Oct 92 14:50:41 GMT
Reply-To: dans@rehab1.UUCP (Dan Schein)
Organization: Reading Rehab Hospital, Reading PA

In article <1992Sep29.141349.10377@schbbs.mot.com> CENG51@maccvm.corp.mot.com (Craig Witkowski) writes:
>
>Sorry about the "no smileys" Dan, I lost my host connection while typing and
>couldn't finish the post before it was sent.  And you won't get any 4 bashing
>here - I'm a Bowtie man myself.  Granted that Ford's been having a great
>year,  but it took them 10 years to catch up to Chevy and only about 4 months
>for the Chevy 18 degree heads to catch up to Ford! (flames to follow no doubt!)

  Its real good to see the GM's getting back in there because it helps the
 sport (NASCAR) in general. The fact that im a GM fan is an added bonus for
 me. Any sport gets to be a bore if one brand/team dominates too much.

>My seats were by Turn 1 (East Grandstand, Sec. B, Row 8, Seat 1) but I could
>follow all the action with my Olympus OM-1, 28-200mm lens and 2x converter.
>I was walking to the turn 1 restroom while the "Rusty Restart" took place
>that took out the GMs (Great Machines) :-( and left the Fords (Boo, Hiss!)
>unscathed.

  The important question is.....

  Was someone else using the camera during that restart, or did it go to
 the rest room with you?

>I've got my tickets reserved for the return bout next year!

  Hmmm.... Dover and reserved tickets seems to be a problem each year.
 I started going 3 years ago and was luck enough to get 1st turn seats in
 the grandstand, 2nd row from the top! However after that I have been
 stuck in turn 4. For some reason they did not offer me the chance to
 renew my seats :-( Since then i have asked for turn 1 seats every year
 with no luck. Once again I requested turn 1 but odds are I will get
 turn 4 seats when they show up. Even still, its better than Pocono!!!!!

 -Dan
-- 
  Reading Rehabilitation Hospital                 Network Adminstration,
  Dan Schein - Information Systems    __|__       Programming, Parenting,
  RD 1 Box 250                   ______(*)______  Rappelling, and soon...
  Reading, PA 19607                   o/ \o       Sky Diving!

  rehab1!dans@cbmvax.commodore.com -OR- {uunet,rutgers}!cbmvax!rehab1!dans
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: ajd@DIALix.oz.au (Anthony Doig)
Subject: Re: F1 Portugal: Patrese incident
Organization: DIALix Services, Perth, Western Australia
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 14:47:38 GMT

This, IMHO, is what happened in the Berger/Patrese incident at Portugal :

Berger took the last turn, and went to the right side (inside) of the track,
intending to go into the pits.  Patrese, who had been following closely for
quite a few laps, followed Berger, thinking Berger was simply protecting the
inside line (although Berger would have been doing this a little early).
Patrese was determined to draft pass Berger this lap.

Berger went into the pits, and braked to do so.  Patrese, following closely,
could do nothing to stop running into the back of Berger.  He had just started
his overtaking manouver.  Berger *did* stop for new tires.  No question.

This was a racing accident, pure and simple.  Berger and Patrese are two of
the *nicest* guys in F1.  There is no way either of them would do something
to deliberatly harm another competitor (not even when Berger was trying
to stop Mansell passing him at Hungary (?)).  Any accusations made by Patrese
after the incident were, as James Hunt said, because he was shaken.

There you go.  My A$0.03 worth (more than usual).

Doigman.
--
Anthony Doig					| E-mail : ajd@Dialix.oz.au
Corporate Systems Development			| Voice  : +61 9 321 2442
Perth, Western Australia			| Fax    : +61 9 474 2553

How to drive a rally car :

	"Switch off the brain and push the throttle down -
	 that is the quickest way."
				Juha Kankkunen, Perth 1992
-- 
Anthony Doig					| E-mail : ajd@Dialix.oz.au
Corporate Systems Development			| Voice  : +61 9 321 2442
Perth, Western Australia			| Fax    : +61 9 474 2553
--
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: CENG51@maccvm.corp.mot.com (Craig Witkowski)
Subject: Re: Dover Eyewitness Wanted (NASCAR)
Organization: Motorola
Date: 4 Oct 1992 16:44:21 CDT

>>My seats were by Turn 1 (East Grandstand, Sec. B, Row 8, Seat 1) but I could
>>follow all the action with my Olympus OM-1, 28-200mm lens and 2x converter.
>>I was walking to the turn 1 restroom while the "Rusty Restart" took place
>>that took out the GMs (Great Machines) :-( and left the Fords (Boo, Hiss!)
>>unscathed.

  >The important question is.....

  >Was someone else using the camera during that restart, or did it go to
 >the rest room with you?

>>I've got my tickets reserved for the return bout next year!

  Hmmm.... Dover and reserved tickets seems to be a problem each year.
 >I started going 3 years ago and was luck enough to get 1st turn seats in
 >the grandstand, 2nd row from the top! However after that I have been
 >stuck in turn 4. For some reason they did not offer me the chance to
 >renew my seats :-( Since then i have asked for turn 1 seats every year
 >with no luck. Once again I requested turn 1 but odds are I will get
 >turn 4 seats when they show up. Even still, its better than Pocono!!!!!

 >-Dan

I had the camera with me and started snapping away as the green was thrown
and continued snapping as Rubberhead and Ironhead got together :-( in turn 1.

As for the reserved ticket policy,  just 2 weeks after the race,  I received
notice from Dover Downs that I needed to send in a 25% deposit by 10/31/92
to reserve the same seat for the Peak 500 of '93!

You can try requesting a ticket upgrade / move again.  You never know who
drops their reserve.  If the deposit isn't in by the due date,  DD can release
those seats for general sale.  Give the ticket office a call after Nov 1 to
see what you can do.

As far as Dover vs. Pocono,  I've never been to Pocono but a co-worker goes
there each year but not to Dover.  I like Dover because even the lowest
grandstand seats can see some backstretch action while at the bigger tracks
the backstretch action is harder to see.

Also,  thanks for the news flash in your other post about Junior and McDonalds
in 93.  I wonder why the number is changing and where 22 will wind up.

Craig Witkowski,  CENG51@maccvm.corp.mot.com
KA2IBV
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Subject: Re: F1 Drivers
Reply-To: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Nashua NH
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 21:36:47 GMT


In article <97176@bu.edu>, nicos@cs.bu.edu (Nicos Kontopoulos) writes:
|>
|>   There has been only one post about Senna after the Estoril GP.
|>Are all the rest of you blind or what?

The majority of the attention following any race concentrates on the winner,
or on spectacular incidents (e.g., Berger and Patrese).  There's not much to
say about the also-rans.

--PSW
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: chucko@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Chuck Fry)
Subject: Re: What is indy car about....
Organization: Recom Technologies, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 17:45:42 GMT

In article <45322@donald.WichitaKS.NCR.COM> msjohnso@donald.WichitaKS.NCR.COM (Mark Johnson) writes:
>Unless the action has been taken relatively recently (last 5-7 years)
>Indy car rules do NOT ban the use of gasoline. Any fuel is allowable;
>it's just that everybody in recent years has burned methanol because it's
>best suited for the engines they're using. CART may have changed this.

Methanol is mandatory at Indy, and has been since the Eddie Sachs disaster.
I can't believe that CART doesn't also mandate it, since the use of
gasoline would allow an overwhelming advantage in number of pit stops
or all-up vehicle weight -- the teams wouldn't be able to pass it up!

>[Disclaimer:  I may be completely wrong on my assessment of current rules.
>I have been following Indy car racing for 30+ years and I stand by my history]

I don't claim to be an historian, but your memory on fuel rules
doesn't match mine.  Anyone out there have accurate, traceable facts??

 -- Chuck Fry  Chucko@charon.arc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: pmh2962@tamsun.tamu.edu (Patrick Michael Hayes)
Subject: Re: F1 whining
Keywords: you asked for it ... 
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 00:43:24 GMT

In article BOB BARKER writes:
>Well I just got back from the store where I bought an apple and so am 
>prepared to be barbecued.  After all that I have seen and read so far this 

... torch 50-some lines of drivel ...

>Having said my piece, I think I will retire to a nice dandelion field and go 
>look at the clouds.  Or maybe I'll just take off my shoes, go climb a tree 
>and learn to play the flute.
>(shish-k-)Bob Barker
---
SHEESH!

You F1 nuts are some piece of work! Who gives a ******? The other day
somebody took a Senna-flame personally and "u"-ed !  GET A LIFE!
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pat Hayes, Meteorology, TAMU  <whoop!>  " ... Aggie by the grace of God."
net: phayes@tamu.edu -or- O&M 1008, TAMU, CS, TX 77843-3150 (409)845-1680 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: epp@mala.bc.ca (Lorne Epp)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: Patrese's Accident and Commentators' Comments
Date: 29 Sep 92 21:21:08 -0700
Organization: Malaspina College

In article <1992Sep29.192027.16230@hubcap.clemson.edu>, csroach@eng.clemson.edu (Shane Roach) writes:
> From article <1992Sep29.142912.20582@neptune.inf.ethz.ch>, by marti@nugget.inf.ethz.ch (Robert Marti):
>> 
>> In a phone interview on Austrian TV Monday night, Berger claimed that
>> Patrese agreed that there wasn't much that Berger could have done to
>> avoid the incident after seeing the tapes.
>> 
>> |> Hobbs and Varsha were both scathing about Berger's action. How did
>> |> the other commentators characterise it?
>> 
>> Lauda called it a "racing accident" on Austrian TV, one of those things
>> that can happen in F1.
>> 
> On the BBC satellite live feed, James made some interesting comments during
> the third set of interviews, by which point the James & Murray show was over.
> Murray to James:  "That was a nice job of back-pedalling you made there after
>     what you said about Patrese's observation of the incident" (not verbatim)
> 
> James to Murray:  "Well word got back third-hand that it had displeased some
>     people, but really, he must have been asleep or something.  I still simply
>     cannot believe he thought that.  He had to have been asleep." (fairly close)
> 
> At this point Jonathan Palmer said something barely audible and unintelligible.
> 
> James to whomever:  "Yes, but Riccardo simply wasn't paying attention.  It's
>     clear that Berger was making a straight line from the corner across to
>     the pit entrance, but he just followed him all the way and drove into 
>     the back of him."
> 
> 
> NOTE:  These quotes are all strictly from memory, heard while getting dressed,
>        and should not be taken as verbatim statements.  Oh, how I wish I'd 
>        had a tape Sunday morning...
> 
This is from memory too, so it's not exact:

During the broadcast either Palmer or Hunt said that Patrese said that
"somebody slashed across in front of him".  Hunt said that it was obvious
that Berger had *not* cut across in front of Patrese, that he had
just turned into the pit lane.  Hunt was somewhat critical of Patrese
for making the accusation (Hunt seemed to view it as just a "bad luck" type
of accident).

A few laps later hunt said that he (Hunt) was too hard on Patrese, because
after an accident like that Patrese's brain would be a little scrambled,
and one shouldn't hold him responsible for anything he might say while
in that condition.  I imagine this is the "back-pedalling" that Walker
was referring to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lorne Epp                                               epp@mala.bc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: bob@ncube.com (Bob Kehoe)
Subject: IndyCar News
Organization: nCUBE Computers, Beaverton, Oregon, U.S.A.
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 22:52:48 GMT

For immediate release:

Midland, Texas -- the Pennzoil Hall/VDS racing team has chosen
sides in the escalating engine war on the IndyCar circuit for 1993.

The selection is Chevrolet over Ford, as the Midland-based team will
race a car powered by the yet-to-be released Chevrolet V8-C engine.

The engine has been described as "the most technologically advanced"
Indy engine to date and "the next generation" of the Chevrolet racing
engine that has dominated the sport for seven years.  Those comments
were made by Frank Ellis, marketing manager for the Chevrolet RaceShop
in Warren, Mich.

While technical specifications are being withheld by Chevrolet, the new
engine is said to be smaller, lighter and more powerful than either the
Chevrolet V8-A currently used by the Midland-based team or the Chevrolet
V8-B, which has powered Penske team cars exclusively in 1992.

Advanced engineering features that have gone into the V8-C engine
include a new engine management system developed by General Motors and
Delco Electronics, Ellis said.  The control module and its software are
ongoing developments of the Chevrolet racing engine design program.

Built in Brixworth, England, by Ilmor Engineering, the V8-C engine will
be assembled and maintained for the Pennzoil Hall/VDS team by VDS
Engines, also located in Midland.
------
From: marti@inf.ethz.ch (Robert Marti)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: Denney Hulme
Date: 6 Oct 92 13:56:26 GMT
Organization: Dept. Informatik, ETH Zurich, Switzerland

In article <1992Oct6.065242.16195@funlwb.enet.dec.com>
moretti@redbck.enet.dec.com writes:
>	[Denny Hulme] was the '67 WORLD CHAMPION of F1 so the man had talent.

Right.  Denny "The Bear" Hulme was also one half of the "Denny and Bruce"
(later "Denny and Peter") CanAm show.  I believe Denny was CanAm Champ in
1968 and 1970, with Bruce (McLaren) taking the 69 title and Peter (Revson)
taking the 71 title.  (I hope I got 68 and 69 correct.)  Too bad they are
all gone, now.

-- 
Robert Marti                    |  Phone:    +41 1 254 72 60
Informationssysteme             |  FAX:      +41 1 262 39 73
ETH-Zentrum                     |  E-Mail:   marti@inf.ethz.ch
CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland     |
From: dlhpfm.uucp!dlh@ab.com (daniel lance herrick)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: F1 Portugal: Patrese incident
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 18:34:20 EDT
Organization: dlh Performance Marketing

thos@suite.sw.oz.au (Thomas Cohen) writes:

> IMHO, the accident, whilst perhaps having some element of trickery on
> Berger's part, was just one of those things that happen. If you are 
> getting a slingshot from someone exactly the same thing could happen
> if they blew a motor, except that you'd be more likely to run into them
> then as you wouldn't be able to see where you were going.

Not really following up Cohen, but responding to this whole thread:

One detail that seems missing from the discussion here is where the
collision happened.  The only previous times that Patrese had been in
that location on the track, he was pitting.  Berger had made a very
strong position signal that he was pitting before he hit the brakes. 
If Patrese had been driving that corner instead of following Berger
there would have been room for another car between him and Berger as he
went past Berger.  If he had not hit Berger, the path he was driving
would have taken him awfully close to the end of the pit wall.

dan

dan  of dlh Performance Marketing  POBox 1419  Mentor Ohio 44061
         NCoast.org!dlhpfm!dlh or ab.com!dlhpfm.uucp!dlh 

Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: kevinh@hslrswi.hasler.ascom.ch (kevinh)
Subject: Re: Sauber (was: New F1 Awareness)
Originator: kevinh@nath
Reply-To: kevinh@hslrswi.hasler.ascom.ch
Organization: Ascom Hasler AG
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 12:23:59 GMT


In article <1992Sep27.161648.26176@neptune.inf.ethz.ch>, marti@nugget.inf.ethz.ch (Robert Marti) writes:
|> 
|> Are my messages getting out to the net at large?  Or have you all put
|> my name into your kill file? ;-)

Well with all this F1 v CART stuff who knows.  :-) :-).


|> I have been trying to explain the
|> relationship between Sauber and Mercedes at least twice in the past 6
|> months or so ...

I remember, but it wasn't *exactly* what I asked.

|> The official story goes like this:
|> Sauber had a contract with Mercedes till either 92 or 93 to field the
|> Mercedes Group C sports cars.  Mercedes decided to pull out of Group C
|> sports cars at the end of 91.  Contrary to what most people believed,
|> Mercedes also decided to not enter F1.  Mercedes therefore agreed to
|> pay substantial damages to Sauber for their breach of contract.  As a
|> result, Sauber decided to continue with the F1 project that he had
|> started in the middle of 91 on behalf of Mercedes on his own.
|> 
|> To summarize:  Officially, Sauber is all by himself, but Mercedes is
|> subsidizing his effort at least financially.

Well, it's pretty certain that Mercedes are using Sauber, as before, to
test the water.  IMHO, the extent of how much support they are giving him
behind the scenes is made more obvious by the fact that Sauber have the
contract with Goodyear, than the fact that Mercedes happen to be paying 
enough damages (due to their breaking the contract) to finance Saubers 
efforts in F1.

|> Of course, many people believe that Mercedes will re-emerge from their
|> current background role if -- or rather, as soon as -- the F1 Sauber
|> is reasonably successful.

Do you think he will be? The Ilmor engine and Karl Wendlinger/JJ Lehto
hardly sound like a winning combination, then again it is their first
season -  who knows?

kevinh@hasler.ascom.ch
From: slana@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (charles.e.slana)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: Buick out of IndyCar?
Date: 30 Sep 92 16:59:01 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Sep30.142103.33304@slate.mines.colorado.edu>, cartley@slate.mines.colorado.edu (Craig Artley) writes:
> I heard on the radio this morning (KOA, ~6:15) that Buick is pulling out
> of IndyCar racing and will concentrate on the Indy-Lights.  This is the
> first I've heard of this.  I'd guess that this will have the biggest
> effect on the Indianapolis race, since this was the only venue where the
> engine was competitive, due to the extra boost.

One thing that none of the reports, press or r.a.s., are mentioning is
whether there will still be Buicks at the 500 next May.  I seem to recall
that the Buick is the only purchased engine, where a customer actually
owns the engine that they buy, as opposed to the leased/liscensed
Chevys or Fords.  Is this correct?  If that's the case, I'd assume some
teams like Bernstein's or Menard's would have a fair supply left, and
enough tuning expertise to have a go at it again in '93, no?

I'm assuming that the factory pullout just means that there will be
no more NEW engines.  Or am I horribly mixed up and Cosworth was the
purchased engine?

Help!


Chuck Slana
AT&T Bell Labs
Naperville, IL
email: ..!att!ihlpm!slana
   or  slana@ihlpm.att.com
From: kim@unix.cc.emory.edu (Kim Wallen)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Will ESPN rebroadcast Portugal?
Date: 29 Sep 92 17:44:53 GMT
Reply-To: kim@unix.cc.emory.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: Department of Psychology

Is there a rebroadcast of the Portugal F1 race scheduled on ESPN?

Thanks

Kim


 ----------------------------------------------- 
| Kim Wallen                        Internet: kim@unix.cc.emory.edu 
| Department of psychology          Bitnet: kim@emoryu1             
| Emory University                                                  
| Atlanta, GA 30322                                                 
|                                                                   
| Phone: (404) 727-4125             FAX: (404) 727-0372             
 -------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: colfelt@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Andrew BW Colfelt)
Subject: Marlboro Challenge 
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 20:37:26 GMT

news@ncsu.edu (USENET News System) writes:
>the Marlboro Challenge 
>all-star race set for this Saturday, Oct. 3.


Is this event to be televised?  

ESPN's Paul Page said during the Portland telecast that
they would be "bringing the Marlboro Challenge, as well as
the race, on the weekend of Oct. 4."

I assume that this means they intended to televise both
Nazareth events, the Marlboro Challenge and the Bosch
Sparkplug 200.

While we know that the Bosch race will be tape-delayed,
there have been no previews for the Marlboro Challenge,
nor any mention of TV coverage on ANY network.

Knowledge, anyone?


-- 
Andrew          
Colfelt@ucsu.Colorado.EDU
--
From: dafuller@sequent.com (David Fuller)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: Honda RA168E (a.k.a. that '88 Honda engine) and fuel preheating
Date: 4 Oct 92 06:59:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: sequent.1992Oct4.065921.16930
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.

In article <1afnhsINNl43@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> ah335@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard Banks) writes:
>
>I was reading an article on the RA168E and RA167E and it states that the
>fuel was ran through an engine coolant heat exchanger to raise the
>temperature of the fuel to within 15 degrees of that of the coolant
>because racing fuel does not typically contain low boiling-point
>ingredients.  The fuel was 84% toluene.  I still don't understand their
>reason for preheating it.  What is the average temperature of fuel and
>what is the average temperature of F1 engine coolant in an operating
>engine?  By the way, I would think to they do the exact opposite, cool
>it, to make it more dense?
>Any comments?
>
>R.Banks

Just happen to have handy the book "McLaren Honda Turbo - A Technical
Appraisal".  Here are some relevant snippets about the RA168E...

First, it appears you're talking about the race tune of the motor and not
the qualifying tune...  Of course, packing in more fuel per bang produces
more horses but F1 is now an economy run (hah!) so...

* The high volume of Toluene (moderated with n-Heptane to achieve 102 RON)
  didn't do well in terms of atomization.  So it evaporated poorly compared
  to good old Gasoline.

* "To obtain the best fuel consumption at 2.5 bar Honda found it necessary 
  to run a charge air temperature of 70 degrees centigrade and a weak 
  mixture - an air ratio of 1.02 and a fuel temperature of 80C.  Under these 
  conditions Honda was able to produce an extremely frugal race engine..."

* "Improved atomisation was also achieved through pre-heating the fuel via 
  the ...heat exchanger.  ...Fuel consumption improved as the fuel 
  temperature was increase from 40C to 80C..."

-- 
Dave Fuller		 	All opinions expressed are my own and not
Sequent Computer Systems	those of Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.
dafuller@sequent.com