So, according to the final comments in the video, it will still be a hazard but not kick up as much dust.![]()
Glenn
When we were there for the June Sprints it was explained to us that it was put there for several reasons: less rutting, less dust, and less maintenance needed due to cars continually running off into that area. And compared to solid pavement, less traction due to the "egg-crate" surface, meaning drivers will be less tempted to intentionally use it as an extension of the racetrack than they would be if the track had just been widened.
Last edited by DaveW; 06.19.25 at 8:00 PM. Reason: Clarified my logic
Dave Weitzenhof
Leave the turn alone!
This is motor racing.... old school. You do not do the turn correctly, you pay a price. Something greater than just a slow lap time.
Brian
You’re complaining because they made an improvement that has absolutely no bearing on those that do the turn correctly, but should make it safer for those that do get it wrong a prevent a situation where 3 drivers are cut out of their cars and airlifted like we saw last year? I seem to remember similarly callous posts from you the last time someone was killed there too.
Van Diemen RF99 FC
I would like to see this approach/solution taken at a few corners at some other tracks...
Chris Robson
R-Motorsports
Performance Coaching and Race Rentals
As I recall, the Nurburgring remained virtually unchanged as the cars/drivers were getting exponentially faster...until it was considered too dangerous and abandoned as a G.P. circuit. Perhaps gradual improvements would have kept it as the premiere track.
What's wrong with occasional improvements and maybe safer racing?
Even in a vintage F1 or Indy car, I'd prefer to have 3-layers of nomex & a Snell helmet over tee-shirts & tin hats.
Glenn
P.S. For me, "glory" and bragging rights come from my accomplishments (big or small) not my disasters or tragedies.
There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (3 members and 1 guests)