Formula one v Nascar. Which is faster which is more dangerous ??
Answers:
Nascar is a degree more dangerous, whereas Formula one is far more superior than any poor substitute the yanks can deliver. Let's face it, the British invented most of the Worlds best sports, then the Americans try to emulate them, and fail badly.
Don't know, hard one for me cos I love F1
I think NASCAR is faster because there are no twisty turns like in Formula One racing.therefore, I think NASCAR is more dangerous.
Formula 1 is substantially faster. Nascar is much more dangerous, because the drivers are expected to make risky maneuvers to please the audience.
nascar,i would no im a nascar fan,there always in some kind of bind
both are dangerous watch a indy wreck and then watch a nascar wreck i think u are more likely to die if u are a indy driver!
With no doubt Formula One is faster. Now, when it comes to which one is more dangerous I would say Formula One also.
Im a NASCAR fan, and em bored with F1
but F1 is definatly faster and more dangerous.
its hard to communicate with every driver & crew member from a different country and every race in a different country. when something goes wrong it takes too long to get help to the driver.
thats what makes it so dangerous
dunno - dont care - both effin borin
They both have about the same horsepower, but the F1 car weighs only half of the Cup car, so it has a speed and acceleration advantage. :)
they both are very deadly
FORMNLA 1 IS FASTER,.,....... NASCAR IS MORE DANGERES
Undoubtedly a Formula One car is much faster than a NASCAR car, but it's difficult to make comparisons as they don't race on the same circuits.
Having said that, I will offer the following: In 1980, the last time Formula One raced at Watkins Glen, N.Y., Bruno Giacomelli qualified an Alfa Romeo on the pole at an average speed of 130.322 mph. This year, Kurt Bush qualified for the `Bud at The Glen' at an average speed of 122.966.
Twenty Six years later, Formula One cars are capable of far greater speeds and Giacomelli's raced on a 3.377-mile circuit. Nowadays, the circuit is in somewhat of a different configuration and is much shorter - 2.45 miles.
Formula One cars don't race on oval tracks, so, a comparison isn't possible. However, IRL cars, like their F1 counterparts are of open-wheel, open-cockpit design, but generate far less horsepower, but the pole time for the 2006 Indianapolis 500 (an IRL race) was approximately 40 mph faster than the pole time for the Brickyard 400, and you have to believe, if adapted, an F1 car would be even faster.
As for which is more dangerous, I think, by its very nature, in many situations an open-wheel, open-cockpit car is far more dangerous.
Note to edselmanl.: The minimum weight for a Formula One car is 600 Kilos (1322 pounds), including the driver; I believe a Nextel Cup car weighs somewhere in the region of 3500 pounds, so it really isn't a 2:1 ratio.
f1 is faster but nascar is more dangerous anytime you are driving next to a earhardt or a waltrip your life is in danger.
Formula one is fastest. But Nascar is probably more dangerous because the cars are not so highly specified, and the tracks are not as safe.
i like nascar never watch formula one , but there both fast and dangerous
F1 has the faster cars it takes a while for nascars to get up to speed about 2 or 3 laps. F1 is safest i heard a fact once that there is a 2 in 1 chance of death in nascar but that was a couple of years ago.
I think the drivers are the deciding factor as far as danger is concerned. Nascar would be much safer if they had F1 drivers in the cockpits and F1 would be carnage with Nascar pilots. F1 is safer because of the quality of the drivers, appart from Takuma Sato, of course... And Schummi in the right circumstances (see the clip)
F1 cars are faster than those in Nascar by far.
"NASCAR" of course.
The answers post by the user, for information only, UKQnA.com does not guarantee the right.