![]() 09/05/2020 at 17:13 • Filed to: None | ![]() | ![]() |
So I’m definitely a casual racing fan. I watch F1 and NASCAR and a few others if I catch them on TV but don’t go out of my way to follow any series. This year I’ve been following F1 a little more closely and if I miss a race I’ll look up the results later. Recently I’ve been wondering - why do we report auto racing results in seconds behind the winner instead of margin like horse racing? If someone wins by 1 second it sounds close but that could be 1 car length or 1 mile depending on how fast the cats are. It seems like margin makes more sense... what am I missing?
![]() 09/05/2020 at 17:31 |
|
Probably coz its easier to measure time difference in auto racing. I can imagine how b ack in the old days it would’ve been easier to t ime the difference between 2 cars using a stopwatch instead of calculating speed and distance between 2 cars at any given point on the circuit.
Also, cars can be different lengths even in the same race (like at LeMans) so 'car length' would've been kinda vague...
![]() 09/05/2020 at 17:34 |
|
The laps are timed and usually about 2-3 minutes per lap so time is the best way to show position at the finish. At 200 mph 8 seconds is a huge gap, at 20-25 like a horse 8 seconds is not as far of a distance. Anyway that’s my speculation.
![]() 09/05/2020 at 18:04 |
|
Historically, you would not know where all the vehicles are at any particular moment. It has always been reasonably easy to record times at start-finish.
![]() 09/05/2020 at 18:25 |
|
It's simply so watch makers can charge 50k for a formula1 themed lux wrist timepiece. Car length doesn't have the same appeal
![]() 09/05/2020 at 18:31 |
|
This makes sense. It’s easy now with computers and blimps/drones over the course. I guess I didn’t think about history.
![]() 09/06/2020 at 00:05 |
|
Because F1 circuits are not round (or oval) so the last mile of a circuit can be sensible slower or faster than half of the 2 last miles for example.