F1 2020 Mercedes vs NASCAR | Daytona 500 

Glock'd

@@sebastianL42 ah fuck sake

Mercedes is German so it's Franz Bernold 😂

@@olipapa7436 lol

Before he lost at italian GP he is now francesco bruhnuli

Ngl it was sick when they did that

How about Martinsville?

@@elfcounsul oh god

Impossible

@@dhruvnarain3948 for what reason?? To be honest after the way one series pulled to many g forces at Texas...it could be possible that the g force at Daytona in the turns could be a potential reason...

@@shawnbarczak1766 ever heard of Indianapolis 2008 or 2006 in f1

Well, you could do it once the current gen cars are done racing. Although you'd likely have to wait until Ferrari puts there current cars up for there F1 Cliente program. In other words wait until 5-10 years from now.

AHHHHH so you mean the entire thing?

@@dhruvnarain3948 r/missedthejoke

@@jimmy_ww298 that isnt even a subreddit? plus i was joking as well

😂😂😂

@@dhruvnarain3948 r/wooosh

This video reminds me of nascar races

lol

ikr

yEaH buT F1 iS beTtEr

@@bloba4443 It's better if you like to nap.

Sameee

I agree, it's apples and oranges.

Lol

Lol yeah and I miss the old sound than hybrid era

@@mrdllo1731 it’s German you muppet, you’re seriously using the color…

@@mrdllo1731 are italians red and green

@@mrdllo1731 african countries dont have black flags

Dang your comment just actually explained so much to me about the difference between the capabilities of an f1 car and a stock car. Thank you✨

Although I believe they still make 750 hp without the EM's

@@aaron_r6611 Exactly. The only real issue is the transmission. Because they have to use one gear ratio for the whole season (and the F1 season doesn't contain that long flat out passages), they peak way too early the way they are. But assuming they'd have Indy and Daytona (the ovals) in the calendar, they'd definitely use different gearboxes and would smoke both Indy and Nascar. It's just a question of how much money they put into F1 vs. how much money they put into the US series.

@@11mousa there are tracks on the F1 calender with longer straights than the back stretch of Daytona or Talledega. Look up Baku, Monza, China, Bahrain just to name a few. Also, they use an 8 speed transmission, with more than enough torque at lower gears, they can run higher ratios for 6,7,8 gears easily. Plus F1 cars have DRS, which at a track like Daytona would be borderline OP.

@@nathanwho1384 there are tracks with longer straights, yes. But all of those have heavy breaking zones and stop and go passages, where a longer ratio would make them overall slower. Only on two tracks in the calendar (Monza and I think Austria) they would slightly benefit from a longer ratio, whereas they would be significantly slower on all other tracks (they need to use the same ratio for all tracks).

And they were all from the USA

I'm from the U.S but I'm a fan of F1 as opposed to Nascar.

@@MiguelHernandez-ev7wd sure thing "Miguel Hernandez"

@@QuickNickGT yes sir!

I disliked, I am not offended. It's really boring and the repetitive sound is annoying af. So I just don't like the video. This is what the dislike button is there for you know.

If this track had corners it would take shorter for the F1 to catch up.

And if was real life the formula 1 engine would blow by the backstretch on the second lap.

@@scoobyruuuu Nope, ever heard of tuning, they could easily make the engines run on lower rpms to prevent overheating, they sure as hell wouldn’t do 14k rpm on a circuit where the brakes are pretty much useless

@@broshido2745 you're a moron life isn't a video game where tuning is the answer!!!

The f1 cars are restricted on what they can do aswell to a certain point, but I get your point

U can tell withing the first few seconds of the video and you can definitely tell from the sound Iam amazed it took you *THAT LONG* to notice

@@BigBrex0124 hes prolly quite old you can tell straight away these graphics are alright at best 😂

@@LFXGaming 🙄

@@BigBrex0124 you niggas need a life if you are getting this angry

The video isn’t even five minutes long xD

The Alpine car would dominate

Or haas

Even Hass vs Williams hahahahahaha

Or Haas vs Haas (Haas F1 vs Stewart Haas)

On an oval track performance would be similar.

They have to restrict power, otherwise you'll have way more deadly crashes.

@@Vinnay94 f1 would probably fly off from a Nascar track that track is for slow cars f1 are light and fast they would have been in audience if they went all in on a Nascar track

@@kiraamv5507 NASCAR ovals aren't for slow cars. You obviously didn't watch old school NASCAR with out the restrictor plates. Nor do you watch IndyCar which have higher top speeds. Your ignorance is showing. You're not a fan of automobile racing, you just like suck F1's 🍆.

Restrictor plates exist for a good reason, nobody wants to see these guys killed

GOK 13 ................no restrictor plate and the Cup Car could keep him in dirty air ?????

NASCAR doesn't use ethanol. NASCAR fuel is Sunoco Green E15, a 98 octane, unleaded fuel

i mean its a video game. so its not really powered by ethanol. unless your pc is ethanol powered.

@@soulfly3438 ethanol cooled

@@true_neutral3378 I’ve found Dexicool concentrate works best. No point in adding water

Lol nascar doesn't use that crap

I’d prefer but Indyroad course but charlotte is my home track so I’d like to see it at Charlotte

Yes it does

I thought of the same

Id be interested to see them race at the Daytona road course, but i’d prefer if they went back to Indianapolis instead of Miami

​@@OumuamuaOumuamua that Miami circuit is fantastic though

@@eats4cheaps305 I think it’s alright

F 1 é o mais lento, queira ou nao

@@TERRAJOVEM6000 I don’t really speak Portuguese but from my knowledge of Italian I think you said “F1 is more slow, like it or not” which doesn’t really make sense since I’m saying I think the stock car would be faster.

@@TERRAJOVEM6000 in certain cases f1 would be faster and other cases it might bit slower. If you take the f1/indy cars into 1.5-2.0 mile track it definitely kick stock cars but because it will have the corner speed. Stock cars has more restricted motors if you take that out on 2.5mile oval such as daytona and talladega it would be similar. Rusty Wallace did a test at talladega and took out the restrictor plates from the motor he was going about 240 and the tires only lasted I think it was like 2 or 3 laps. That was with the stock car. I can look for the video and post it if you like. So you can see what I'm talking about.

Rusty Wallace did a test at dega without the restrictor plates and did a out 240mph

Take off rev limiter from f1 engine and it would go upto 19000 revs. Now whose talking

Nothing beats a pack of restricted stock cars around the turn of the century imo. Not even the cars NASCAR runs these days.

@@nicolesgaming8917 Have you heard of the Ferrari F2004? That thing revs at 18k RPM! It also sounds amazing.

@@seven5677 I have heard of it, and it does sound amazing, but I grew up watching NASCAR around the turn of the century, and didn't start watching F1 until the turbo hybrid era.

@@nicolesgaming8917 I agree. The sounds of Nascar cars as they go right next to the safer barrier is amazing

The ONLY good sounding V6 F1 car is the Mclaren's of the 80s and 90s. The current F1 cars aren't even close.

Miles per hour, not kilometers per hour.

A bit generous but ok

J.C. ..............and that was 20 years ago , but the cup car could sure dirty up that air that F 1 needs !!!!!!!

@@dannycalley7777 F1 2022 cars say no.

Look up bill elliott unrestricted coors car..i believe 142mph

"Stock" car

or. National association of stock car auto racing cars

@@dhruvnarain3948 Just made it sound silly lol

Or NASCAR Race Car

@@pomegranates3269 No. My one is the best

I agree.

I’d love to see a NASCAR stock car without restrictor plate vs with, and compared to F1. Those restrictor plates take around 50mph off on the superspeedways.

Think of IMSA series racing. Different classes and makes all on the same track. I'd say 10 F1 cars, 10 Indy cars, and 10 NASCAR Cup cars on Talladega for an exhibition race/test experiment. Set the Indy and F1 cars speed to the limit of the Cup cars to be fair or vice versa as far as safety will allow and see which series has the better aero package, drivers, and mechanics. We know which series has the most money to lose so start with F1. Thats what I'd like to see. Oh and did I mention that talladega is know for speed and wild wrecks?

@@rxw5520 Restrictor plates aren't that old...i remember as a kid the first race they did them and it sucked, but as a couple races unfolded we discovered good things....like Earnhardt absolutely mastering pack racing and you always got "The Big One"

@@JacobStevens13 yeah they came and went for a while as they fiddled around with engines in the 70s, 80s, and 90s. There’s only so much horsepower you can put in a car with crappy downforce and no brakes before drivers start dropping like flies!!

It was just in one race and it was all Michelins fault, not the cars, Bridgestone had no issues, but i guess you don't even have a clue of what happened lol.

@@marcoar3109 😂🤣 what a dick...i was joking and by the comment "the tyres fell off"" tells i knew full well what the issue was 👍

However the lateral force on the tires would destroy the F1 car’s race after about one lap.

Felt a little slow to me too

@@benk7849 not if they removed a lot of the downforce

not exactly, the mercedes would still trump them but it would take longer, individually, the highest performing NASCAR Toyotas can only grt to around 195mph at daytona, tagether they could theoretically clock in 210mph when working together

@@kieranchadderton3894 i think 210 is being optimistic. I know quite a bit about nascar. Alone they do about 188 190 because of the restrict or plate on the intake. Bump drafting they would be more likely to get 205 in a perfect world. What I don’t know, is F1 cars lol

In the 2020 Daytona 500 they were hitting about 211 with restrictor plates. In whatever year. Rusty Wallace ran a 235mph lap at talladega

F1 generates way more drag than a Stock Car, and it has a similar top speed, an F1 car without aero would obliterate even a Bugatti Chiron in straightline speed

@@marcoar3109 an f1 car without aero wouldnt be an f1 car dummy

@@BigCheeseIsReal When did i say something like: "An f1 car without aero isn't an f1 car"?

The highest speed a Stock Car reached unrestricted was 271.8 MPH.

Put a current ford FR9 Stock car V8 in bill elliott's 1987 Thunderbird without a Restrictor plate I project about 240 if you can hold it on the track

It's actually dependant, forced induction is allowed they also just have hefty regulations to actually slow them down such as fuel flow restrictions, limited boost level, lower rev limiter, and the turbocharger (superchargers are allowed, however, all constructors opted for the turbo). There are hefty build restrictions in comparison to F1 than NASCAR because of the complexity of the cars and how they operate. These engines wouldn't blow up after a few laps they'd be worn down but in no serious danger until around the 500-600 laps area unless something was already seriously long this is why we tend to see retirements due to engine failure (if the team hasn't already opted to potentially take the grid penalty or swapped out parts before race weekend) around the middle part of the mid season or nearing its tail end.

Well technically you can make the engine last at least halfway distance of what NASCAR races in Daytona if the limiter was rearrange

@Random Animations Okay that too. That works for me.

And in other news, water is wet.

@@schizoidforjesus Well that's for the road courses in NASCAR. They added that quite some time back but it's becoming a full guarantee race in the rain in NASCAR. But F1 they deal with it and race in the rain like they're legends even if they aren't.

@@markdemars7648 ya didnt get the joke

@@schizoidforjesus Oh. It was a joke? I didn't know that was a joke.

There's no probably it would clear 300. Hell the nascar might at Talladega by now at least until it gets into a turn. Everything in racing would come down to tire development if the gloves were taken off by now because unless some big development changed it racing would be always be limited to what the tire could withstand by now. Both the current F1 and nascar would look like moving glacier shitboxes in comparison and would bore you to tears if all restrictions were taken off, so saying if this or that one restriction was taken off is pointless and arbitrary. F1 would literally look half alien to modern eyes lol

Jeff Gordon

@@Bolt_theG35 actually I believe it was Tony Stewart at Watkins Glen. Gordon did a seat swap with Montoya back in the early 2000s when Juan was still at Williams

Jimmie Johnson also did a swap with Fernando Alonso at McLaren a couple of years back

It was Tony Stewart. Think Mobil1 sponsorship has something to do with it also.

Explain I don’t get it

@@username_password NASCAR uses an aluminum plate with small holes in it to restrict their speed so they don’t take flight.

I actually don't think it would catch up. The banking is enough to keep the cup car close to flat out and the formula 1 car engine doesn't have near the power continuously. It would be down a couple hundred HP with no clear aero drag advantage.

You should look at the fastest F1 drivers

@@HieuTran-ck7oe the fastest an F1 car has ever gone was 231 mph in Mexico. A NASCAR will easily exceed 200 mph unrestricted and Scott Dixon won the poll at the Indianapolis 500 this year with a top speed of 243 mph. I know exactly how fast these cars go.

@@Bolt_theG35 Are you saying Nascar is faster?

@@HieuTran-ck7oe that’s a very subjective question that can only be answered with a very subjective answer. In a straight line and on a road course, of course not, an F1 car is much faster than a nascar because it’s designed for those kind of tracks and has such short gearing, and it’s aerodynamically designed for maximum downforce through corners. On a track like Daytona or Talladega however, if the nascar was unrestricted, it more than likely would be faster, especially in tandem racing; in other words two F1 cars vs two nascars, the nascars will probably be faster because that’s what the nascar is designed to do; two nascars are faster than one. The F1 car has way too much downforce/drag and too short of gearing which will more than likely make the F1 car suffer on the 31 degree banking at Daytona and Talladega, and it’s hybrid engine would be pretty much useless on a track like that. The F1 car just isn’t designed for that kind of track, so it’s possible the nascar could be faster on a big oval like that.

Would be good to have one of the old F1 cars from 20 years ago. They had way more power and ground effect.

The combustion engine on F1s is over 750hp tough, still more than enough. Reliability is on point too, the real thing that would create problems for the F1 are tyres

It’s actually 5.9 liter

no its not

You never heard an F1 car in real life

@@lindsaymartinez5341 I have heard both and the cup car sound is better

1.6 litre vs 5.8 litre ? No contest Mercedes, "Hold my beer !"

the stock car was able to use it's speed tricks

@@Dr.Doomsday19 ?

@@BigCheeseIsReal lol

Well that's not fair, the stock car gets to use 100% of its potential and the F1 car doesn't? I mean, they gave the stock car a 21 second head start.

NASCAR cars only use petrol and have a big spoiler on the back on. For speedways they only have 500 horsepower. The f1 car has 1,000 by the engine alone. See the difference now

that cap

TONIGHT I'LL FIGHT!!! I'LL BE THE HEROOO!

That is true that F1 cars average a 22 MPH top speed but if you took the restrictor plates(Restrictor plates are devices installed between the carburetor and intake manifold that restrict the amount of air and fuel entering the engine's combustion chamber causing the NASCARS to always be at a even pace. (Basically limits the amount of speed that NASCARS use.)) off of NASCARS they would average 20 MPH+ top speed and be faster than F1 cars.

@@YEGGS_1 put them in a road course and watch the f1 car lap the stock car 7 times

What are you talking about? F1 cars run faster on more difficult tracks. How in the world NASCAR is “more competitive” than F1 is beyond me. NASCAR have more non-fatal injuries, whilst having just 4 less fatal injuries during races. Love both types of racing, but your comment is a little bit unfair.

I’m nascar (pre-2019) the package was around 750 hp and the aerodynamics of a brick. All that power to the rear wheels in a car that doesn’t want to turn or do anything well. Not to mention the other 30-40 drivers that also have the same problem and are pushing the issue to try to come out on top. Nascar is very competitive. Also now we run 660 hp with less downforce so you have to manhandle the race car. I’m not dissing f1. I respect in it it’s own way but it’s just all about being smooth and dirty air controls everything (also kinda did in nascar) but to me, nascar is more competitive and has some of the best racing.

@@UknowJow Well joe its like this. Count how many times you see a pass in a F1 race and how many you see in a NASCAR race. THats why. F1 they just follow each other around the track, the winner is determined by qualifiing.

Exactly

They were going even faster than that in the 80s, that 212 lap was the lap average

Well Nascars have restrictor plates.

@@pomegranates3269 yup they sure do

It wouldn't, F1 cars never run a downforce spec low enough to reflect how powerful the engines are. If an F1 team were to race their car against Indycars we would see a super low downforce spec. F1 cars have hit the area around 380kph with a lot of downforce on now can you imagine if they trim all of it? Modren F1 cars have the most efficient and complex engines ever built and reach 1000HP compared to the 650 of indycar. You can say Indycar engines are closer to F2 than F1.

​@@ruben_m8907 The most recent V10 era cars would probably beat Indy but the current hybrids? Once the battery runs out I don't think so. Big power losses. Not to mention, bending the rules changing to down-force set ups never seen isn't really a good answer. By the same logic, let's fit DRS and modern aero to the F2004 and see how it compares to the modern F1 cars. We're talking about cars in their natural form. Indy gets thrashed by F1 on the Road for sure but on an oval? Not for me.

@@stevenhickenjr pretty much. Likely with a hybrid setup, AWD, upgraded engine, higher downforce, an IRL Indycar could easily beat an F1 car around a road course. Kind of a stupid argument. If we are assessing cars, it needs to be in pure form, not some what if.

@@jeremiahd2417 True but also if you took the restrictor plates off of NASCARS, NASCARS would average 260-270 MPH lol it would be insane speed you can even look it up to.

@@stevenhickenjr well the bhp of the combustion engine is 750hp, and changing aerodynamics setup is completely legal in F1, all teams run very different rear and front wings in Monza compared to Monaco, I don’t see what would be the problem running even less downforce in an oval

2000 Indianapolis GP. The reason why F1 has only 1 tyre manufacturor since.

But the nascar Is way slower and it’s only built to do that we need to try this rest on a f1 track see if the Americans have managed to handle corners yet

@@essexginge9167 you Europeans ever heard of google? Have you used it to figure out about a mysterious series of open wheel racing called “indycar” 😱 ikr so difficult for you guys to do but trust me it exists. And guess what, they race mostly street circuits and road courses but ALSO ovals. Complete madness. You guys should get caught up

@@Kilo-sz4ch Eh, I’m European and most F1 fans (for example on the F1 subreddit) know that it isn’t about corners and what not. The whole series spec is different, budgets are different, and there’s good engineering going on everywhere. www.grandprix247.com/2018/04/10/porsche-lmp1-breaks-formula-1-lap-record-at-spa/ is the perfect example of why series spec/restrictions are the thing that defines speed.

This video is in a video game, so the only bs is your comment.

Most of the difference was the acceleration of the lighter car. Things leveled out once they were both at terminal velocity.

@@The52car yh but their is still around a 30 kph difference between their speeds

Cup car also has a restrictor plate, if wide open...the f1 tires may last longer..but a 21 second difference..he may never catch it

Because f1 isn’t for ovals

You can only use drs when your close to another car

@@starlord7636 in an F1 race, which this is not - you can see DRS used on the straights

I'd expect the stock car to have far less drag.

@@sausagecatjohnson the stock car has the aerodynamic capabilities of a brick lol

@@wolfgangvan-uber6515 which is still far better than an F1 car. High Downforce = high drag.

lmao

It’s messed up F1

F1 👍🏽

@@victorcisneros.1196 all Motorsport 👍🏻

Nascar cars are limited on the biggest tracks (Daytona and Talladega) from 780hp to around 520. They would do 400 km/h without restrictions easy. With only 4 gears and a weight of 1 and a half tons

@@JUSTRACINGYT lmao im just trying to balance out the comments about which car would be faster without restrictions, nascar has the higher preference right now

In 1986, Road and Track did a test at a test track (8 mile oval) between Al Holbert’s 962 and Tim Richmond’s Monte Carlo SS. It wasn’t even close even with LeMans gearing. Richmond won like 235 to 220. We’ll never see this in real life, but Cup cars in the right setting are massively fast. F1 cars are quick and fast, but aren’t optimized at all for an oval.

@@coolfred2832 Because they are more restricted. The record speed of an unrestricted stock car was 271.8 MPH but without a draft and the restricted engines, they run 180 around Daytona. Almost 90 MPH is dropped from these restrictions.

@@canon1753 f1 car will explode at the back stretch In real life

Mercedes-AMG vs Ford Mustang

@@Racer33_YT yop

You're gonna enjoy tomorrow's video

Bangings.....seriously?

All you have to do is put long lasting tyres on the car a lot of fuel save the battery and whala f1 still wins don't be suprised

On a race track with turns. That will be a different story.

@@seven5677,true , but that's not the comparison here. Of course and F1 car would destroy it on a road course. On a long track it might lap a cup car before the cup car completed a lap😎

@@sextonjr8 yeah that is true as well

Yes also Cup Cars have restrictors that restrict speed but if you took the restrictor plates off the Cup Car the Cup car would speed up to about 260-270 MPH and probably still win in the road course lol.

@@YEGGS_1 a car that has 0 downforce, and has like 1/3 of the steering win a road corse ?

And put the Bill Eliott Talladega 200mph+ car

@@pomegranates3269 it's funny but the modern cars without restrictor plates would be much faster. they have a thing on iRacing called coca cola super speedway. It's a three mile oval 35 degree banking and no restrictor plates. I've seen 260mph in the draft.

But it will not be able to turn the corners at that speed

*I A M S P E E D*

Idk about 250... definitely not average lap speed.

The g-force at that speed in the corners would cause the driver to pass out.

@@jameshoran8 or in other words, CART at Montana.

Hahahahahaha what?indycar doing what?!lolol

Of course, the CART cars ran 250MPH+. Even the 90s CART racers were faster than today's Dallara which has a max of about 235-240. F1 is built for cornering unlike an Indycar which is built for speed and reliability. Different cars built for specific formats of racing. F1 built for 45 minutes road course sprints, Indy for 500 mile oval endurance races.

@@jeremiahd2417 45 mins?lol.. anyway F1 Is faster than indycar on straights too

@@echipuosaperlo the specifications say otherwise. I will use the CART era as that was the peak. I will use a 1994 Penske PC-23 Mercedes and a 1994 Williams-Renault FW16B, the championship car for that year. First off, the powerplants. The PC-23 used an Ilmor-Mercedes capable of up to 1024 hp at 10,500 rpm in race trim. The Renault V10 was capable of 830hp at up to 14,300 rpm in race trim. We easily see the winner there. The chassis, the PC-23 weighed in at 1550lbs. It had a power:weight ration of 1.46bhp:1kg. There were no specs on the FW16B but the weight was likely similar. The power to weight ratio was 0.53bhp:kg. There's a clear winner there. Torque was about the same with 557lbft at 8500rpm for the PC-23 compared to the 560lbft at 9400rpm. The PC-23 ran 520 miles without a single issue. The FW16 ran a max of 350 miles until it started having issues. Winner here, the PC-23. Clear reliability while keeping sustained power.

@@jeremiahd2417 lol tf is he even talking about xD.. yeah, talk about 1994 lol wtf xD.. current f1's are way faster on straights too.

G-force? F1 drivers regularly drive with up to 6 Gs so I don't think you need to worry about that. Also restrictor plates wouldn't increase it to 240 more like topping out closer to 230 rather than 240+. It would be close without restrictor plate if using f1 tires but still f1 would win

theres no way it isnt butter

F1 cars make alot more dirty air than stock cars, and on an oval the dirty air from the Stock car is beneficial because it cuts drag

It would take longer but eventually catch up f1 cars go around 231 mph

I actually wanna see that. But it should be F1 cars before FIA started clamping down on the cars since people actually started dying.

I was so excited to see the difference, that I didn't pay attention to the surroundings. Definitely see it on the second go around lol!