Hi Doug,

>Thanks for jumping in!!

:)

>Well, the Can-Am cars actually were not 'straight line accelleration' only cars, though they did indeed attempt to put as much horsepower onto a frame as possible. Usually 7-800 HP!! They were built for the turns and curves as well though and had to be able to brake quickly. I think their approach was 'typically' American in that they attempted to solve what really is a finesse issue with power and muscle.

That's the big differencce I think, you assume that a good car is the more poer it has, here not.

>
>A lot of the reason for racecars is to test new technologies. Here in America the Can-Ams represented the 'big engine' way of thinking. When the gasoline shortage hit us in 1973 I think that is when the Can-Ams started to decline.

But gasoline shortage were a problem for the US? Curious.

>
>Europe has always had much higher gasoline proces and I'd think that this is why they tend to have smaller, more efficient automobiles. This naturally shows in the kinds of race cars constructed.

Well can be, but I don't know if Europe has always had much higher gasoline proces, I thoughted this was for USA

>I hope you understand that I was tossing out some good-natured teasing regarding the F1 cars. I really do enjoy them as much as the Can-Ams....
>
>Just some friendly competition.. <g>

ALso I enjoy both, :) I understand that but, saying that the F1 Cars are like Tiny Toys, were too much for me! LOL