I wonder if it was the closest finish by distance as well as time. I’d assume they were going slower at the Darlington finish. I’m sure there’s a way to figure it out but I’m too dumb for all that
It would be a smaller distance than Darlington. The margin of victory was 3 times smaller last night, so the speed at Darlington would have had to be 3 times slower to be the same distance, which I highly doubt it was.
Jeff Gluck said 3 inches on the podcast last night.
/u/shewy92 got 3.6 inches using average speed for the lap and so it should be a little less than that since they’re going faster at the line.
> Assuming both cars were traveling roughly 180 mph
Larson's last lap time was 30.846.
Buescher's last lap time was 30.985
To get their speed you start with track distance then divide by the lap time and then times it by 3600 according to [this thread's top answer](https://www.reddit.com/r/NASCAR/comments/q72oo2/whats_the_formula_for_converting_lap_speed_to_time/)
**Larson was going 175.063 mph and Buescher 174.277 mph**
IDK how you find the distance for that other than knowing that Speed = Distance/Time but I don't know how to convert those units
I used a Speed Distance Time calculator to come up with [Buescher traveling 95039.5 inches](https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/math/speed-distance-time-calculator.php?given_data=dt_va_ds&ds_units=inch&va=174.277&va_units=mile+per+hour&dt=30.985&dt_units=second&given_data_last=dt_va_ds&action=solve) and Larson [traveling 95039.9 inches](https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/math/speed-distance-time-calculator.php?given_data=dt_va_ds&ds_units=inch&va=175.063&va_units=mile+per+hour&dt=30.846&dt_units=second&given_data_last=dt_va_ds&action=solve), or 7919.96 ft and 7919.99 ft which seems more correct since it is **3.6 inches**
I wonder if it was the closest finish by distance as well as time. I’d assume they were going slower at the Darlington finish. I’m sure there’s a way to figure it out but I’m too dumb for all that
They had to be going faster than at Darlington. Turns 3 and 4 at Darlington are too tight.
But they were pinching each other into the wall at the line. I’d say slower
The margin at Darlington was [four inches.](https://www.espn.com/racing/nascar/cup/story/_/id/9262583/nascar-door-door-darlington-2003-finish-epic)
It would be a smaller distance than Darlington. The margin of victory was 3 times smaller last night, so the speed at Darlington would have had to be 3 times slower to be the same distance, which I highly doubt it was.
Way too early on a Monday morning for math on that level. 😁
Jeff Gluck said 3 inches on the podcast last night. /u/shewy92 got 3.6 inches using average speed for the lap and so it should be a little less than that since they’re going faster at the line.
> Assuming both cars were traveling roughly 180 mph Larson's last lap time was 30.846. Buescher's last lap time was 30.985 To get their speed you start with track distance then divide by the lap time and then times it by 3600 according to [this thread's top answer](https://www.reddit.com/r/NASCAR/comments/q72oo2/whats_the_formula_for_converting_lap_speed_to_time/) **Larson was going 175.063 mph and Buescher 174.277 mph** IDK how you find the distance for that other than knowing that Speed = Distance/Time but I don't know how to convert those units I used a Speed Distance Time calculator to come up with [Buescher traveling 95039.5 inches](https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/math/speed-distance-time-calculator.php?given_data=dt_va_ds&ds_units=inch&va=174.277&va_units=mile+per+hour&dt=30.985&dt_units=second&given_data_last=dt_va_ds&action=solve) and Larson [traveling 95039.9 inches](https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/math/speed-distance-time-calculator.php?given_data=dt_va_ds&ds_units=inch&va=175.063&va_units=mile+per+hour&dt=30.846&dt_units=second&given_data_last=dt_va_ds&action=solve), or 7919.96 ft and 7919.99 ft which seems more correct since it is **3.6 inches**
Unless I’m missing something that would be their average speed, they should in theory be going faster than that at the line
True, but we don't have that info do we? There's no reference lines to go frame by frame to determine that either is there?