I seriously wonder if they could be sued for false advertisement since they have stock car in there name
I seriously wonder if they could be sued for false advertisement since they have stock car in there name
I've never been to a NASCAR race, but watched a lot of it on TV as a kid. I think that it's like Golf, Bowling or Baseball. Which is to say it's as much about the socializing as anything. I can certainly think of worse ways to spend my money. The fact that people enjoy bashing it as much as they do says more about how people just like bashing stuff than it does about the events themselves.
And while I'd rather watch F1, I don't think that it's inaccurate to say that F1's every bit as much of a dysfunctional zoo as Nascar - maybe more.
wvumtnbkr wrote: In reply to racerdave600: I am not sure I agree with your comment about the cars being low tech. I think they ARE low tech. I don't believe they are using any new or cutting edge technologies in the cars. I would love to hear otherwise. Just because some of the tools the teams use can be considered "High-Tech", to me doesn't mean that NASCAR or the actual cars are high tech.
I'm not going to go item by item, but you need to go see one and understand what is going on. Just because it is metal and not carbon fiber doesn't make it low tech. They have parts designed to do a job and what you consider to be high tech may not work for what the intended purpose is. And if you make the cars $1 mil or more each, how is that better racing that one that costs $250,000? I've worked with some pretty high dollar stuff, some that are exotic, and while they may not be considered exotic, they are not low tech. I would go as far as to say most people in general couldn't maintain or build one without serious specialized help. And if you think you can, without millions of dollars invested, you are sadly, sadly mistaken.
We helped Toyota get involved, and I know what it took, and what it cost us, and I can assure you, even with Toyota's help, it wasn't nearly enough. It took them years to get a handle on what it needed to be competitive, much less win.
WildScotsRacing wrote: NASCAR drivers are, with a few exceptions, so bad at road racing that virtually the entire field takes a three day refresher course at Barber or Bondurant the week before one of the road course events. Throw in the fact that punting someone to make a pass on a road course rather than out-driving them is legal and quite common. I blame the France family for everything, and would not be suprised if NONE the Frances had anything approaching race-worthy driving skill themselves.
This comment is so far off the mark I'm not even sure what to say. That may have been true a quarter of a century earlier, but not today. Look how many run the 24 with success. And why would you not take a refresher for something you only do twice a year? You want as much of an edge as you can get. It is far more difficult to go to an oval and do well. A vastly different driving experience than a road course. If you try to drive it the same way you will end up with no brakes and the car in the wall in short order.
I guess I don't understand all the hate. There aren't many forms of racing I don't like. How is all this bashing any different than the rednecks and their hatred of road racing? It comes from a complete lack of understanding of the different series.
I'm going to second the above comment: I don't understand the hate. And this thread makes our community look rather close-minded.
spitfirebill wrote: They need to do whatever the hell it takes to get rid of restrictor plates. Decrease the engine size or compression or both. With the new fuel injection, just limit the fuel charge.
The problem with unrestricted racing is that it stops being close racing. NASCAR is all about close racing.
I got fed up with NASCAR several times: When they allowed cars to run that don't exist
That has kind of been the case for a long time. Wasn't everyone using '65 Galaxie front suspension parts in the 70s?
alfadriver wrote: IMHO, the last indy car tech that made it to production cars was the rear view mirror. At least one that made an impact in the race. People have tried "stock block" engines, and the rules even gave them advantages. None of the real ones did anything.
A lot of the things from the Buick Indy cars got to the street. At least, I'm pretty sure that GM's DIS ignition system was created for Indy. And the drag racers love the hell out of the Indy blocks. (And they're TOUGH, too. A blown up block that has been welded back together and is full of sleeves is still good for way over a thousand horsepower) THAT SAID, one of these days people will realize en masse that the Series II block is a seriously beefy unit, like a 3/4 scale Chevy GenIII. And on further consideration, given where I work, I should probably have some conversations with people so the aftermarket parts will be in place and for sale when people realize that there is an actual alternative to increasingly rare and valuable 30 year old iron...
Not rallying- that's become a spec engine formula now, much like the BTCC.
I'm seeing some of the subtle suspension geometries from rally making it to the street. IIRC a lot of the damping tech making its way to production cars is also thanks to stage rally developments.
I personally don't like the spec engine rule, myself (if you don't have a suitable 1600cc engine, you're allowed to make a one-off that meets certain dimensional criteria) and I'm torn on the spec transmission rule. But the engines are limited so the only way to get speed is in the suspension, and the suspensions are where the innovation is happening.
Which is why, incidentally, my opinion is that if they want to slow the cars down for safety, they shouldn't make the engines less powerful, they should limit suspension travel to 8 inches of shock stroke. That will take away a lot of cornering speed...
In reply to racerdave600:
Here we have Jeff Gordon picking up a F1 car pretty quick, as I recall it's been argued he would have done better with a correct helmet.
If nascar wants to make it interesting again They only need one thing: a "run what ya brung" American iron series capped at 50k per car, including safety equipment. Showroom stock frames and geometry.
Also, nascar likes to play that dumbass "demographic" card as to why they don't come to the Pacific Northwest. Maybe we aren't fans because the nearest race to us is in god awful Las Vegas! (No offense to those living there)
David S. Wallens wrote: I'm going to second the above comment: I don't understand the hate. And this thread makes our community look rather close-minded.
Agree. I used to look down my nose at Nascar and local dirt tracks, but at this stage in my life I'd race anything; even lawn mowers.
I have been on this board for probably 7 or 8 years now. I came here with circle track experience and was pretty bummed to see that a lot of GRMers thought so poorly of circle track in general. There is definitely a pecking order here and circle track is at the bottom. Never understood that.
Honestly people who are happy with Nascar are fine by me, I actually just watch V8 Supercars.
Trackmouse wrote: If nascar wants to make it interesting again They only need one thing: a "run what ya brung" American iron series capped at 50k per car, including safety equipment. Showroom stock frames and geometry. Also, nascar likes to play that dumbass "demographic" card as to why they don't come to the Pacific Northwest. Maybe we aren't fans because the nearest race to us is in god awful Las Vegas! (No offense to those living there)
I agree with bringing the cars themselves closer in line with what regular production models are like. However I'm sure there is way to much profit involved now for that to change.
My recommendation is to have at least one "vintage" race per season, where previous model cup cars, say only pre 1980, are allowed to race.
In reply to bearmtnmartin:
Most of my experience is with circle track too. I don't get the hate either. Even at the lower local levels there are more specialized parts and labor than your average roadrace or autocross car and yet they are looked down on like idiots.
bearmtnmartin wrote: I have been on this board for probably 7 or 8 years now. I came here with circle track experience and was pretty bummed to see that a lot of GRMers thought so poorly of circle track in general. There is definitely a pecking order here and circle track is at the bottom. Never understood that.
i like their parts. can get some really nice secondhand stuff for cheap.
confession - i don't watch any racing either televised or in person. it bores me to death. i go to the track and race and generally don't bother watching anyone else run. for me it's about the machinery and not watching someone else drive it. i'd rather walk the pits and look at the cars when i'm not running than watch other people run.
Bash NASCAR? OK why don't they give more support to the weekend warriors that campaign on asphalt every weekend? Anyone here seen NASCAR at Trenton?
I've been saying for years that the best way to make the restrictor plate races relevant would be to restrict fuel instead. Let them bring whatever they want, but only one 55 gal drum of fuel each. Then instead of waiting for the crash you would wait for the tank to run dry; I'd watch that.
I posted memes tongue in check. I never understood the frothing madness of hatred some people have. I'd hate to see what they say about drag racing.
Appleseed wrote: I posted memes tongue in check. I never understood the frothing madness of hatred some people have. I'd hate to see what they say about drag racing.
Exactly. Or autocrossing. At the end of the day, it's all fairly stupid. We do it (and watch it) because we enjoy cars, right?
Nazareth anyone? Bueller?
Appleseed wrote: I posted memes tongue in check. I never understood the frothing madness of hatred some people have. I'd hate to see what they say about drag racing.
Was thinking the same thing.
I would like to see more road courses though, just because I think it'd be cool.
wheels777 wrote:Appleseed wrote: I posted memes tongue in check. I never understood the frothing madness of hatred some people have. I'd hate to see what they say about drag racing.Was thinking the same thing.
It's just the standard "Holier than Thou" attitude that sneaks into the sports car crowd every couple of months. Not a big deal once you realize their brand of blather sounds a lot like the crap that spews from the bro-dozer, ricer, HD, NASCAR, Hot Rod, LBC, Corvette, Mustang...need I go on.
There are closed minded people in every group. I generally try to ignore them. I was avoiding this thread until I saw that David had posted in here, I was curious about what he had to say.
All I have to say about NASCAR is, I wish I had a product that was half as profitable as theirs. They have a business model they follow, that makes billions every year and it works. Hard to call that stupid in my book.
To be fair, I think the bashers are in the minority, even in this thread.
Tom_Spangler wrote: In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the lowliest backmarker in any NASCAR Sprint Cup race would flat-out embarrass any weekend warrior like us on any kind of track. They wouldn't have reached that level if they couldn't.
As an aside, I don't think I can golf better than anyone on the PGA Tour. I find that equally as boring to watch as NASCAR. The skill level of the participants doesn't matter for a hill of beans if it isn't entertaining to me. Granted, both the PGA and NASCAR don't seem to have much problem attracting others who enjoy their spectacles, so it seems I'm just really not a part of their target audience.
You'll need to log in to post.
