Why Nascar Sucks

This thread will go into the E36 M3ter very quickly, predicts I.

I loathe NA$CAR. However, there was a time when I watched it and even went to Daytona. I remember watching this live on TV: I still think Pearson is a rat bastard. But anyway...aside from the car brands becoming totally irrelevant, possibly a lot of the problem is that NA$CAR has become all about money, which made it mainstream. The majority of people who watch it now aren't really car people, they are just sports fans. You can debate if it's bad or good, but I kind of equate it to the "instant biker" syndrome with Harleys. It's become far too mainstream and the uniqueness is gone. Has nothing to do with class, locale, etc. Being a racing fan (of any form) used to make you a bit of an outsider. Now, everyone is, yet most of them couldn't tell you what a carburetor is. The cars all look like, well, Skittles, so the only way to 'pick' a favorite is to choose a personality. Not really what racing is about to me.

Moparman wrote: Real bikers run the Isle of Man (let the flames begin!).

No Nomex required. Truth.

In reply to Appleseed:

Isle of Mann. Tingles in all the right spots. On my bucket list.

Racing's promise is simple: the fastest car/driver over the distance/time within the rules wins the race. Rules are necessary, but fewer rules are better. Rules to liven up the show are not necessary.
I really want to like NASCAR and Indycars as much as I did when I was younger. I don't because the adults acting like children took the magic away. The childish behavior was probably there when I liked it, but I didn't notice it. Racing gets interesting when amazing driver performance or car craftsmanship shows. If everybody is doing the same thing it just becomes a traffic jam at high speed. I think I stopped liking NASCAR when they introduced restrictor plates for Talledega, Charlotte, and Daytona. The cars could go faster, but had to be slowed down. That seemed/seems contradictory to the spirit of racing. As a matter of fact the more they try to slow the cars down the less interested I am in the event. I stopped liking Indycar when IRL broke off. Just before that it was arguable that Indycar was faster than F1, which is the whole point of watching. Supposedly GTP was even faster, but they were never on TV.
Racing needs different people trying different things to be interesting. Somehow those efforts should be tied to the cars consumers drive everyday. The push to make everybody do the same stuff makes it boring to me. If you want to make NASCAR interesting again the cars should be FWD and run the same engines and automatic transmissions that are on the street. Make them run the emissions control stuff too to push along the technology. An 9-5, Accord, Avalon, Impala, Galant, Legacy, Maxima, Mazda6, Passat, Sebring, Sonata, and Taurus, all in the same race would be absolutely cool, relevant and entertaining.

Quote in my local newspaper regarding NASCAR -

Talk about a snoozefest, the Nationwide Race was at a road course Saturday, then the Sprint Cup will be at a road course. Talk about two days of boredom. I'm sorry, but I don't think NASCAR should have road races. Formula One has road courses, IRL has road courses and Sports Club of America is nothing but road races. We shouldn't have these for NASCAR and trucks. I guarantee you the viewership will be down so low from these races. I'm a big NASCAR fan, but I just can't watch it.

ddavidv wrote: ......The cars all look like, well, Skittles, so the only way to 'pick' a favorite is to choose a personality. Not really what racing is about to me.

I honestly mean no disrespect, but it struck me funny and made me laugh out loud. This, coming from a guy running Spec-E30! I probably should have kept this to myself.

+1 for ddavidv, he's pretty much got this figured out. It is all about the show for people that normally watch football and basketball. Most have no idea what a car feels like when it moves around on track, and most don't really want to know. They do however want a show, and that's what Nascar provides to it's audience. You and I are not that audience generally speaking. Living in Alabama I can say from experience I am in the minority around here, and most people don't even know that other types of racing exist, nor do they care.

A few interesting tidbits, when we were working to get the Toyota approved for Nascar (2000-2001), they took molds off an actual car to make them. I mean we drove a car up there, they took molds from it, and that is what was used on the nose and tail. Granted that was the only thing even remotely looked like the real car, but at least the engine block was Toyota. It was also an interesting experience dealing with the sanctioning body. They had a plan as to when the car could do better, and when it could win, etc. You had to pay your dues, and they saw to it that it took a while to do that.

There are numerous ways that can happen, but there are cars that officials were told not to tear down. Giving cars an edge has been going on for a long time, and while they didn't exactly pick the winners, they could stack the deck in favor of who they wanted to excel on a particular weekend.

That said, the engineers, drivers, and teams work extremely hard, and they take that as the norm in order to compete. Right now if you want to make money racing, Nascar is really your only choice. Most other series' are a pay to play kind of deal for the most part, with the exception of the top few. How else could Milka Duno stay in a car?

novaderrik wrote: people tend to look down on anything related to the South as being something only ignorant redneck hillbillies could possibly like.

Just for the record, I am from the south (Birmingham, AL) and look down on it because it is horrible racing. Nascar isn't racing, it is a popularity contest at 200mph.

did you know that the Toyota Nascar engine block uses a Chevrolet 1955 transmission housing bolt pattern, so they can use a Chev. trans. Nascar mandated , Jericho, or Richmond gear box.

so we got a toyota engine with a GM bolt up, go figure.

Toyman01 wrote:

ignorant wrote: Nascar + Watkins Glen = awesome.

Plus a lot. If they ran more road courses I would watch more. The only part of a roundy round worth watching to me is the last 20-30 laps on the short tracks. The super speedways put me to sleep. Less traction would do a lot to make it more interesting. Make them slow down for the corners more and actually have to accelerate down the straits.

I agree.

This was NASCAR

This is NASCAR

There is a reason most of us like old NASCAR and hate new NASCAR.

How many times have we had this argument? I mean that is two arguments going on right now about it. Can we not just let it go? Some people like some people don't. Can't we argue about something else ?

96DXCivic wrote: How many times have we had this argument? I mean that is two arguments going on right now about it. Can we not just let it go? Some people like some people don't. Can't we argue about something else ?

Yeah like how people who own Hondas and Toyotas are bone smokers!

I keed.

jrg77 wrote: I think I stopped liking NASCAR when they introduced restrictor plates for Talledega, Charlotte, and Daytona. The cars could go faster, but had to be slowed down.

I'll admit I don't watch as much NASCAR as I once did , nor do I follow it as closely as I did back in the days of Lee, Ralph, Fireball, Jr (the original one) ... but when did they put restrictor plates on the Charlotte cars... ?

The problem is the average Piggly Wiggly customer has no idea what a performance car is. Many don't realize Corvettes are raced, never mind foreign cars or small domestic cars. Fact: A first generation 5-speed DOHC Neon runs 0-60 in 7.6 seconds. Fact, that is faster than all but the rarest cars from the muscle car era.

minimac wrote:

ddavidv wrote: ......The cars all look like, well, Skittles, so the only way to 'pick' a favorite is to choose a personality. Not really what racing is about to me.

I honestly mean no disrespect, but it struck me funny and made me laugh out loud. This, coming from a guy running Spec-E30! I probably should have kept this to myself.

No, good for you for catching that.

Here's the difference in my warped little brain: I'm an amateur racer. I get zero sponsorship dollars. Nobody comes to watch me. It's a hobby. I chose a spec class because I want to see where I rank with other drivers, so a spec series takes the car mostly out of the equation. If I was a builder more than a racer, I'd be in AIX or something.

When you talk about pro racing, and sponsorship money is involved (particularly when you have manufacturers involved), then it is being marketed to fans. Racing fans historically were mostly car enthusiasts, so having notably different cars for different brands mattered as much as, if not more than, who was behind the wheel. With turning pro racing into a spec class, it becomes about the personalities only. Real enthusiasts such as myself become bored (particularly when it becomes a circular freight train with little passing) while the sheeple of the sports fan base buy endless apparel with large numbers on it for their favorite celebrity...err, driver.

It's a successful formula for them, which proves what I like isn't a good business model. But as a car geek I'm bored to tears by what passes as mainstream motorsport these days.

so many snobs.....

Appleseed wrote: This was NASCAR This is NASCAR This is the reason most of us like old NASCAR and hate new NASCAR.

• I don't think anyone is arguing the term "Stock" in stock car racing. But there was a (more exciting) time in nascar history when the cars in the track more closely resembled the car one would see in the showroom. That's how I remember it and might become a fan once again if that variety returned to the series.

And those multiple do-over finishes are just silly.

kabel wrote:

Appleseed wrote: This was NASCAR This is NASCAR This is the reason most of us like old NASCAR and hate new NASCAR.

+ I don't think anyone is arguing the term "Stock" in stock car racing. But there was a (more exciting) time in nascar history when the cars in the track more closely resembled the car one would see in the showroom. That's how I remember it and might become a fan once again if that variety returned to the series. And those multiple do-over finishes are just silly.

you are going to wait a long time for that to happen again. the reason the NASCAR racers of old were each so unique and stock looking was because no one had any money and everyone had to figure out their own way to build a car to compete. the easiest way to build a competitive car that was cheap and easy to keep running was to start with an actual stock car and build from there.

they have been running tube chassis since the early 70's, so they haven't been very "stock" for a long, long time.

these days, the parts are standardized not only on the upper level, but down into the lower levels, as well. old Cup cars race in the ARCA series, i think, and all the common parts are readily available to anyone that wants to buy them and build a car for themselves.

guys I remember when the stock cars were in fact .... stock cars... have a flat tire and none in the pits... borrow one off a car in the infield.... liked them better back then , but the cars now are better racers, ... stay together better, handle better, faster, safer... etc.... just don't like them as much

'bout the only NASCAR I watch any more are the road courses, Martinsville, (love me some short track) and Darlington for the tradition... if nothing else on TV and nothing else to do I'll watch 'til I get bored then find a book to read..