...but first they had a Sprint Cup with absolutely no sprint cars, and now they have the Can-Am Duel with not a single Can-Am car in sight. I realize that they haven't been "stock" for years, but this is getting ridiculous.
...but first they had a Sprint Cup with absolutely no sprint cars, and now they have the Can-Am Duel with not a single Can-Am car in sight. I realize that they haven't been "stock" for years, but this is getting ridiculous.
Ironically I was thinking about nascar last night. I think I figured it out... Before the late 70s or whenever they stopped using real cars it was interesting and useful to modern buyers and enthusiast (race on Sunday sell on Monday, ect) and it got massively popular so the people in charge decided to make it faster, safer, more blah blah blah which meant less real cars but people were still so infatuated with it. In the 90s when I was a young lad I realized it wasn't that cool anymore so I knew I wasn't the only one but they are still trying to hold on to fans and make it faster, more exciting, safer, which means even more less old school nascar like. Eventually it will die out cause the only thing difference between first place car and last is the stickers....oh wait...
I'm not a big fan of NASCAR, but the "Sprint" was for the phone company and the "Can-Am" was for the ATV manufacturer.
Lol. Damn marketing! Things not meaning what they used to.
And the reason they went from "stock" cars to tube frame was that they are safer and easier to repair. A big hit doesn't always mean the car is totaled, and a big hit on an oval is far greater than a big hit at say Barber. You can "clip" a car for instance and still show up at the next race. When you're paying the bills, this is VERY important. We used to race in Nascar so I have a bit of experience, and believe me when I tell you getting though a weekend with no car damage is next to impossible.
It's not my favorite form of racing, but it is what it is, and I don't fault them for having a tube frame. Many of the GT cars racing now have tube frames as well.
Didn't the SCCA have the rights to the name CanAm? Did they sell the rights?
chiodos wrote: Eventually it will die out cause the only thing difference between first place car and last is the stickers....oh wait...
They've been saying this for 25 years now. I remember when the death of NASCAR was letting Chevy run a phantom RWD Lumina, and then let them deviate from stock body dimensions by allowing them to widen the rear deck to fit the required rear spoiler width.
Maybe NASCAR isn't doing as well as it was ten years ago, but I think predicting its demise is pretty unrealistic.
(not a NASCAR apologist)
snailmont5oh wrote: ...but first they had a Sprint Cup with absolutely no sprint cars, and now they have the Can-Am Duel with not a single Can-Am car in sight. I realize that they haven't been "stock" for years, but this is getting ridiculous.
There is much wisdom in your words.
NASCAR just doesnt make sense to me period
Claff wrote:chiodos wrote: Eventually it will die out cause the only thing difference between first place car and last is the stickers....oh wait...They've been saying this for 25 years now. I remember when the death of NASCAR was letting Chevy run a phantom RWD Lumina, and then let them deviate from stock body dimensions by allowing them to widen the rear deck to fit the required rear spoiler width. Maybe NASCAR isn't doing as well as it was ten years ago, but I think predicting its demise is pretty unrealistic. (not a NASCAR apologist)
And then they made the Monte Carlo with the big wide/flat decklid BECAUSE it looked like a Cup car that way.
Of course the Monte Carlo is a niche vehicle so they can do things like that.
Nascar is the way to get more people interested on road racing... Better to try and get more road races than the two on the "sprint" calendar and the handful on the nationwide (or whatever they are calling it this year) schedule. I am afraid that if COTA doesn't get one of these series that it will die. I admit that the cars in the past were cooler and even up to the 80s they influenced body styles (Monte aerocoupe or the t-bird turbocoupe, which were both cool looking cars). Road racing is the form of racing which is threatened in the US. Try and get more people interested in what you do by raking an interest in what they're doing. If you don't want to watch close your eyes and listen to the raw power.
snailmont5oh wrote: ...but first they had a Sprint Cup with absolutely no sprint cars, and now they have the Can-Am Duel with not a single Can-Am car in sight. I realize that they haven't been "stock" for years, but this is getting ridiculous.
True Story: When I was a kid I thought it was the Winston Cup because NASCAR was from Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
I'd love to go to a NASCAR race. Who cares what it used to be or what it's called, those engines are spectacular. And think about it, the cars are big and heavy and cornering almost all the time.
And if you win, they give you money!
Canam. I was a wee bit bitter that the Canadian government sponsored the duels. Canam is built by Bombardier, which is in Quebec, and therefore receives massive bailout money annually. Most of that goes to train and aircraft building, (They make a lovely business jet that nobody buys) and the powersports stuff actually makes a buck now and then, but still...
In reply to PushrodRWD:
Agreed, the road races are the only ones worth watching on TV, the last few laps are usually nuts, cutting corners, trading paint, driving with a blown tire, whatever works.
Keith Tanner wrote: And if you win, they give you money!
How ungentlemanly!
BrokenYugo wrote: In reply to PushrodRWD: Agreed, the road races are the only ones worth watching on TV, the last few laps are usually nuts, cutting corners, trading paint, driving with a blown tire, whatever works.
Cross off "trading paint" and you have every moment of stage rally ever.
Objective 1: Get to the end of the stage in as little time as possible. Objective 2: Try not to berk the car up so bad that the service crew can't put it back together.
Keith Tanner wrote: I'd love to go to a NASCAR race. Who cares what it used to be or what it's called, those engines are spectacular. And think about it, the cars are big and heavy and cornering almost all the time. And if you win, they give you money!
This.
I'm not a NASCAR fan by any means, don't watch but a few races each year, don't "have a driver". But last October I went to my first race in Charlotte and its a hell of a spectacle to behold simply as a car guy. The racing is much more interesting when you can follow the driver of your choice the whole way around the track for lap after lap watching him set up a pass. It's a much more engaging experience seeing it live.
And then there's the sounds. Dear god, the sounds!
I find it interesting how the same arguments come around every year after year at the beginning of the NASCAR season.
Daytona baby, run whatchabrung,squeeze it through tech and kick azz. Walk barefoot on the beach and say bluebird.
stuart in mn wrote: I find it interesting how the same arguments come around every year after year at the beginning of the NASCAR season.
Yep.
February is when the NASCAR haters come out of hibernation.
Every year.
Right on time.
Then they post on this forum.
Every year.
Every...
Berking...
Year...
We get it... a lot you guys don't like NASCAR... do we have to hear about it every berking year?
Nascar has its many faults, for me most of them revolve around that dumbash restrictor plate. That's the most moronic thing ever. When you send 40 cars into turn one wide f -en open, it doesn't get any better than that. Especially at the short tracks. It's real easy to forget how fast these guys are going all the time. 15 sec lap times on a 1/2 mile track. 46 seconds on a 2.5 mile track. All with cars based on 40 to 50 year old technology. Pushrod V-8s and truck arm suspension.
In reply to ncjay:
I'm not a NASCAR hater or apologist, but what do you do if the tech is worked out a long time ago?
WRC uses struts at all four corners. That is 1950s tech.
Bicycles, even the best of the best of the best, use chains and sprockets, which is technology from the 1800s.
That one is the one that gets me, because chain and sprocket have a 98-99% power transfer efficiency and some people STILL try to change it to something different (like belt, or linkage, or shaft drive) because "it is old so therefore it isn't any good".
Pushrods work just fine and if they got rid of them, they'd just have to restrict the engines further so who cares?
Truck arms work extremely well. Their only downside is trying to get an exhaust through all the undercar real estate. There are several firms who make truck arm conversion kits for classic cars with the intent of autocrossing and open tracking the cars.
I'd love to put truck arms in my RX-7. Pity that I need every inch of exhaust space I can get.
All I can say to the "haters" I challenge you to sit at turn 1 and not have a chill go down your spine when they light it up after a restart and charge in to turn 1.
Oh and don't count on ever seeing nascar at COTA. Everyone keeps saying it but as an employee of TMS and a regular volunteer at COTA, I don't ever see that happening. Too many politics involved.
And then there's the sounds. Dear god, the sounds!
I'm pretty sure I lost a fair amount of my hearing at Bristol, even with ear plugs and muffs.
You'll need to log in to post.
