Hopefully I'll be dead before the 50th anniversary of the Aztec.If the Gen 7 comes out in 2021, it’ll coincide perfectly with the 50th anniversary of the Vega. I think we need another tribute scheme to commemorate this milestone.
Hopefully I'll be dead before the 50th anniversary of the Aztec.If the Gen 7 comes out in 2021, it’ll coincide perfectly with the 50th anniversary of the Vega. I think we need another tribute scheme to commemorate this milestone.
I'm with @gnomesayin on this... say "No" to BoP. It would be a perpetual clusterf**k that would be 10 X worse than anything we see in sportscar racing (which is plenty bad IMO). "My 4-cylinder Honda needs more turbo boost to be competitive with the Corvettes." No thank you!
I see no good reason to do either... production engines, production bodies, or production chassis. I've always said "No thanks!" to people suggesting that top-level racing should be showroom stock racing. Like virtually every other top-level racing series, Nascar Cup racing should be single-purpose vehicles designed and engineered to race. I've seen no evidence, facts, or persuasive logic to change my mind on that.Well, like it or not, IF NASCAR does move back to production based engines, the engines combinations are going to be VASTLY different from each other and the ONLY way it would work is with some serious BoP adjustments. I think it's easier to get the engines on par between manufacturers than the aerodynamics might be if they go back to more production based bodies. .
I see no good reason to do either... production engines, production bodies, or production chassis. I've always said "No thanks!" to people suggesting that top-level racing should be showroom stock racing. Like virtually every other top-level racing series, Nascar Cup racing should be single-purpose vehicles designed and engineered to race. I've seen no evidence, facts, or persuasive logic to change my mind on that.
No it really isn't, and I wouldn't think cup participation would be either. It brings up a question though. Does Nascar require manufacturers to enter all three series? Got me.![]()
Ford seemed to have learned their lesson with the Mustang though, fast right out of the box so far.
I may be in the minority but I don't want 6 or 7 manufacturers. I'd be ok with adding one more, but as long as Chevy, Ford, and Toyota remain all in and don't cut back, what's really the point? It's not like the field can grown by a whole lot. This would basically become a low-end IMSA series if we get to 6 or 7.
Also, if they start track testing that soon, perhaps we might get some leaked photos? I just hope they don't rush it in order to meet the 2021 mark. Take the time to get it right. As long as the wait pays off, that's what truly matters.
I see no good reason to do either... production engines, production bodies, or production chassis. I've always said "No thanks!" to people suggesting that top-level racing should be showroom stock racing. Like virtually every other top-level racing series, Nascar Cup racing should be single-purpose vehicles designed and engineered to race. I've seen no evidence, facts, or persuasive logic to change my mind on that.
From what I've read, there's no indication the engine formula will be wildly different. Probably something smaller, with some production elements. But something along the lines of a 5.0L V8. A lot of what they (at least Ford) are looking for is some more changes to the styling cues (more of a fastback shape) and suspension stuff (IRS).
At Daytona it really doesn't matter what your racing. It looks like the biggest line of any manufacturer has the advantage. last lap it is all about who is fighting with who.Chevy won Daytona last year.
At Daytona it really doesn't matter what your racing. It looks like the biggest line of any manufacturer has the advantage. last lap it is all about who is fighting with who.
I don't know about that. We have heard so much about Ford horsepower, but I will say that those races cannot be an evaluation of a car....and this was my point. Mr. @StandOnIt was making the point that the Mustang was off to a good start, and my point was that the Camaro won Daytona in '18, and then look what happened.
there were the duals before that and and they had speed at the Vegas test. Like I said, they are off to a good start with the new car.
Ford knew what they were doing. There's a reason the thing looks so similar to the Fusion.
yeah I heard the OSS was made by FordYeah, the Fusion was hated until OSS. Oh my, how quickly perceptions change.
yeah I heard the OSS was made by Ford![]()
Oh I thought it was the "about time"
Define 'commit'. Five years? Ten? How do you enforce it?I don't care how many come, but if they come, they need to stay and commit. Period. NASCAR needs to be careful here. If you make it easy to enter, you make it easy to leave IMO.
"OSS"!!! EVERYBODY DRINK!Yeah, the Fusion was hated until OSS. Oh my, how quickly perceptions change.
Define 'commit'. Five years? Ten? How do you enforce it?
I see no good reason to do either... production engines, production bodies, or production chassis. I've always said "No thanks!" to people suggesting that top-level racing should be showroom stock racing. Like virtually every other top-level racing series, Nascar Cup racing should be single-purpose vehicles designed and engineered to race. I've seen no evidence, facts, or persuasive logic to change my mind on that.
Dodge's last run was 12 years, '01 to '12. That looks like commitment to me.I can't see any business (team/s) working with manufacturers going into this without 5 year and 10 year milestone plans, not just for the iterative process of building on their own successes/failures out of the gate, but also for spreading capital improvements and other initial expenditures across multiple years for that business. Savvy Accountants and Lawyers are more the experts for success before any manufacturer engineers and race entrepreneurs can push their race teams into the money pit.
That was my thought. With 'single-purpose racing machines', where do we draw the line? When do we say the 'stock cars' we're racing no longer have enough in common with the stock cars being sold? Some features of the race cars are way ahead of what's on the street, and others are way behind."Single-purpose vehicles designed and engineered to race" is what F1 is.
Source or 'Tongue out' emoji, please.Just got word that NASCAR will introduce an 18” wheel for the Gen 7 model. Compared to the 15” wheels run now.
Getting closer to an IMSA look
I assume cost has something to do with it. They're only going to look good for a few laps after they're new, before the brake dust accumulates. The painted wheels Penske uses are usually flashy enough for me. But I mostly don't look at wheels anyway, so I probably don't know what I'm missing.I just hope if they change the wheel size, we can get away from those God awful looking black painted wheels. I don't understand why ANYBODY runs those ugly things. If NASCAR wants to make the cars look more relevant, it would be a great time to go with some nice alloy wheels.
It’s traditionI just hope if they change the wheel size, we can get away from those God awful looking black painted wheels. I don't understand why ANYBODY runs those ugly things. If NASCAR wants to make the cars look more relevant, it would be a great time to go with some nice alloy wheels.
More evidence I'm not a car guy. I just assumed all wheels on street cars came as steel with hubcaps from the factory, and all alloy were after-market. I obviously don't even know what I'm seeing, even on those rare occasions when I happen to look.Only the crappiest base model street cars are still available with them.
Dodge's last run was 12 years, '01 to '12. That looks like commitment to me.
As you noted, nobody would get in for two or three years anyway. The start-up costs are too high to justify participating for that short a period. It's a lot easier to come and go in other series with a lower development price tag. I don't see lack of commitment being an issue.