All Electric NASCAR Series on the Horizon

AndyMarquisLive said:
Representative of anywhere from 20-40% of the country - which is more than enough to make a dent in market trends.

"Big Truck Culture" is sweeping big cities now.
Click to expand...
"Big cities" where, in North Carolina? The largest cities in the United States are absolutely not being swept by big truck culture now.
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
Also, don't take my word for it. Watch the presidential campaign ads and ads for people running for Congress. Anyone running on the Republican ticket has an ad of them filling up a literal monster truck complaining about the price of gas.

Americans are the kings of making irresponsible decisions and expecting someone else to pay for it.



"Feel safe" is part of it too. When everyone on the road is driving a truck that, when they get behind you, it looks like they're literally going to drive over and through you if you don't get out of their way, it makes you want to buy the same thing.

This is intentional. And why these trucks keep getting bigger and "BaDaSs" looking.

The sheer size of these trucks is actually something that needs to be regulated before we are selling 18-year-olds CDL-size trucks just so they can be a badass.

We had the problem in North Carolina where people would take the back of the truck and lower it to where it's on the ground, then take the front of the truck and lift it up. The state actually had to ban it because it was unsafe. These kids were causing tons of accidents because they were literally looking at the sky, not the road. And the trucks had no purpose since anything you'd put in the bed would basically fall out.

Today's trucks are so large they literally pose enormous safety risks to even SUVs, older trucks, and modern sedans/SUVs. People LITERALLY climb in to these things with ladders, just to feel like Superman. And at the end of the day, many of these consumer "Big Badass Ultra American Trucks" can't actually hold up to the workload of older trucks.

"Big Truck Culture" is so stupid.
Click to expand...
Ok, so again, you live surrounded by morons. "Carolina squat" was made fun of by truck owners in my area when that started gaining national notoriety. That is/was a very regional specific movement.

Regarding political ads featuring trucks and fuel prices: politicians are trying to appeal to as many people as they possibly can. If most of their regional constituents drive trucks and have high fuel prices as one of their primary concerns, then yes, they are going to leverage that to appeal to their base. That's just marketing.
 
Some of us just have gasoline in our veins and live for the sound and feel of an internal combustion engine. For me, engines are almost a religious experience. I love them with all my heart and soul. For me, an electric vehicle is the transportation equivalent of a blow up doll. I have ZERO interest in driving an EV, leasing one or owning one, and I have even LESS interest watching them race. If that ever becomes the norm, I'll just go play golf on Sunday afternoon.
 
cheesepuffs said:
I didn't even read all that. Wherever you live is not indicative of the entire country and it sounds like you just happen to know a bunch of idiots.
Click to expand...

It's just a bunch of anecdotal BS. Nothing but fiction and hyperbole.

Yes, truck sales are at an all time high, and most Americans who buy pickups don't actually NEED a truck. But some inbred yeeyee teenager Andy met one time who took his granddad's Silverado, lifted it on mud tires, and flies a Confederate/American/Gadsgen/Trump/etc flag from the bed? Yeah well believe it or not, that kid doesn't represent the general American truck population. Shocking, I know.
 
A good 8 pages. Looks like more on the way. (it's the off season) Watered by Andy's obsession with pick up trucks, and the you will take my V8 gas rig when you pry my cold dead hands off of it.
On a more on topic note, The wigs at Nascar have been looking at not only electric hybrid, but hydrogen power. They went to one of the sources, Japan to look at some hydrogen powered choices. One of the benefits of hydrogen is that the current motors being used in Nascar can run hydrogen with a few relatively small changes.

Big oil isn't dumb. They would love to be able to charge what they want, but setting too high prices and squeezing the consumers on the gas side will cause a flood to electric vehicles. They can and are getting away with it with the price of diesel, but EV's are keeping them honest to a certain point on the gas side of things. A $7500 dollar rebate for buying the right make of made in the USA EV OR fuel cell vehicle is a resounding kick in the nads to big oil and a shot in the arm for cleaner air. It isn't for everybody, but it is an alternative to the status quo.

Qualified vehicles​


To qualify, a vehicle must:


  • Have a battery capacity of at least 7 kilowatt hours
  • Have a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 14,000 pounds
  • Be made by a qualified manufacturer.
    • FCVs do not need to be made by a qualified manufacturer to be eligible. See Rev. Proc. 2022-42 for more detailed guidance.
  • Undergo final assembly in North America
  • Meet critical mineral and battery component requirements (as of April 18, 2023).
The sale qualifies only if:


In addition, the vehicle's manufacturer suggested retail price (MSRP) can't exceed:


  • $80,000 for vans, sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks
  • $55,000 for other vehicles
MSRP is the retail price of the automobile suggested by the manufacturer, including manufacturer installed options, accessories and trim but excluding destination fees. It isn't necessarily the price you pay.


You can find your vehicle's weight, battery capacity, final assembly location (listed as “final assembly point”) and VIN on the vehicle's window sticker.


Click the button below to see if a vehicle is eligible for the new clean vehicle credit.

Credits for new clean vehicles purchased in 2023 or after | Internal Revenue Service

You may qualify for a clean vehicle tax credit up to $7,500 if you buy a new, qualified plug-in electric vehicle or fuel cell electric vehicle.
www.irs.gov www.irs.gov
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
....people would take the back of the truck and lower it to where it's on the ground, then take the front of the truck and lift it up. The state actually had to ban it because it was unsafe. These kids were causing tons of accidents because they were literally looking at the sky, not the road. And the trucks had no purpose since anything you'd put in the bed would basically fall out.

Today's trucks are so large they literally pose enormous safety risks to even SUVs, older trucks, and modern sedans/SUVs. People LITERALLY climb in to these things with ladders, just to feel like Superman. And at the end of the day, many of these consumer "Big Badass Ultra American Trucks" can't actually hold up to the workload of older trucks.

"Big Truck Culture" is so stupid.
Click to expand...

It takes a special kind of stupid to intentionally lower the back of a truck and raise the front. I think I would refuse to even ride in one if offered. I wouldn't want to be mistaken for that kind of idiot or trust someone to safely drive that spent good money on the shietware.

That kind of idiocy leaves one shaking their head at just how badly someone can eff an otherwise great piece of equipment with an impression that is not easily forgotten. But they are not very common and I only see a two or three a week at the most like that. It is not like the next craze thats going to overtake us.
Good on the NC law makers and the ban.

As for myself I have a 2015 full sized 4 wheel drive Siverado crew cab. It isn't my daily driver, I drive my wife's old 2012 Camry that was her primary car prior to buyingvher a 2020 Honda Accord.

I only drive the truck on the weekends is to extend the life. I like the functionality, and I do like the look of the bigger all terrain tires, but it isn’t lifted. Trucks are expensive enough for me not to even consider buying a newer one. I am reasonably sure I would spend well into the 60s at a minimum to buy a new one that is comparable to my current one. I plan on keeping mine for low milage use and to make it last for decades.

I always wanted a truck, maybe it is a southern culture thing. There is something fun about a powerful piece of equipment that is fun. I know there is truck culture out there with the insane aftermarket off road kits that some use as their daily drivers.
But I think they are in the minority and usually restricted to a limited market. EVs will easily overtake them with a bigger customer base, if they haven't already.
 
cheesepuffs said:
Ok, so again, you live surrounded by morons. "Carolina squat" was made fun of by truck owners in my area when that started gaining national notoriety. That is/was a very regional specific movement.

Regarding political ads featuring trucks and fuel prices: politicians are trying to appeal to as many people as they possibly can. If most of their regional constituents drive trucks and have high fuel prices as one of their primary concerns, then yes, they are going to leverage that to appeal to their base. That's just marketing.
Click to expand...
They want to appeal to voters, they should bitch about grocery prices. The truck ads only appeal to a segment of voters.
 
cheesepuffs said:
I didn't even read all that. Wherever you live is not indicative of the entire country and it sounds like you just happen to know a bunch of idiots.
Click to expand...
It may not be everywhere but it's certainly indicative of the Southeast (prime NASCAR country, by the way). It's as if they've all bought into the notion that the size of your truck directly relates to the size of your genitals. And like genitals, they're are treated very gently and used for play more than work. I see far more 'Pavement Princesses' than trucks that appear to have set tire off the pavement or had anything in the back ever.

A neighbor had a three-year-old Tahoe that he traded for whatever that top-of-the-line Chevy pickup is. He was telling me about the torque and the payload and the towing capacity. We live on 1/4- to 1/3-acre suburban lots, he has nothing to move, and nothing to tow. It's been three months and the pile of leftover bikes and patio furniture is still behind his shed. In the same time, the Maverick and I have hauled three beds full of yard debris to the dump, and brought home a bed of pine straw and mulch. (It also makes a great stable birding platform for my long range scope.) While I planned on buying a hybrid, I didn't initially plan on buying a truck but since I have one, I'm going to use it like a damn truck, short bed and all.
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
We had the problem in North Carolina where people would take the back of the truck and lower it to where it's on the ground, then take the front of the truck and lift it up. The state actually had to ban it because it was unsafe. These kids were causing tons of accidents because they were literally looking at the sky, not the road. And the trucks had no purpose since anything you'd put in the bed would basically fall out.
Click to expand...
The law banning these in SC took effect this week. Front fender can't be more than 4 inches higher than back. 6 month grace period with warning tickets.
 
Greg said:
It takes a special kind of stupid to intentionally lower the back of a truck and raise the front.
Click to expand...
Or raise the back and lower the front, or raise or lower both, or put on oversized or undersized wheels, or any combination of the above. People have been doing stupid things to vehicular chassis in order to get attention for decades. This one happened to be enough of a threat to people OUTSIDE the vehicle to get it banned here.

For most of the buyers, oversized trucks are just another attention-getting device.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Or raise the back and lower the front, or raise or lower both, or put on oversized or undersized wheels, or any combination of the above. People have been doing stupid things to vehicular chassis in order to get attention for decades. This one happened to be enough of a threat to people OUTSIDE the vehicle to get it banned here.

For most of the buyers, oversized trucks are just another attention-getting device.
Click to expand...
So are hot rods, muscle cars snd sport cars, but the last time I checked, it was still America, and we are still allowed to like, and in most cases own what we like, as much as it annoys some. Some of us like vehicles that excite us or convey a certain message, and there is NOTHING wrong with that. For many of us, vehicles are far more than a generic form of transportation, and are a part of who we are and what we are about, and I for one will NOT apologize for that.
Now I also have very high standards when it comes to modifications, and expect them to FUNCTION as well as appeal to the visual senses, and I'm always going to lean towards the practical over the far out, but for the most part, to each his own. Since it was mentioned, I will say the Carolina Squat thing might take the all time prize for a stupid vehicle modification, as it not only looks incredibly dumb, it actually detracts from the functionality of the vehicle, which is a cardinal sin in my book. Function should never be devoid of form, and form should never be allowed to sacrifice function. Every mechanical modification must make a vehicle BETTER at something, not worse.
 
Formerjackman said:
So are hot rods, muscle cars snd sport cars, but the last time I checked, it was still America, and we are still allowed to like, and in most cases own what we like, as much as it annoys some.
Click to expand...
I agree completely. If anything I said implied otherwise, that was not my intent. People are free to do whatever they want to their own vehicles within the law, no matter what I think of the results.
 
cheesepuffs said:
"Big cities" where, in North Carolina? The largest cities in the United States are absolutely not being swept by big truck culture now.
Click to expand...
Are Charlotte, Atlanta, and Houston big enough for you? I've been in all three for at least several days within the last year. I saw just as high a percentage of large trucks as I do here in Columbia SC or Wilmington NC. As I noted previously, it may not be everywhere, but it's definitely a thing in the US Southeast.
 
It’s sad watching people refuse to embrace new technologies. At one point, the internal combustion engine was a new fangled technology but our ancestors bravely gave up the horse and buggy to give it a try.

Car culture used to be about pushing the limits of new technology to see what it can do. At some point, some of you decided to get complacent.

I want to see EVs pushed to their limit. I want to see them raced too, because racing has often spurred technological innovations that make it to our street cars.
 
The Nature Boy said:
It’s sad watching people refuse to embrace new technologies. At one point, the internal combustion engine was a new fangled technology but our ancestors bravely gave up the horse and buggy to give it a try.

Car culture used to be about pushing the limits of new technology to see what it can do. At some point, some of you decided to get complacent.

I want to see EVs pushed to their limit. I want to see them raced too, because racing has often spurred technological innovations that make it to our street cars.
Click to expand...
People all this time later still love to ride horses for recreation and pay a lot of money for the privilege. It's sad these people can't just drive an EZ-GO golf cart in their free time instead and move on with the times already.
 
cheesepuffs said:
People all this time later still love to ride horses for recreation and pay a lot of money for the privilege. It's sad these people can't just drive an EZ-GO golf cart in their free time instead and move on with the times already.
Click to expand...

But yet no one outside of the Amish is taking the horse and buggy on public roadways and using it as their primary mode of transportation.

No one is saying to give up the internal combustion engine but it’s also counterproductive to act like a child about new technologies. I encourage people to tinker with and race EVs because I want to know what is possible.

I also want our government to invest in infrastructure improvements so we can actually use the damn things. We’ve gone from the country that built things like the Hoover Dam, the interstate system, the transcontinental railroad, and the Erie Canal to one that just accepts things as they are and says it’s impossible to make great leaps forward.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Are Charlotte, Atlanta, and Houston big enough for you? I've been in all three for at least several days within the last year. I saw just as high a percentage of large trucks as I do here in Columbia SC or Wilmington NC. As I noted previously, it may not be everywhere, but it's definitely a thing in the US Southeast.
Click to expand...
Respectfully, Charlotte, Atlanta and Houston don't generally influence what the rest of the country does. Like you said, it seems that we've established that this is definitely a thing in the Southeast, but the Southeast is it's own thing maybe more than local residents even realize.

To me, generally grandstanding about truck culture due to regional tastes is like complaining that, "everybody drinks their tea with too much sugar!". It's like, what if I told you that nobody outside of the Southeast drinks sweet tea because they find it disgusting? People all over the United States drink tea, but they don't drink tea like that. And people all over the United States drive pickups, but I've never once seen a Carolina Squatted truck in my region.
 
The Nature Boy said:
But yet no one outside of the Amish is taking the horse and buggy on public roadways and using it as their primary mode of transportation.

No one is saying to give up the internal combustion engine but it’s also counterproductive to act like a child about new technologies. I encourage people to tinker with and race EVs because I want to know what is possible.

I also want our government to invest in infrastructure improvements so we can actually use the damn things. We’ve gone from the country that built things like the Hoover Dam, the interstate system, the transcontinental railroad, and the Erie Canal to one that just accepts things as they are and says it’s impossible to make great leaps forward.
Click to expand...
They aren't going to invest for the infrastructure improvements to them see said improvements go to waste if the masses don't then adopt EVs. It's a chicken-egg scenario. Your point of view is "if you build it they will come", but, what if they don't? The Hoover Dam didn't rely on every average household making a change like this.
 
cheesepuffs said:
Your point of view is "if you build it they will come", but, what if they don't? The Hoover Dam didn't rely on every average household making a change like this
Click to expand...

Sales are on a steady upward trajectory (even if they are slowing) so people ARE coming. This isn’t some untested technology, there is demand for it.

There are also people who would buy an EV if the infrastructure was there to support it. We don’t need every household to switch to EVs, we just need to make EVs a viable alternative. ICEs and EVs can exist alongside each other.

You can embrace EVs without buying one yourself. I find the technology interesting and I think if we can get the infrastructure to scale and figure out how to make them charge more quickly, they would make sense for the average daily car user.
 
donthaveanickname said:
The EU and California certainly are.
Click to expand...

California set an overly aggressive deadline that will inevitably get pushed back, if not outright eliminated. I refuse to believe that the state that has rolling blackouts currently has the infrastructure to handle a mass move to EVs. It’s aspirational but ultimately unrealistic and Newsom set the deadline far enough ahead that it won’t be his problem.

We do need to be more bold on this issue. We used to be more bold. Our ancestors were willing to try that newfangled car thing and the federal government funded the US highway system before the majority of Americans owned an automobile. You could argue that the latter influenced the former.

EVs have a lot of potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and save people money.
 
The Nature Boy said:
It’s sad watching people refuse to embrace new technologies. At one point, the internal combustion engine was a new fangled technology but our ancestors bravely gave up the horse and buggy to give it a try.

Car culture used to be about pushing the limits of new technology to see what it can do. At some point, some of you decided to get complacent.

I want to see EVs pushed to their limit. I want to see them raced too, because racing has often spurred technological innovations that make it to our street cars.
Click to expand...
The difference is the automobile offered REAL tangible benefits to the owners and could accomplish things only dreamed of with the horse. EV's have basically NOTHING new to offer unless you are convinced they are going to save the planet. I'm fine with new technology, but it has to offer something worth the price and the hassle.
 
Formerjackman said:
The difference is the automobile offered REAL tangible benefits to the owners and could accomplish things only dreamed of with the horse. EV's have basically NOTHING new to offer unless you are convinced they are going to save the planet. I'm fine with new technology, but it has to offer something worth the price and the hassle.
Click to expand...

Benefits that are only obvious in hindsight. Go to newspapers.com and find a turn of the 20th century newspaper - there were people writing letters to the editor saying that the automobile wasn't going to take it off and was going to be restricted to hobbyists. It took government investment in roadways and the subsidizing of the fossil fuel industry to make the automobile into a viable option. It's easy to say these things with 100 years of hindsight. A person in 1910 could easily say that the existing road infrastructure doesn't facilitate long distance travel so the horse and buggy are the only viable transportation method.

As @cheesepuffs points out, there are some real challenges with EVs right now. The lithium production cycle is incredibly inefficient and our electrical grid is still powered by coal and fossil fuels. I think we can change both of these things. Racing will almost certainly demand a more efficient form of battery and our electrical grid is in dire need of modernization. Innovators can handle the former and the government needs to handle the latter. A lot of advancements in car tech came from racing, I don't see why EVs would be different.
 
Formerjackman said:
Some of us just have gasoline in our veins and live for the sound and feel of an internal combustion engine. For me, engines are almost a religious experience. I love them with all my heart and soul. For me, an electric vehicle is the transportation equivalent of a blow up doll. I have ZERO interest in driving an EV, leasing one or owning one, and I have even LESS interest watching them race. If that ever becomes the norm, I'll just go play golf on Sunday afternoon.
Click to expand...
EVs are still wayyyyyyyyy far away from ever being a Sunday thing. Garage 56 proved there’s still a lot of appeal in a big honkin’ V8. And the range to power high speed race cars for 500 miles is still nowhere close at the moment. But NASCAR wouldn’t be doing this without current and prospective manufacturers influencing them to do so, so it’s worth at least an R&D item as they see how industry trends go. They’re not gonna replace a series with this anytime soon; if anything it would be additive.
 
FLRacingFan said:
EVs are still wayyyyyyyyy far away from ever being a Sunday thing. Garage 56 proved there’s still a lot of appeal in a big honkin’ V8. And the range to power high speed race cars for 500 miles is still nowhere close at the moment. But NASCAR wouldn’t be doing this without current and prospective manufacturers influencing them to do so, so it’s worth at least an R&D item as they see how industry trends go. They’re not gonna replace a series with this anytime soon; if anything it would be additive.
Click to expand...
What in Hell does racing have to do with this? :p
 
The Nature Boy said:
California set an overly aggressive deadline that will inevitably get pushed back, if not outright eliminated. I refuse to believe that the state that has rolling blackouts currently has the infrastructure to handle a mass move to EVs. It’s aspirational but ultimately unrealistic and Newsom set the deadline far enough ahead that it won’t be his problem.

We do need to be more bold on this issue. We used to be more bold. Our ancestors were willing to try that newfangled car thing and the federal government funded the US highway system before the majority of Americans owned an automobile. You could argue that the latter influenced the former.

EVs have a lot of potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and save people money.
Click to expand...
The United States has become the country of “we can’t.”

A generation that watched man land on the moon and “we can do anything we set our minds to” has grown up to become the generation of status quo.

Of course, the fossil fuel industry’s stranglehold on Washington is a big part of this. And there is a very large segment of the country that would rather save coal miners’ jobs than modernize the grid – which could still be accomplished if they weren’t “anti-globalist” nationalists. (Sell the coal to Europe and to developing nations.)
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
They want to appeal to voters, they should bitch about grocery prices. The truck ads only appeal to a segment of voters.
Click to expand...
cheesepuffs said:
I know you're smart enough to understand that a rise in fuel prices correlates to a rise in grocery prices.
Click to expand...
Voters believe lying politicians who claim they can do something about, or that their opponents are responsible for, the price of a commodity sold on a global market. "Drill more!" -might- make sense if the output stayed in the US, but it goes on the market with every other country's production.
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
The United States has become the country of “we can’t.”

A generation that watched man land on the moon and “we can do anything we set our minds to” has grown up to become the generation of status quo.

Of course, the fossil fuel industry’s stranglehold on Washington is a big part of this. And there is a very large segment of the country that would rather save coal miners’ jobs than modernize the grid – which could still be accomplished if they weren’t “anti-globalist” nationalists. (Sell the coal to Europe and to developing nations.)
Click to expand...
Or retrain the miners to make solar panels, wind blades, etc.
 
The Nature Boy said:
Racing will almost certainly demand a more efficient form of battery and our electrical grid is in dire need of modernization. Innovators can handle the former and the government needs to handle the latter. A lot of advancements in car tech came from racing, I don't see why EVs would be different.
Click to expand...
The days of tech advancements trickling down to road cars is long gone. Racing for OEMs is 100% marketing and exposure. Racing series are making their vehicles more like what we have on the street to please the marketing side of things, not the other way around.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
I agree as far as ICEs go. There's still plenty of room for development of EVs.
Click to expand...
What's in it for the sanctioning body, the team owners, or the OEMs to innovate in the field of EVs through racing?

NASCAR itself isn't an engineering firm.

The teams aren't made up of battery chemists, and racing teams (even in F1 believe it or not) notoriously don't pay very well for talent, because they partially rely on luring employees in because of their "passion" for the industry. So the teams aren't going to pay to hire top development talent for EVs anyway. The owners don't benefit from spearheading EV development as the OEMs would receive the fruits of that labor anyway, if it were to happen.

The OEMs are going to spend money to develop EVs within the confines of a racing rulebook instead of putting that money into their standard passenger vehicle EV R&D budget? Not likely.
 
cheesepuffs said:
The OEMs are going to spend money to develop EVs within the confines of a racing rulebook instead of putting that money into their standard passenger vehicle EV R&D budget? Not likely.
Click to expand...
That would depend on how much overlap there is between the passenger vehicles and the racing rulebook. One reason nothing trickles down from most current racing series is there's so little in common between the track and the street. EV racing could be a return to the days when the R&D that won on Sunday could actually be found at the dealer on Monday. Why bother with two budgets when the race car is all you need, and you get the publicity too. Toss in a couple of endurance events to show off the battery life, and to Hell with keeping the brands competitive.
 
cheesepuffs said:
What's in it for the sanctioning body, the team owners, or the OEMs to innovate in the field of EVs through racing?

NASCAR itself isn't an engineering firm.

The teams aren't made up of battery chemists, and racing teams (even in F1 believe it or not) notoriously don't pay very well for talent, because they partially rely on luring employees in because of their "passion" for the industry. So the teams aren't going to pay to hire top development talent for EVs anyway. The owners don't benefit from spearheading EV development as the OEMs would receive the fruits of that labor anyway, if it were to happen.

The OEMs are going to spend money to develop EVs within the confines of a racing rulebook instead of putting that money into their standard passenger vehicle EV R&D budget? Not likely.
Click to expand...

The OEMs aren't pushing NASCAR to do R&D for ****s and giggles. I fully believe that they see racing as a way to develop new tech for their passenger cars. There's no way current tech can support an electric racing series and the OEMs are well aware. Any tech that enables a racing series to exist will be useful for passenger cars.
 
The Nature Boy said:
The OEMs aren't pushing NASCAR to do R&D for ****s and giggles. I fully believe that they see racing as a way to develop new tech for their passenger cars. There's no way current tech can support an electric racing series and the OEMs are well aware. Any tech that enables a racing series to exist will be useful for passenger cars.
Click to expand...
OEMs and NASCAR are pushing an electric CUV bodied stockcar for one reason only and that is marketing relevance. NASCAR is a traveling circus that holds it's competitors to a rulebook. They literally define the sandbox. When you play in a sandbox, you naturally stifle open innovation.

The innovations in NASCAR, like when teams used to get rear-steer in the car during the gen 6 era, are fascinating and show creativity, but they aren't pushing boundaries that can trickle down to the consumer level. This isn't an open class of racing that will ever create breakthroughs in battery tech.
 
cheesepuffs said:
This isn't an open class of racing that will ever create breakthroughs in battery tech.
Click to expand...

The existence of such a series will necessitate a breakthrough in battery tech. To have an EV racing series, you need to solve 3 problems:

1. A safer battery that is less prone to fires
2. A battery that can be charged relatively quickly
3. A battery that can run for extended periods of time at high rates of speed.

All of these breakthroughs would be game changers for consumer automobiles.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
That would depend on how much overlap there is between the passenger vehicles and the racing rulebook. One reason nothing trickles down from most current racing series is there's so little in common between the track and the street. EV racing could be a return to the days when the R&D that won on Sunday could actually be found at the dealer on Monday. Why bother with two budgets when the race car is all you need, and you get the publicity too. Toss in a couple of endurance events to show off the battery life, and to Hell with keeping the brands competitive.
Click to expand...
An unlimited EV arms race, yes, that's what the OEMs want for NASCAR, to raise the budgets F1-sky high and then potentially get outclassed by their competition anyway in a series that is only meant to serve as rolling billboards and automaker silouttes.

I don't think you guys understand how small the publicity of this would be for EVs compared to putting half that amount of money into targeted online advertising.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom