Are We Seeing Fewer Wrecks In Cup This Year?

Tumbleweed

Tumbleweed

Team Owner
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
4,194
Points
743
Location
Washington, DC Area
I have absolutely no data to back this up and I may be all wet but it seems to me that we are seeing fewer wrecks, (or at least fewer bad wrecks) this year with the new package. It seems to me that you may see someone brush the wall now and then or even hit the wall fairly hard but other than that, I don’t remember many significant wrecks this year (other than Dega and Daytona).

There seem to be a lot of “almost” wrecks but guys are usually able to gather their cars back up and keep going. Guys seem often able to recover from spins as well without hitting anyone or anything. There just doesn’t seem to be as much equipment torn up this year as in previous years. For example, if I remember correctly, out of a 40 car field in Kansas 1, there wasn’t a single car out of the race because of wreck damage.

Like I said, I have no data to back this up and may be all wet but does anyone else see it that way? If it’s true, the owners must be loving it this year.
 
Tumbleweed said:
I have absolutely no data to back this up and I may be all wet but it seems to me that we are seeing fewer wrecks, (or at least fewer bad wrecks) this year with the new package. It seems to me that you may see someone brush the wall now and then or even hit the wall fairly hard but other than that, I don’t remember many significant wrecks this year (other than Dega and Daytona).

There seem to be a lot of “almost” wrecks but guys are usually able to gather their cars back up and keep going. Guys seem often able to recover from spins as well without hitting anyone or anything. There just doesn’t seem to be as much equipment torn up this year as in previous years. For example, if I remember correctly, out of a 40 car field in Kansas 1, there wasn’t a single car out of the race because of wreck damage.

Like I said, I have no data to back this up and may be all wet but does anyone else see it that way? If it’s true, the owners must be loving it this year.
Click to expand...
Only 1 car was out due to crash last year at Kansas in Oct
 
I'll have to get my stats up when I'm back on my computer, I have every year of Cup other then 2004-2007 which I'm working on
 
Tumbleweed said:
Sounds as if more "debris" cautions may be coming.
Click to expand...
I guess it's an odd trade off. Would I rather see a phantom "debris" caution, and go to a commercial break, or go to commercials and miss racing action? I noticed in the race thread Saturday night, it was mentioned a time or two "Fox goes to a commercial break and we have a lead change", to paraphrase that. Its a no win situation. I'd like to see all of the race. Solutions anyone?
 
Clint Boyer and Dale Jr. talked about this subject on Jr's podcast. Clint said the cars won't wreck anymore and Jr. agreed with him.
Ever since the no ride height rule and the way the bodies are on the cars it is almost impossible to wreck or spin out. Clint said heck even touching bumpers now will straighten each other out .
Clint said in a meeting about the Gen 7 cars that the cars need to be able to wreck. The others looked at him like he was crazy but Clint said " I mean the cars need to be able to spin out".

Rick Mears said in a article that it takes more driver skill to drive high horsepower/low down force than low horsepower/ high downforce. I.e; today's cup cars are to easy to drive compared to the skills of the guys driving them. So end result less cautions.
 
I don’t watch racing for wrecks. My heart still jumps into my throat when anyone wrecks,
 
That was a sweet drift by Chase Elliott though. Maybe if they add some more rear downforce they can drift all the way through the corners.
 
Zerkfitting said:
I was amused when they compared the number of "natural cautions". I think the debris cautions stopped a couple years ago. I was confused by the article suggesting a lack of cautions is a problem. (I think their point was that the cars are too easy to drive).
Click to expand...
I have a hard time reading much that Matt Weaver writes. This year was the first time he had been close to a dirt sprint car and he's full grown. He is pretty much an east coaster who has knowledge of the short track pavement scene there. Anything else he is out of his element IMO. He does a lot of knocking Nascar racing, but most of his knowledge is flawed.
 
StandOnIt said:
I have a hard time reading much that Matt Weaver writes. This year was the first time he had been close to a dirt sprint car and he's full grown. He is pretty much an east coaster who has knowledge of the short track pavement scene there. Anything else he is out of his element IMO.
Click to expand...

Short of a walking NASCAR encyclopedia like Pockrass, there aren't many in the NASCAR media contingent that have more pure racing knowledge than Weaver. He is definitely a southeastern late model guy, but he'd been to dirt races and even raced on dirt himself briefly, as his Dad was a dirt racer. He just hadn't been to a WoO show before this year. Credit to him for expanding his scope. I look for him to become one of the premier American auto racing journalists in coming years.

I like Gluck personally too, nice guy, and Weaver's depth of knowledge is much, much greater.
 
It is definitely not just the 2019 package. Wrecks were trending downward in the low downforce years too. Other factors are fewer field fillers and backmarkers, fewer damaged cars allowed back on the track, and greater overall reliability. The easier to drive (and certainly easier to save from spinning with the drastic increase in drag) cars are decreasing accidents even more.
 
gnomesayin said:
Short of a walking NASCAR encyclopedia like Pockrass, there aren't many in the NASCAR media contingent that have more pure racing knowledge than Weaver. He is definitely a southeastern late model guy, but he'd been to dirt races and even raced on dirt himself briefly, as his Dad was a dirt racer. He just hadn't been to a WoO show before this year. Credit to him for expanding his scope. I look for him to become one of the premier American auto racing journalists in coming years.

I like Gluck personally too, nice guy, and Weaver's depth of knowledge is much, much greater.
Click to expand...

dirt racer eh..bicycles?
 
He's been covering USAC for years and attended races in Indiana. And yes, his father and he raced on dirt at the local level. Jeez. You get so biased against anyone who isn't pro-package that you lose your wits. There were other NASCAR media people covering their first WoO race this year in Vegas.

Gluck went to his first WoO race last fall. He'd be the first to tell you that Weaver knows more about the technical aspects of racing. Many others haven't been at all. It's a niche thing, as you know.
 
Last edited:
gnomesayin said:
He's been covering USAC for years and attended races in Indiana. And yes, his father and he raced on dirt at the local level. Jeez. You get so biased against anyone who isn't pro-package that you lose your wits. There were other NASCAR media people covering their first WoO race this year in Vegas.

Gluck went to his first WoO race last fall. Many others haven't been at all. It's a niche thing, as you know.
Click to expand...
Sure would be nice to see all of this second hand knowledge in print. But it really doesn't matter, full grown and haven't seen a sprint car tells it all for me. I Prefer to read Kelly Crandall's articles. Much less bias, wins reporting awards, not a 10%er..

 
Fewer wrecks is a large component to fewer cautions. As D.W. likes to say cautions breed cautions. There are wrecks and there are WRECKS. The cars need to be tougher so they don't become wrecks, even a light brush with the wall creates problems when racing hard. The drivers racing on the track are tip toeing around these days with a tin foil thick car afraid to touch anybody because it could damage them more than who they hit could also be improved. The Xfinity composite body is the way to go, those things are light and tough. I think we would see a lot more pushing and shoving going on.
 
StandOnIt said:
Sure would be nice to see all of this second hand knowledge in print. But it really doesn't matter, full grown and haven't seen a sprint car tells it all for me. I Prefer to read Kelly Crandall's articles. Much less bias, wins reporting awards, not a 10%er..
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't matter. You decided you didn't like him because he has a different opinion of the package. I've talked to him, so if you prefer to believe I decided to invent a fake backstory for him, go ahead.

Kelly Crandall is a bright young reporter as well and doing good work. I say that without knowing how many WoO races she has attended.



 
gnomesayin said:
No, it doesn't matter. You decided you didn't like him because he has a different opinion of the package. I've talked to him, so if you prefer to believe I decided to invent a fake backstory for him, go ahead.

Kelly Crandall is a bright young reporter as well and doing good work. I say that without knowing how many WoO races she has attended.



Click to expand...

didn't say I didn't like him. Don't be putting words in my mouth Bud. Here is what I said: He does a lot of knocking Nascar racing, but most of his knowledge is flawed
 
mack said:
I guess it's an odd trade off. Would I rather see a phantom "debris" caution, and go to a commercial break, or go to commercials and miss racing action? I noticed in the race thread Saturday night, it was mentioned a time or two "Fox goes to a commercial break and we have a lead change", to paraphrase that. Its a no win situation. I'd like to see all of the race. Solutions anyone?
Click to expand...

They could do like ESPN did with the F1 races when they started running commercials during the final few races last year, i.e. delay the race broadcast for the duration of the commercials and return to the race at exactly the point they left it when the first commercials first started.

That way no racing action is missed.
 
Tumbleweed said:
I have absolutely no data to back this up and I may be all wet but it seems to me that we are seeing fewer wrecks
Click to expand...

I agree with you. While I never want to see anyone hurt, wrecks are an exciting part of racing. That is definitely missing and I think without wrecks new fans will be hard to come by.
 
Privateer said:
I don't want to say "we need more wrecks", but lack of wrecks demonstrates that no one is riding on the edge of being in control.
Click to expand...
Perhaps they have that new fancy adaptive cruise control, emergency braking system and blind spot indicators in their mirrors like the new Buick.
 
DSquad48 said:
oooo please share
Click to expand...
I do have a few years posted in a thread called crash stats and some other series too, I didnt want to post everything until I get all the seasons done because I was trying to figure out who has crashed most in NASCAR history, right now I'd guess just based off of what I can guess is Richard Petty, Kurt Busch and Jimmy Spencer are leading the pack
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom