Can NASCAR's race team alliances last long term, be mutually beneficial?

[StandOnIt]

"This started falling apart when Furniture Row started beating Joe Gibbs Racing," SHR driver Kevin Harvick said. "Our alliance fell apart ultimately in the end because of the fact that Stewart-Haas Racing was beating Hendrick Motorsports, and the crew chiefs didn't like it, the sponsors don't like it. Internally, it doesn't go over well, and in the end, they fall apart."

"They can work," Stewart-Haas Racing driver Clint Bowyer said. "It worked last year for the championship. They're not going to work for long because of greed and everything else. Could you imagine making a deal with somebody where you furnish them cars and everything else and never dream in a million years that they would go out and beat you for a championship? That's a tough pill to swallow.

"And then how do I get out of it? I made this bed and I'm going to have to lay in it, but the next time the washer comes around, I'm pulling the sheets off this baby."

All of the alliances are unique in some way. JGR leased bodies and chassis to Furniture Row. If they didn't continue their alliance beyond this year, Furniture Row would have had to give back all of its cars.

The SHR-Hendrick alliance was just chassis and didn't include bodies

http://www.espn.com/racing/nascar/s...ries-2018-breaking-nature-race-team-alliances

 

[Revman]

No, they can't work long term. In the case of JGR & FRR, I think you had equal engineering talent on both end. JGR did the heavy lifting, and FRR took the cars to the next level. The only thing that limits talented engineers is time. They cannot engineer a day greater than 24 hours. FRR used their time to perfect. JGR used their time to establish baseline. My two cents.

 

[Formerjackman]

So does this crazy episode blow up the whole business model? Does it go back to the big teams supplying ONLY hardware and letting the buyer figure out what to do with it? Do they stop supplying chassis at all? As tight as things are financially for the teams, it's hard to believe they would walk away from the revenue, but you can't take people's money and then get all bent out of shape when they do more with than you do. I don't know exactly how the Hendrick/SHR relationship was SUPPOSED to work as far as information sharing, but once SHR started to outperform HMS, if I were Rick Hendrick I would have been on my people's ass every day wanting to know why THEY were getting more out our stuff than WE are. If I were Rick, that would have pissed my off, but I would have blamed MY people for underachieving, not try to blow up my customer's program for overachieving. The same thing goes for JGR/FRR.

 

[gone]

With teams downsizing and good engineer/mechanics getting laid off, plus this consternation of big teams not liking getting out-performed by the teams they supply (and possibly cutting them off or selling them inferior product), we might see a return of chassis fabrication businesses like Hutcherson-Pagan and Banjo Matthews used to be...

 

[MRM]

The only benefit I saw from the current structure of the RTA was to get a charter, which guaranteed you made every race. Since some races don't even have 40 cars, that became less of an issue.

 

[gone]

The only benefit I saw from the current structure of the RTA was to get a charter, which guaranteed you made every race. Since some races don't even have 40 cars, that became less of an issue.

Yep, that and to try to generate a market value for a team's membership in NASCAR.
But as you say, when fewer cars show up than the maximum number of starting positions you don't need to buy a charter in order to guarantee getting into the race.

 

[Mopardh9]

Yep, that and to try to generate a market value for a team's membership in NASCAR.
But as you say, when fewer cars show up than the maximum number of starting positions you don't need to buy a charter in order to guarantee getting into the race.

The whole charter thing is a farce as far as im concerned, another gimmick that realky isn't working.

 

[Mike Crayne]

The only benefit I saw from the current structure of the RTA was to get a charter, which guaranteed you made every race. Since some races don't even have 40 cars, that became less of an issue.

It also guarantees a minimum amount of money.

 

[StandOnIt]

It also guarantees a minimum amount of money.

yep

 

[Zerkfitting]

Banjo Matthews with help from Holman-Moody built 72% of the winning cars from '74-'85 (they built cars for all manufacturers). It sounds like there is a need for independent suppliers.

 

[StandOnIt]

Banjo Matthews with help from Holman-Moody built 72% of the winning cars from '74-'85 (they built cars for all manufacturers). It sounds like there is a need for independent suppliers.

can't help but be another possibility IMO with these "alliances" holding hostage all of the cards on pricing. The truck spec motors and the composite bodies have helped the smaller teams be more cost effective. Nothing is going to stop the mega teams from blowing money out the tailpipe.

 

[Formerjackman]

Banjo Matthews with help from Holman-Moody built 72% of the winning cars from '74-'85 (they built cars for all manufacturers). It sounds like there is a need for independent suppliers.

The problem is, the chassis suppliers would likely need to invest in all the ultra high tech equipment the mega teams have and THEN outbid the teams for the guys smart enough to make it all work, on the speculation that SOME lower end teams MIGHT buy the cars from you. The days are LONG gone of Banjo or Mike Laughlin welding together piles of tubing on second hand surface plates (I believe Banjo's came from Holman-Moody) with the help of a handful of good ole boy stock car welders and fabricators at a time when even the big teams bought their chassis from outside vendors. Now, the technology has gone through the roof, and the potential market is a fraction of what it once was.

 

[saltysenior]

Not to hijack , but this seems to be a thread that would accept my question as chassis and bodies are mentioned......drivers are ranked or graded to a degree.... my question is are the finished cars individually graded by those who know about them before the race , for example garage talk.....'' that # 4 car should be the one to beat,but the # 9 just isn't in it's class.........it's hard to explain what I'm asking , but I know at local short tracks certain cars are better no mater who built, owns, or drives them...

 

[StandOnIt]

The problem is, the chassis suppliers would likely need to invest in all the ultra high tech equipment the mega teams have and THEN outbid the teams for the guys smart enough to make it all work, on the speculation that SOME lower end teams MIGHT buy the cars from you. The days are LONG gone of Banjo or Mike Laughlin welding together piles of tubing on second hand surface plates (I believe Banjo's came from Holman-Moody) with the help of a handful of good ole boy stock car welders and fabricators at a time when even the big teams bought their chassis from outside vendors. Now, the technology has gone through the roof, and the potential market is a fraction of what it once was.

they (Nascar) can spec parts until the cows come home and they have in certain areas already. Doesn't matter who builds them as long as they are to spec. They have the technology today to do that. It is just a matter of time before they do more of that. I expect more rules next year like this year that spec'd flat splitters and common radiators and oil coolers in the front ends.

 

[Charlie Spencer]

Not to hijack , but this seems to be a thread that would accept my question as chassis and bodies are mentioned......drivers are ranked or graded to a degree.... my question is are the finished cars individually graded by those who know about them before the race , for example garage talk.....'' that # 4 car should be the one to beat,but the # 9 just isn't in it's class.........it's hard to explain what I'm asking , but I know at local short tracks certain cars are better no mater who built, owns, or drives them...

I regularly hear reporters say which cars the drivers think will be the ones to beat after practice sessions, and Jayski and others report which chassis number a team is using that week.

 

[Zerkfitting]

If the big teams become too protective of their parts reaching smaller teams, or if their parts become too expensive, or if they have to cut their development, I can see a cottage industry filling the void. I'm guessing there are a variety of job shops of varying tech in the area already.

 

[gone]

Not to hijack , but this seems to be a thread that would accept my question as chassis and bodies are mentioned......drivers are ranked or graded to a degree.... my question is are the finished cars individually graded by those who know about them before the race , for example garage talk.....'' that # 4 car should be the one to beat,but the # 9 just isn't in it's class.........it's hard to explain what I'm asking , but I know at local short tracks certain cars are better no mater who built, owns, or drives them...

Absolutely, people pay attention to which cars are "best". They usually won't sell them, though, unless they feel the car is no longer "best" or unless they're getting out of racing. Note that "best" might be defined by how a driver likes the feel of a certain car (what's "best" to him may not be "best" to another)... there have been cases where a driver insisted on a certain car or cars go with him when he changed teams.

With so many parts and construction points in a car it's no surprise that a few can work a little better than others, despite efforts to standardize parts and dimensions. Plus it's virtually impossible to legislate every last detail.

 

[gone]

If the big teams become too protective of their parts reaching smaller teams, or if their parts become too expensive, or if they have to cut their development, I can see a cottage industry filling the void. I'm guessing there are a variety of job shops of varying tech in the area already.

I've seen this cycle before, in lower levels of racing. It can get embarrassing to a driver or crew chief if equipment they built and sold ends up beating them consistently, so they start holding onto their best stuff and selling the stuff that they don't think is as good... customers start to suspect that they're not getting those producers' best work so they start buying elsewhere... former employees at those shops take the opportunity to leave to set up their own competing shops using what they've learned...

Bottom line, some days you just get beat even by your own customers. Maybe they had better luck on the track, maybe they adjusted their equipment better than you did, maybe their driver has a little more talent or your driver is starting to fall off just a little. Usually the most successful shops are proud of all wins by their equipment, whether their driver was at the controls or somebody else was.

 

[Zerkfitting]

Bottom line, some days you just get beat even by your own customers. Maybe they had better luck on the track, maybe they adjusted their equipment better than you did, maybe their driver has a little more talent or your driver is starting to fall off just a little. Usually the most successful shops are proud of all wins by their equipment, whether their driver was at the controls or somebody else was.

It is probably a good thing - business wise, to have customers beating you. A friend used to race boats and it was the independents vs the factory teams, they rarely beat the factory teams so they left the sport (my friend built a fast bass boat and went fishing instead of racing).