Gen 7 Cup Car

gnomesayin said:
Here's what the always astute Steve O'Donnell said regarding the development of the Gen 7 last year:



I don't really know what that means, regarding cool technology they can (pretend to be) putting in the car. The philosophy seems to be what can they do to attract younger fans, which is a business necessity for them.

The just announced Mustang entering Australia's V8 Supercars in 2019 sure looks cool:

v8supercars-ford-mustang-livery-2018-ford-mustang-livery-8143732.jpg


That series has some pretty complex regulations that are intended to achieve aero parity using bodies that look much closer to production models, but I am going to guess that quest is actually more difficult on high speed ovals than on road courses. However, if they could get closer to something in that vein cosmetically, it sure might attract some eyeballs that are bored by the Gen 6. The Gen 6 has been improved during its lifetime, but sleek and sexy are not exactly the words that come to mind.
Click to expand...
No reason why Nascar couldn't look more like V8 supercars. They achieve high speeds, so their aero has to be on par.
 
IMO what took Nascar away from a sport that survived BECAUSE of the racing to something that needs gimicks to attract fans was the expansion of Nascar to 1.5 tracks. These tracks were only designed to satisfy the greedy assumption that more seating was better as well as more infield space to rent. The Old saying "Less is More" and leaving you audience wanting more can be the driving force behind popularity.
These tracks need to be shorter or have chicanes added that makes the racing harder. Just going into the corner faster does nothing for the TV audience.
 
Mopardh9 said:
No reason why Nascar couldn't look more like V8 supercars. They achieve high speeds, so their aero has to be on par.
Click to expand...
Depends on how quick you want Cup cars to corner at. Places like Michigan they enter at insane speeds; would fans want to see that go away? They don't run sustained speeds on ovals so it's kinda hard to compare but the highest speed they reach in Supercars is around 300 kmh down through the Chase at Bathurst. Big difference from what a Cup car can currently achieve.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Depends on how quick you want Cup cars to corner at. Places like Michigan they enter at insane speeds; would fans want to see that go away? They don't run sustained speeds on ovals so it's kinda hard to compare but the highest speed they reach in Supercars is around 300 kmh down through the Chase at Bathurst. Big difference from what a Cup car can currently achieve.
Click to expand...
I think they go too fast, slow them down to 180- 185, plenty fast enough.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Depends on how quick you want Cup cars to corner at. Places like Michigan they enter at insane speeds; would fans want to see that go away? They don't run sustained speeds on ovals so it's kinda hard to compare but the highest speed they reach in Supercars is around 300 kmh down through the Chase at Bathurst. Big difference from what a Cup car can currently achieve.
Click to expand...
But does high speed mean good racing? I think Not.
If you want speed thrills go to drag strips.
 
Larsonfan1995 said:
It was plenty fast enough in 1995-2005 when the racing was at its best
Click to expand...

Stretch it to 2007.

Gen 4 was so much fun.

The fastest car of the year wasn't always the fastest car every race cause mechanical grip at the time seemed so important.

The "fastest" car in speed could run slower laptimes by a tenth or two than another car that is handling to the drivers liking.

Now, the gen 6 just handles so well. Over the last few months, I have watched about 40 full races on youtube from 2002-2007. Those cars moved around WAY more than the gen 6 and just seemed like such a handful to drive.

Comers and goers, etc. There wasnt always a clear cut best car. And when there was, it still wasnt driving good, so that car could be overcome by good handling.

I miss that NASCAR. I grew up in the 90s and was a Ricky Rudd fan..so I saw Dale, Jeff, Rusty, etc, all these guys. But to me, the beginning of the Tony Stewart, Jimmie, Matt, Kevin, Kyle era is THE NASCAR that I know.

Prefer those drivers, and the racing to the 90s, or any era
 
StandOnIt said:
nobody could tell the difference if the cars were a bit slower, but would it improve or lessen the racing is the question and until it is tried and tested thoroughly nobody really knows
Click to expand...
That's true so why does Brian always want to go faster? Just slow the cars down a bit and tell us they are doing 210 mph. :sarcasm:
 
No I really don't. You and the rest really don't have a clue when racing was better. No aha moment when you realized it was worse.
 
I feel it was better from 2002-2007.

The "aha" moment was in 2015 for me when racing was an issue
 
jaqua19 said:
I feel it was better from 2002-2007.

The "aha" moment was in 2015 for me when racing was an issue
Click to expand...

I "feel" we would have as many opinions as posters and some years might over lap with others. A part of it has to do with age, the economy, and what was going on in the posters life at the time.
 
StandOnIt said:
I "feel" we would have as many opinions as posters and some years might over lap with others. A part of it has to do with age, the economy, and what was going on in the posters life at the time.
Click to expand...
Or it has to do with being able to run side by side without the car on the inside getting loose. Or being able to pass the leader under green.
 
StandOnIt said:
when did that happen? side by side racing routinely?
Click to expand...
my opinion was that they could pass pretty good on the larger tracks was in the 70's when most of the cars had the flat front ends and the huge spoilers that punched a huge whole in the air. The era of the "slingshot" pass
 
StandOnIt said:
when did that happen? side by side racing routinely?
Click to expand...
Go watch the last 20 laps of the 2001 Atlanta race that Harvick won. 5 cars racing 2 and 3 wide for the win on a 1.5er. That would never happen with the Gen 6. Or the Craven-Busch finish at Darlington, that would never happen with the Gen 6.
 
StandOnIt said:
I "feel" we would have as many opinions as posters and some years might over lap with others. A part of it has to do with age, the economy, and what was going on in the posters life at the time.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I deliberately remember in 2015 thinking to myself, "this is different". I remember making posts about it too..Harvick and Logano havjng over 27 top 10s in the same season, where prior, we havent seen another driver have over 25 since 2008.

Obviously there is context to statistics, but this was more my subjective thought process than a fact.

As a fan I never once complained about the racing, until 2015
 
Larsonfan1995 said:
Go watch the last 20 laps of the 2001 Atlanta race that Harvick won. 5 cars racing 2 and 3 wide for the win on a 1.5er. That would never happen with the Gen 6. Or the Craven-Busch finish at Darlington, that would never happen with the Gen 6.
Click to expand...

Edwards vs Jr 2005 Atlanta

Johnson vs Stewart 2007 Atlanta
 
They averaged mid-180s in qualifying on the intermediates in '95. 2000, places like Atlanta, Michigan, Texas saw pole speeds north of 190. In 2005 you could add Charlotte to that list. It's been a long time since cars topped out in the 180-185 MPH bracket. They should certainly be slowed in the future, but probably not nearly as much as is often suggested.
 
jaqua19 said:
Edwards vs Jr 2005 Atlanta

Johnson vs Stewart 2007 Atlanta
Click to expand...
Burton vs Kenseth Dover 2006 and Texas 2007. All 6 of these examples within a 6 year period. In the 6 years of the Gen 6 I can't think of any classic battles other than Larson and Kenseth at Dover a couple years ago, and that was only because Larson would get under Kenseth and get loose and lose ground.
 
I can think of some, Joey and Kenseth at Kansas, Gordon and Kez at Texas, Edwards and Kyle Bu 2016 at Richmond, Hamlin and Logano at Fontana.
 
Larsonfan1995 said:
Burton vs Kenseth Dover 2006 and Texas 2007. All 6 of these examples within a 6 year period. In the 6 years of the Gen 6 I can't think of any classic battles other than Larson and Kenseth at Dover a couple years ago, and that was only because Larson would get under Kenseth and get loose and lose ground.
Click to expand...
Ummm? I consider Gen 6 to be only a couple seasons old. Smaller spoiler, reduced splitter, etc.
 
Everybody has their own opinion, this is a pretty good highlight reel for 2016 and it is just part one, lots of hard racing
 
StandOnIt said:
I can think of some, Joey and Kenseth at Kansas, Gordon and Kez at Texas, Edwards and Kyle Bu 2016 at Richmond, Hamlin and Logano at Fontana.
Click to expand...
Were they several laps of side by side racing? No, because you have to make the pass quickly with these cars or you can't make it at all. Joey wrecked Hamlin on the last lap at Fontana because he was under him and got loose, as is typical with these cars. The old car wouldn't have done that.
 
Larsonfan1995 said:
Were they several laps of side by side racing? No, because you have to make the pass quickly with these cars or you can't make it at all. Joey wrecked Hamlin on the last lap at Fontana because he was under him and got loose, as is typical with these cars. The old car wouldn't have done that.
Click to expand...

the era of the "twisted sister" car that I remember was the most aero dependent car they had. That being said they had some good races with it.
 
jaqua19 said:
As a fan I never once complained about the racing, until 2015
Click to expand...
Citing 2015 is a really bad example, as 2015 was the one Gen 6 year where the racing on intermediate tracks was ALL about clean air. In 2015, there was a very slight reduction in downforce and a sizable cut in horsepower from 2014. It turned out to be a very bad combination. On intermediate tracks, clean air was KING in a way that no other Gen 6 year has come even close to. (By early spring 2015, Nascar and the teams were scrambling to figure out what to do and when. Plans to introduce a new aero package at the 2015 All Star weekend were delayed at the last minute due to owner complaints about the costs.)

Racing today on intermediate tracks is starkly different from 2015. Different and better. There is still a side force issue, however. Nascar's next job in managing aero is to cut side force, IMO.
StandOnIt said:
the era of the "twisted sister" car that I remember was the most aero dependent car they had. That being said they had some good races with it.
Click to expand...
Right on! There was extreme aero dependency in the 90's and 00's. It is easy to see in tapes of the races.

One big difference was that the announcers and journalists of the 1990's very rarely discussed aerodynamic downforce. They had no understanding nor appreciation of the science back then. The media still doesn't understand aerodynamic solutions very well, but the lingo is everywhere and everyone at least knows what the issues are.
 
I just don't want to seem them take more power away from these cars. I'm not really fan of slowing them down either but it's probably going to happen.

Anyone that says they can't tell the difference between a car going 170 vs. 190+, go watch the ARCA race at Daytona in February and stick around for the Clash the next day. You'll see.
 
AdoubleU24 said:
I just don't want to seem them take more power away from these cars. I'm not really fan of slowing them down either but it's probably going to happen.

Anyone that says they can't tell the difference between a car going 170 vs. 190+, go watch the ARCA race at Daytona in February and stick around for the Clash the next day. You'll see.
Click to expand...
Why do they need to go 200+?
 
AdoubleU24 said:
Anyone that says they can't tell the difference between a car going 170 vs. 190+, go watch the ARCA race at Daytona in February and stick around for the Clash the next day. You'll see.
Click to expand...
I went to the double in 2016 and did not notice the speed difference
 
AdoubleU24 said:
I just don't want to seem them take more power away from these cars. I'm not really fan of slowing them down either but it's probably going to happen.

Anyone that says they can't tell the difference between a car going 170 vs. 190+, go watch the ARCA race at Daytona in February and stick around for the Clash the next day. You'll see.
Click to expand...

Arca qualified Daytona pole at 185.533, Cup @195.644. you got a better eye than me. Maybe at the track? But I couldn't tell sitting at home. I have watched boatload of truck races on buck an a halfs, they look pretty fast, sometimes faster that cup cars look when they are side by side. One of the big reasons there is more passing in the trucks is because they punch such a big hole in the air
 
StandOnIt said:
Arca qualified Daytona pole at 185.533, Cup @195.644. you got a better eye than me. Maybe at the track? But I couldn't tell sitting at home. I have watched boatload of truck races on buck an a halfs, they look pretty fast, sometimes faster that cup cars look when they are side by side. One of the big reasons there is more passing in the trucks is because they punch such a big hole in the air
Click to expand...
Which would make the cup cars better if they did the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom