NASCAR goes back to the drawing board after Coke 600 blowout

It was pretty amazing the 78 was still the fastest car after the sunset.
 
People bitch and NASCAR responds I suppose. I think it is stupid, but on the other hand, I love the challenge for my friends at TRD. Responding to change/problems is an engineering thing. It will be fascinating regardless.
 
Halbert said:
It was pretty amazing the 78 was still the fastest car after the sunset.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I kept waiting for the drop off. The banter is that there was no dramatic day/night drop off in track temp due to cloud cover.
 
RacerrecaR said:
Amen. And don't mandate things like gear ratios, spoiler angles, and shock packages.
Click to expand...

Absolutely!!! All of these make for a more IROC type of series and we all know how that worked out.

Give the teams back some basic adjustability. All of the teams have a crap load of engineers. If they come up with different ideas and somebody hits on the right package, good for them!!!

It's not like we would be going back to the stone ages to see a crew member jump over the wall with a rubber mallet to start beating the spoiler up to get a little more rear grip! BRING IT ON!
 
29-4 said:
Knee Jerk Reaction is BF's middle name:

Matt Kenseth dominated the championship? Let's create a non-nonsensical playoff system
People complain about Gordon missing the Chase? Let's destroy our Chase rules and make it a 13-car playoff.
Tony Stewart complains about lugnuts? Let's stop all the cars on pit road to check lugs (after we fine, him of course.)
One bad race? Let's go back to the drawing board on aero after a season that has included some of the best races in a decade

I'm sure others could add to this list.
Click to expand...

Tony didn't even race in that race either
 
Old 97 said:
Absolutely!!! All of these make for a more IROC type of series and we all know how that worked out.

Give the teams back some basic adjustability. All of the teams have a crap load of engineers. If they come up with different ideas and somebody hits on the right package, good for them!!!

It's not like we would be going back to the stone ages to see a crew member jump over the wall with a rubber mallet to start beating the spoiler up to get a little more rear grip! BRING IT ON!
Click to expand...

I'm in favor of anything that puts the outcome in the hands of the driver and race team on race day. That's what we as fans pay them big bucks for, right? To see them wheel around the cars as best they can and make the difficult decisions and execute a strategy.

"Dumbing down" the cars and taking away aids does that. Taking away downforce and other aero tech advantages does that. Equalizing the cars more does that. All three put more of the outcome in the hands of the drivers by making the cars harder to drive for everyone, not just the wealthy teams.

The problem I see with "open up the toolbox" talk is where does it stop and who benefits most. Again, I want the race to be won and lost on Sunday by the guys at the track, that's what's entertaining to me. We don't buy tickets to December wind tunnel test sessions so we shouldn't have our race outcomes decided there. I'd love to see teams have the option of adjusting more things on a car during a race than just air pressure, tape, track bar, and wedge (Side note, I'd also like to see this info broadcast to the public during the race if possible, to make it easier to follow for us fans that like this stuff). But the slippery slope that leads us to is F1 style sensors all over the car and the biggest teams with the best computer models kicking butt while their driver goes around on autopilot. Driver feel needs to remain a key skill to achieve success.

Similarly, when we're talking about things like gearing, body panel shape and engine tuning where a team can unload 3/10ths quicker thanks to the calculations done by engineers 5 months ago, it takes away from the importance of the driver and pit crew and primarily benefits the richest teams with the most engineers. Not that I don't like engineers, it's just I wouldn't pay good money to watch them do their work. Unchecked development of the cars leads to championships being bought, not won.
 
ToyYoda said:
Even though it was a butt whoopin', Sunday's race was a little different in that, because it was Truex, we were all waiting to see if that team would botch the win away like they have so many times before. That provided a little more drama than would have existed had the race been dominated by Kyle Busch, Logano, etc.
Click to expand...

Exactly. As many times as the 78 team has screwed the pooch anything is possible. With some of the other guys the race could have been called a hundred miles in.
 
"Back to the drawing board" doesn't necessarily mean scrapping everything and starting over.
 
Acs said:
I'm in favor of anything that puts the outcome in the hands of the driver and race team on race day. That's what we as fans pay them big bucks for, right? To see them wheel around the cars as best they can and make the difficult decisions and execute a strategy.

"Dumbing down" the cars and taking away aids does that. Taking away downforce and other aero tech advantages does that. Equalizing the cars more does that. All three put more of the outcome in the hands of the drivers by making the cars harder to drive for everyone, not just the wealthy teams.

The problem I see with "open up the toolbox" talk is where does it stop and who benefits most. Again, I want the race to be won and lost on Sunday by the guys at the track, that's what's entertaining to me. We don't buy tickets to December wind tunnel test sessions so we shouldn't have our race outcomes decided there. I'd love to see teams have the option of adjusting more things on a car during a race than just air pressure, tape, track bar, and wedge (Side note, I'd also like to see this info broadcast to the public during the race if possible, to make it easier to follow for us fans that like this stuff). But the slippery slope that leads us to is F1 style sensors all over the car and the biggest teams with the best computer models kicking butt while their driver goes around on autopilot. Driver feel needs to remain a key skill to achieve success.

Similarly, when we're talking about things like gearing, body panel shape and engine tuning where a team can unload 3/10ths quicker thanks to the calculations done by engineers 5 months ago, it takes away from the importance of the driver and pit crew and primarily benefits the richest teams with the most engineers. Not that I don't like engineers, it's just I wouldn't pay good money to watch them do their work. Unchecked development of the cars leads to championships being bought, not won.
Click to expand...

I think we agree more than we disagree.

Gear ratios, shocks and spoiler angles aren't that technically advanced. Of the three, shocks are the most intricate but much of the voodoo surrounding them has been removed over the years. The whole "engineer" thing was tongue in cheek. It doesn't take much more than good racing knowledge to make a decision on these 3 while giving the teams a chance to shake things up.

I am not a fan of dumbing down the cars to the point where we are at! We have had watered down IROC for 12 or so years. Look at the stands. Something isn't working. I will always say your local go kart rental track is a good example. If you have 10 equally prepared and powered go karts it doesn't take long for your 12 year old to be running the same lap times as you. It's nothing but a freight train until he/she figures out the line and over takes you because he/she weighs 100 lbs less than you!

If there was some way to totally equallize the cars to the hundredth decimal you would see a freight train every week like we had in years past. Most of these drivers are the best. The top 15 or 20 will be nose to tail (no passing). The back markers will mix it up and if they don't screw up there will be a debris caution. Sound familiar?

I applaud NASCAR for the direction they have finally decided to go. I have watched more this year than since the mid 2000s. We are on the cusp of good racing once again. I want more!!!!
 
Old 97 said:
I think we agree more than we disagree.

Gear ratios, shocks and spoiler angles aren't that technically advanced. Of the three, shocks are the most intricate but much of the voodoo surrounding them has been removed over the years. The whole "engineer" thing was tongue in cheek. It doesn't take much more than good racing knowledge to make a decision on these 3 while giving the teams a chance to shake things up.

I am not a fan of dumbing down the cars to the point where we are at! We have had watered down IROC for 12 or so years. Look at the stands. Something isn't working. I will always say your local go kart rental track is a good example. If you have 10 equally prepared and powered go karts it doesn't take long for your 12 year old to be running the same lap times as you. It's nothing but a freight train until he/she figures out the line and over takes you because he/she weighs 100 lbs less than you!

If there was some way to totally equallize the cars to the hundredth decimal you would see a freight train every week like we had in years past. Most of these drivers are the best. The top 15 or 20 will be nose to tail (no passing). The back markers will mix it up and if they don't screw up there will be a debris caution. Sound familiar?

I applaud NASCAR for the direction they have finally decided to go. I have watched more this year than since the mid 2000s. We are on the cusp of good racing once again. I want more!!!!
Click to expand...

Well said and you know something is wrong when the sanctioning body will squeal about 1/1000th of tolerance yet will throw a bogus yellow to manage the race.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
If someone thinks running a 4:56 ratio at Daytona makes sense then let him do it!!!!
Click to expand...
Gear ratios are controlled to rein in the cost of racing. It makes sense to remove the temptation to gain a performance edge by gearing for 10,000 rpm at the end of the straight, because that gearing would lead to a lot more blown motors (as well as more expensive motors). It is the same rationale as specifying a minimum weight, which reduces the temptation to invest huge money to build a lighter car.
 
Acs said:
I'm in favor of anything that puts the outcome in the hands of the driver and race team on race day. That's what we as fans pay them big bucks for, right? To see them wheel around the cars as best they can and make the difficult decisions and execute a strategy.

"Dumbing down" the cars and taking away aids does that. Taking away downforce and other aero tech advantages does that. Equalizing the cars more does that. All three put more of the outcome in the hands of the drivers by making the cars harder to drive for everyone, not just the wealthy teams.

The problem I see with "open up the toolbox" talk is where does it stop and who benefits most. Again, I want the race to be won and lost on Sunday by the guys at the track, that's what's entertaining to me. We don't buy tickets to December wind tunnel test sessions so we shouldn't have our race outcomes decided there. I'd love to see teams have the option of adjusting more things on a car during a race than just air pressure, tape, track bar, and wedge (Side note, I'd also like to see this info broadcast to the public during the race if possible, to make it easier to follow for us fans that like this stuff). But the slippery slope that leads us to is F1 style sensors all over the car and the biggest teams with the best computer models kicking butt while their driver goes around on autopilot. Driver feel needs to remain a key skill to achieve success.

Similarly, when we're talking about things like gearing, body panel shape and engine tuning where a team can unload 3/10ths quicker thanks to the calculations done by engineers 5 months ago, it takes away from the importance of the driver and pit crew and primarily benefits the richest teams with the most engineers. Not that I don't like engineers, it's just I wouldn't pay good money to watch them do their work. Unchecked development of the cars leads to championships being bought, not won.
Click to expand...
This is exactly right, IMO. Acs may be a young dude who just attended his first Nascar race, but the dude has got it figured out, LOL. Excellent post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Acs
R Clarence said:
They're spendin' hugh money to make 'em go faster when they're restricted to one or two final drive ratios.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The cost "savings" are simply spent elsewhere.

Engine development has never ceased in spite of rpm limitations.
 
I remember when they said putting tapered spacers on would help cut costs. How much have teams saved since then?

Screen-Shot-2014-08-19-at-13.08.35.png
 
LewTheShoe said:
Gear ratios are controlled to rein in the cost of racing. It makes sense to remove the temptation to gain a performance edge by gearing for 10,000 rpm at the end of the straight, because that gearing would lead to a lot more blown motors (as well as more expensive motors). It is the same rationale as specifying a minimum weight, which reduces the temptation to invest huge money to build a lighter car.
Click to expand...


I can't disagree more. The little guy from the Northeast with 5 friends and a dream was nudged out a loooong time ago. I could give 2 David Hoots about how much it costs one of these teams to put a diverse product on the track.
Put the gear to it! Test the limits!!!
If you have a charter and a race shop in Mooresville I pesronally don't want to hear about your money woes. Shut down the wind tunnels or something along those lines but don't whine to me about the money it costs to build gears and motors.
Minimum weight is a basic rule. Cu In is a basic rule. Enough with the same cars with different stickers!
If you can't keep up with the big boys, take up a different hobby! Rant over.
 
LewTheShoe said:
Gear ratios are controlled to rein in the cost of racing. It makes sense to remove the temptation to gain a performance edge by gearing for 10,000 rpm at the end of the straight, because that gearing would lead to a lot more blown motors (as well as more expensive motors). It is the same rationale as specifying a minimum weight, which reduces the temptation to invest huge money to build a lighter car.
Click to expand...

As the saying goes if you want a small fortune take a large fortune and go racing. I don't know if it would be more a case of reallocating funds or if a whole new round of spending would have to take place. Would second tier teams like Roush, Ganassi and RCR fall further behind the top teams or would they keep up? I doubt Nascar will ever loosen its grip so we will never know.
 
Old 97 said:
If you have a charter and a race shop in Mooresville I pesronally don't want to hear about your money woes.
Click to expand...
It is an empirical question, not a philosophic one, as to whether there will be enough money coming into the sport to sustain it long term even with unfettered spending. I'd love to see another 25 sponsors like Lowes, M&M, and Shell/Pennzoil, but I don't see that. Rather than the teams receiving 25% of $820 million annual TV money, I'd love to see them hauling down 50+% of $1,640 million, but not holding my breath.
 
LewTheShoe said:
It is an empirical question, not a philosophic one, as to whether there will be enough money coming into the sport to sustain it long term even with unfettered spending. I'd love to see another 25 sponsors like Lowes, M&M, and Shell/Pennzoil, but I don't see that. Rather than the teams receiving 25% of $820 million annual TV money, I'd love to see them hauling down 50+% of $1,640 million, but not holding my breath.
Click to expand...

All I know is that this sport sustained it's greatest growth rate when a major sponsor was shelling out less than 10 mil per year. The small players got priced out of the game. This didn't have anything to do with rearend gears. It had a lot to do with greed.
 
Old 97 said:
All I know is that this sport sustained it's greatest growth rate when a major sponsor was shelling out less than 10 mil per year. The small players got priced out of the game. This didn't have anything to do with rearend gears. It had a lot to do with greed.
Click to expand...
All sports (and most other forms of entertainment) are about making money.
 
Old 97 said:
All I know is that this sport sustained it's greatest growth rate when a major sponsor was shelling out less than 10 mil per year. The small players got priced out of the game. This didn't have anything to do with rearend gears. It had a lot to do with greed.
Click to expand...
You know way more than that.

10 mill times inflation = X, depending upon when you start counting. Same thing applies to revenues earned and expenses of all teams, including the small ones who have been priced out of the pointy end of the game since day 1, everywhere and in every series. Nature of the sport. Speed costs money ... greed doesn't factor into that.
 
aunty dive said:
You know way more than that.

10 mill times inflation = X, depending upon when you start counting. Same thing applies to revenues earned and expenses of all teams, including the small ones who have been priced out of the pointy end of the game since day 1, everywhere and in every series. Nature of the sport. Speed costs money ... greed doesn't factor into that.
Click to expand...


Eh. I think otherwise, But hey, how about Pocono this weekend? It used to be my third most hated race(after The road courses), but not so much any more. Go Blaney!!!!
 
Charlie Spencer said:
All sports (and most other forms of entertainment) are about making money.
Click to expand...
No. Not this one! It's about hoisting that trophy and having a cold one after the big win!
Uggggg! It's not coming back is it?
 
Old 97 said:
Eh. I think otherwise, But hey, how about Pocono this weekend? It used to be my third most hated race(after The road courses), but not so much any more. Go Blaney!!!!
Click to expand...
Did you fail math or economics? Or both? :D

Love Pocono. They race cars there. They go very fast. It's extremely difficult.
 
aunty dive said:
Did you fail math or economics? Or both? :D

Love Pocono. They race cars there. They go very fast. It's extremely difficult.
Click to expand...

It used to be boring just like the road courses were! Not so much as of late. And yes. I failed them both because I had a GF and didn't go to school for all of the days that were required to pass the simple classes! On a good note....Our son ended up being a pretty good racer! LOL
 
Last edited:
^ thought so highly of my post he simply quoted it. :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom