NASCAR to standardize at-track rosters beginning in 2018

Cars being approved for NASCAR before any (or enough) were built has happened more than once, and will probably happen again. I know that less than 100 1986 Monte Carlo SS Aerocoupes were built before the race car showed up in Daytona for the 86' 500. What NASCAR would do if those cars ended up not being built is anyone's guess. Also not really applicable to the current situation, but in 1973 when Benny Parsons wrecked in the final race and needed to rebuild the whole right side of the car to get back on the track, crewman from several different teams pitched in to help put it back together and someone else's car provided the donor roll cage parts. In ARCA, teams loaning people to help out other guys was common. I pitted cars for three different teams one night because they were short handed.
 
Formerjackman said:
Cars being approved for NASCAR before any (or enough) were built has happened more than once, and will probably happen again. I know that less than 100 1986 Monte Carlo SS Aerocoupes were built before the race car showed up in Daytona for the 86' 500. What NASCAR would do if those cars ended up not being built is anyone's guess. Also not really applicable to the current situation, but in 1973 when Benny Parsons wrecked in the final race and needed to rebuild the whole right side of the car to get back on the track, crewman from several different teams pitched in to help put it back together and someone else's car provided the donor roll cage parts. In ARCA, teams loaning people to help out other guys was common. I pitted cars for three different teams one night because they were short handed.
Click to expand...

I think the case of JGR and FRR working together is just a case of sour grapes and trying to make something normal seem sinister.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
If Ford or GM want to use 3 fronts ends in 4 years it is all good. If they don't want to spend the money to keep up then they can get left behind.
Click to expand...
Be sure to use your best imitation Bernie Ecclestone voice when you preach that line of commercial suicide.
 
LewTheShoe said:
Be sure to use your best imitation Bernie Ecclestone voice when you preach that line of commercial suicide.
Click to expand...

Manufacturer means squat to me so I don't care if the entire field is full of Kia's, Ford's or Nissan's. I know it is important to some people and I respect that but not to the extent that it hinders manufacturers from spending money to improve.
 
StandOnIt said:
I heard it was around 1000 to 1500. They had a hell of a time selling the Superbirds many dealers said, not only was it ugly, it cost more than the regular sized Dodge with a 440 in it.
Click to expand...
I recall in '71.....maybe '72..... there was a '70 Superbird on the used car lot close to me..... they were asking 1900 dollars for it. It was there forever it seems....
 
kymartin6 said:
I recall in '71.....maybe '72..... there was a '70 Superbird on the used car lot close to me..... they were asking 1900 dollars for it. It was there forever it seems....
Click to expand...
And you didn't buy a couple for the barn?? :D
Back in the day, GM used to make each dealer take one car that was designed for Nascar.
Most of them were plain Jane with no appeal what so ever. The car on the track with decals and paint schemes all looked better.
 
StandOnIt said:
One of them was that they had to sell so many models in the showroom first before it saw any track time.
Click to expand...
I think they had to build a number of consumer cars based on the number of dealers. Ford would have to build more cars than Dodge.
 
kymartin6 said:
I recall in '71.....maybe '72..... there was a '70 Superbird on the used car lot close to me..... they were asking 1900 dollars for it. It was there forever it seems....
Click to expand...

The Monte-Carlo and Grand Prix Aero Coupes were so unpopular that GM had their field reps driving them and then running them through a GM sponsored auction with about 2-4000 miles on them. Not only did people not like the look they really disliked what the year window did to the trunk opening space. Back then we saw those things a boat anchors that wouldn't sell.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
The Monte-Carlo and Grand Prix Aero Coupes were so unpopular that GM had their field reps driving them and then running them through a GM sponsored auction with about 2-4000 miles on them. Not only did people not like the look they really disliked what the year window did to the trunk opening space. Back then we saw those things a boat anchors that wouldn't sell.
Click to expand...


The Monte Carlos weren't that bad. I know a couple people that ordered them brand new. The Pontiac was just a hot mess style wise. The biggest mistake GM made was not upgrading the drivetrain in those cars. Tuned port engines and a 5 speed option would have done wonders for the sale of those cars, although the notch back Monte Carlo SS sold pretty well. As for that old Mopar muscle, as late as the mid-80's you could pick that stuff up dirt cheap. Most people just didn't want it, and here in the Midwest, most of them rusted so fast you could almost watch it. Who knew some of those cars would be worth 100-400,000 dollars? One particularly rare Mopar sold for something like 4 million. In 1988, I picked up my 72 Chevelle SS 350 Convertible, a molested but rust free drivable car for $2800.00 Even that relatively modest car is worth about 10 times that now.
 
Will new pit stop rules even the field, make it safer and lower costs?

"I don't see how it's going to be safer," said 2015 Cup champion Kyle Busch. "You're taking 40 people of pit road, but you're now going to have an opportunity for 20 tires being loose?

"The amount of talent you have going over the wall is only so great to be able to carry and do the things they've got to do already."

Obviously, having one fewer over-the-wall crew member should cut costs, although NASCAR executive vice president Steve O'Donnell cited an attempt to create more parity in addition to safety as the main reasons for the change.

But Busch predicted that the best athletes who can adapt to the new rules will now be in even higher demand.

"Now you have to be even better than what you were before to do two jobs at once," Busch said. "The amount of talent pool that you have to be able to do that is a lot smaller. The teams that are going to be able to afford those guys are the bigger teams over the smaller teams."

http://www.espn.com/racing/nascar/story/_/id/21666913/nascar-new-pit-stop-rules-even-field
http://www.espn.com/racing/nascar/story/_/id/21666913/nascar-new-pit-stop-rules-even-field
 
Formerjackman said:
True, but the skill level just became even more specialized, and those that can do it well will command more money. I'd say the savings on this deal will be a net zero.
Click to expand...
I disagree. While those more capable crewmen may get more salary, that'll be more than offset by the savings on non-salary costs of that sixth man (benefits, travel, lodging, food, etc.).
 
No Yoder alien guns for Jr. :D, but they got him anyway.
The teams will lease the guns from the NASCAR-specified vendor, and Dale Earnhardt Jr. said his JR Motorsports Xfinity Series teams estimate the cost at approximately $30,000 a year per car.
"The gun thing is a little bit difficult for us because we weren't using that trick-damn gun and we weren't spending hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to develop one," he said.
"But now ... we've got to find that in our budget. We have every dollar accounted for to race all year, [and that money] is hard to find."
 
Cutting the number of people at the track is designed to cut costs but I think the big teams will establish support services near by.
 
StandOnIt said:
No Yoder alien guns for Jr. :D, but they got him anyway.
The teams will lease the guns from the NASCAR-specified vendor, and Dale Earnhardt Jr. said his JR Motorsports Xfinity Series teams estimate the cost at approximately $30,000 a year per car.
"The gun thing is a little bit difficult for us because we weren't using that trick-damn gun and we weren't spending hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to develop one," he said.
"But now ... we've got to find that in our budget. We have every dollar accounted for to race all year, [and that money] is hard to find."
Click to expand...

In typical NASCAR fashion, they took something that could have been REALLY cheap and simple, and made it neither cheap or simple. They COULD have just bought off the shelf impacts like the IR Thunder Gun, tested them at the R&D center for performance, sealed them and handed them out to the teams on race morning. After the race they could take them back to R&D and retest them. Any guns not meeting specs would be replaced. After so many races, the old guns could be retired and sold on e-bay as race used pit guns. Couple that with sealed non-adjustable air regulators, and you have a cheap solution. Heck, they probably could have gotten IR or CP or somebody to sponsor the whole thing and not cost the teams ANYTHING.
 
Formerjackman said:
If you severely limit the time the teams are actually in contact with them, it would make it much harder to screw with them.
Click to expand...
Like just before the race starts, the teams can not leave pit road with, heck, they cant leave their pit box with them.
 
IF the problem is the racing, why is NASCAR spending time on something that is not racing? Bizarre.
 
Formerjackman said:
In typical NASCAR fashion, they took something that could have been REALLY cheap and simple, and made it neither cheap or simple. They COULD have just bought off the shelf impacts like the IR Thunder Gun, tested them at the R&D center for performance, sealed them and handed them out to the teams on race morning. After the race they could take them back to R&D and retest them. Any guns not meeting specs would be replaced. After so many races, the old guns could be retired and sold on e-bay as race used pit guns. Couple that with sealed non-adjustable air regulators, and you have a cheap solution. Heck, they probably could have gotten IR or CP or somebody to sponsor the whole thing and not cost the teams ANYTHING.
Click to expand...

You are correct. At a micro level your post explains how NASCAR has been managed and why it is floundering.
 
Revman said:
IF the problem is the racing, why is NASCAR spending time on something that is not racing? Bizarre.
Click to expand...

As far as I can tell Nascar does not think there is any problem with the racing as I know Brian France has said the racing has never been better than today.
 
The Nascar rules makers can't see past the end of their nose.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
The Monte-Carlo and Grand Prix Aero Coupes were so unpopular that GM had their field reps driving them and then running them through a GM sponsored auction with about 2-4000 miles on them. Not only did people not like the look they really disliked what the year window did to the trunk opening space. Back then we saw those things a boat anchors that wouldn't sell.
Click to expand...
I remember those cars. But what I most remember is how many of those I saw here in Honolulu. Many Police Officers here drive "subsidized" private vehicles while on duty. When I arrived here in the 80's the most popular patrol car was the Monte Carlo SS Aero Coupe. The town was filthy with them. So they were sales slugs? I guess they found their place to dump them here. Now a days the patrol vehicle of choice is the Toyota 4Runner.
 
Hawaii808 said:
I remember those cars. But what I most remember is how many of those I saw here in Honolulu. Many Police Officers here drive "subsidized" private vehicles while on duty. When I arrived here in the 80's the most popular patrol car was the Monte Carlo SS Aero Coupe. The town was filthy with them. So they were sales slugs? I guess they found their place to dump them here. Now a days the patrol vehicle of choice is the Toyota 4Runner.
Click to expand...

Very interesting
 
I’m not liking this new pit crew rule with only 5 guys over.. I don’t say a lot about not liking something when it comes to this sport.. but 5 guys over and slowing down pit time and having one guy do more I think it’s actually a step back... I love seeing the fast pit time... now it will be slow with prob more tires flying over the track.. I just think this a wrong move
 
Thegeneral23 said:
I’m not liking this new pit crew rule with only 5 guys over.. I don’t say a lot about not liking something when it comes to this sport.. but 5 guys over and slowing down pit time and having one guy do more I think it’s actually a step back... I love seeing the fast pit time... now it will be slow with prob more tires flying over the track.. I just think this a wrong move
Click to expand...
Speed's relative. It's still crew vs. crew. That's what it's really about anyway. I don't have a clue what the difference will be between a pit stop time in 2017 vs. 2018. I'll throw out a figure of 2 seconds slower this coming year. If they are all dealing with that same increase, what does it really matter? As far as tires loose on pit road..... The penalty for that can be pretty severe. I think teams will still get the job done.
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
Speed's relative. It's still crew vs. crew. That's what it's really about anyway. I don't have a clue what the difference will be between a pit stop time in 2017 vs. 2018. I'll throw out a figure of 2 seconds slower this coming year. If they are all dealing with that same increase, what does it really matter? As far as tires loose on pit road..... The penalty for that can be pretty severe. I think teams will still get the job done.
Click to expand...
So you like the move ? Isn’t the whole thing about speed and getting faster and not slower ?
 
Thegeneral23 said:
So you like the move ? Isn’t the whole thing about speed and getting faster and not slower ?
Click to expand...
The move doesn't bother me. It's still going to be every bit about speed and who gets the job done quicker. There is going to be a new benchmark this season of the amount of time that a pit stop takes. As time goes on, that time will decrease. It's always going to be about teams getting faster.

Does it really bother you that they are going to be slower, as a whole, this season over last? That's something that I don't really find all that important.
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
The move doesn't bother me. It's still going to be every bit about speed and who gets the job done quicker. There is going to be a new benchmark this season of the amount of time that a pit stop takes. As time goes on, that time will decrease. It's always going to be about teams getting faster.

Does it really bother you that they are going to be slower, as a whole, this season over last? That's something that I don't really find all that important.
Click to expand...
Ok cool ... maybe it won’t be so bad lol.. I was just thinking it was going to be really slow because of only 5 guys.. Steve larte or whoever u spell his name said he didn’t like it either and said he thought it should be more guys over.. I just didn’t see what the prob was with 6 ... ohh well I’m excited for season can’t wait to be in Daytona!
 
I agree that the overall speed of the stop is not that important, (although any unscheduled stop just became that much more of a penalty) but I just don't think the stops will be as fluid and as pleasing to the eye. There is a REASON that pits stops had seven people over the wall, there were 7 individual jobs to be done. The elimination of the catch can made it six, which is OK, but there are still SIX jobs to be done and only five people to do it now. I guess the question I have is if you are going to eliminate ONE tire carrier, why not eliminate BOTH? The changes are also going to put any car that needs a wedge or track bar adjustment at an even greater disadvantage to cars that don't. You may see crew chiefs try even harder to fix the handling with air pressure instead of going to the wrench next year.
 
Formerjackman said:
I agree that the overall speed of the stop is not that important, (although any unscheduled stop just became that much more of a penalty) but I just don't think the stops will be as fluid and as pleasing to the eye. There is a REASON that pits stops had seven people over the wall, there were 7 individual jobs to be done. The elimination of the catch can made it six, which is OK, but there are still SIX jobs to be done and only five people to do it now. I guess the question I have is if you are going to eliminate ONE tire carrier, why not eliminate BOTH? The changes are also going to put any car that needs a wedge or track bar adjustment at an even greater disadvantage to cars that don't. You may see crew chiefs try even harder to fix the handling with air pressure instead of going to the wrench next year.
Click to expand...
This Is basically what I was saying too.. 5 just don’t seem like enough to be honest and while it can prob get done.. it’ might not be on eye.. it just seem like there asking 5 guys to do to much ..
 
Thegeneral23 said:
I’m not liking this new pit crew rule with only 5 guys over.. I don’t say a lot about not liking something when it comes to this sport.. but 5 guys over and slowing down pit time and having one guy do more I think it’s actually a step back... I love seeing the fast pit time... now it will be slow with prob more tires flying over the track.. I just think this a wrong move
Click to expand...
You probably weren't a fan then but 15 or 20 years ago, TV commentator and Cup champion Benny Parsons had a standing offer. He'd give $100 to each crewman (back then it was 7) if they could turn in a pit stop in under 13 seconds. He carried the cash with him every week, but he didn't have to pay off more than a couple of times.

My point is that at one time a 13-second pit stop was phenomenal. Fans accepted stops in the mid-13s as great, and the high-13 or low-14 second range was considered normal. It's just a question of what you're used to.

But assuming the tire changes take longer (which has yet to be demonstrated), there should be no excuse for leaving without a full gas tank.
 
Last edited:
Charlie Spencer said:
You probably weren't a fan then but 15 or 20 years ago, TV commentator and Cup champion Benny Parsons had a standing offer. He'd give $100 to each crewman (back then it was 7) if they could turn in a pit stop in under 13 seconds. He carried the cash with him every week, but he didn't have to pay off more than a couple of times.

My point is that at one time a 13-second pit stop was phenomenal. Fans accepted stops in the mid-13s as great, and the high-13 or low-14 second range was considered normal. It's just a question of what you're used to.

But assuming the tire changes take longer (which has yet to be demonstrated), there should be no excuse for leaving without a full gas tank.
Click to expand...
Thanku I hope it works out
 
I'll be curious to see how it works out. Initially there will probably be several ways of doing it until one team procedure proves to be the best. It reminds me how they innovated when they stopped teams from rolling the tire to the pit wall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom