What Do you Think of the New Package?

StandOnIt said:
yeah buddy, those things were a hand full..all three cautions worth, 2 of em were the stages. Wosh, Zoooom. :D It's tough for some to understand but 4 times the down force with only double the speed. Over 900 pounds more at 200 than at 170. That is all things being equal, I have no idea what they added with this package
Click to expand...

You know damned well that they were much more difficult and captivating to drive, making it much more enjoyable to watch...

I will gladly compromise a finishing interval versus draft-heavy racing and lack of speed and skill.


Remember a couple months back when I told you it didnt matter what the racing looked like. you would love it and I would hate it. Well, here we are. :D
 
yep, well you complain away, see if it changes a damn thing, and I will do what I do deal? I think it has been an interesting season so far. Will the teams be able to turn it into a single lane follow the leader fest on the 1.5's? Time will tell.
 
He might do ok over there at Hendrick, I don't think SHR or Penske would be a good choice unless he left his helmet on all of the time.
 
jaqua19 said:
Bobby .. I can't tell if you are serious lol

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...



Kyle is well known for his setup ability's and good feedback, HMS appears to be lost. Look at the KBM trucks, I think that input from Kyle keeps them competitive. Even when HMS gets a car close to being right, they can't keep a hold on it for an entire race.
 
DUN24 said:
You know damned well that they were much more difficult and captivating to drive, making it much more enjoyable to watch...

I will gladly compromise a finishing interval versus draft-heavy racing and lack of speed and skill.


Remember a couple months back when I told you it didnt matter what the racing looked like, you would love it and I would hate it a Well, here we are. :D
Click to expand...

My recollections as well.
 
DUN24 said:
Nah, never. You were just thrilled when they decided to fundamentally change the racing for no reason and think its ridiculous to think otherwise.
Click to expand...

I don’t understand how a race fan could like the 2019 rules over 2018 version but some do and I see it as a personal preference.
 
Speedbowl14 said:
That's this year's buzz word, last year's word was "OSS", the year before was "en/cucumbered".
Click to expand...

I think the use of the word package is kosher when describing the 2019 rules. If I was in the 6th grade I would probably think the use of the word package was funny
 
kyle18fan said:
Kyle is well known for his setup ability's and good feedback, HMS appears to be lost. Look at the KBM trucks, I think that input from Kyle keeps them competitive. Even when HMS gets a car close to being right, they can't keep a hold on it for an entire race.
Click to expand...

Sure is great having Joe Gibbs engineers work on his trucks. Not to mention Toyota outspends Ford and Chevrolet by a lot. Its just not by accident, money and resources go a long way.

Also, that's why Toyota is successful. They are not afraid to spend on their teams and are constantly trying to find more.
 
StandOnIt said:
using this place for a comparison? laughable. Truex lapped all but 9 cars, intervals perfect for single file racing, compared to below, Busch overcomes a speeding penalty, and a much closer finish between competitors. seeing is not believing around here, bias is. :D

Click to expand...


Manufactured smaller time gaps because of neutered cars makes the race better? I think not.

2 of the fastest cars (Harvick/Larson) in the 18' race both had damage after racing each other hard early btw. 1 recovered, 1 didn't. Busch led 62 laps.
 
you keep thinkin not. It's interesting, I couldn't complain all year about racing myself, I'm not here to constantly complain, I haven't found it helps much of nothin. :idunno:
 
Turtle84 said:
Manufactured smaller time gaps because of neutered cars makes the race better? I think not.

2 of the fastest cars (Harvick/Larson) in the 18' race both had damage after racing each other hard early btw. 1 recovered, 1 didn't. Busch led 62 laps.
Click to expand...

As near as I can tell the idea behind the 2019 rules was to create an illusion of closer competition by having cars run closer together. The best cars are still the best cars so why does it make any difference if there is a 5 second or 10 second separation?

The gap between the haves and have nots hasn’t changed and we have dumbed down racing to show for it. This type of racing is like moving your video game from expert to intermediate!
 
IanMcVittie said:
I think the use of the word package is kosher when describing the 2019 rules. If I was in the 6th grade I would probably think the use of the word package was funny.
Click to expand...
No attempt at humour was made.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
yeah I like to make stuff up also. But the racing is closer so far overall, it is doing what Nascar said it would for the most part. Not all races can be expected to be barn burners, and it is nice to see passing and side by side racing compared to mostly single file follow the leader this year. Seems many like it, I know I do.
 
Kiante said:
Sure is great having Joe Gibbs engineers work on his trucks. Not to mention Toyota outspends Ford and Chevrolet by a lot. Its just not by accident, money and resources go a long way.

Also, that's why Toyota is successful. They are not afraid to spend on their teams and are constantly trying to find more.
Click to expand...



The ass that meets the seat brings it all together, the engineers don't drive em and keep up with the adjustments during the race.
 
Kiante said:
Sure is great having Joe Gibbs engineers work on his trucks. Not to mention Toyota outspends Ford and Chevrolet by a lot. Its just not by accident, money and resources go a long way.

Also, that's why Toyota is successful. They are not afraid to spend on their teams and are constantly trying to find more.
Click to expand...

IDK how much any of the manufacturers spend on Nascar but if Toyota is willing to work harder and smarter plus spend more dough good for them.
 
I wanted to wait into they got several races in before offering any comments on the new package.

First of all, what is the purpose of the new package? If it's to keep cars closer together, it's not working. You need to have them on short tracks for that to work. Second, it seems to me the racing is no better or no worse with this package. The restarts can get pretty intense, but that's about all I see. The one negative I saw was at Atlanta and a little bit at California where the downforce is so great in the corners we didn't see the cars sliding around on old tires like we used to.

I don't have a problem with slowing the cars down on the bigger tracks. But they've slowed them down so much that most drivers can hold the cars wide open for a number of laps on new tires. The cars should be made harder to drive. That's what makes these drivers the top of the sport. They need work to do on this package or scrap it altogether.
 
MRM said:
I wanted to wait into they got several races in before offering any comments on the new package.

First of all, what is the purpose of the new package? If it's to keep cars closer together, it's not working. You need to have them on short tracks for that to work. Second, it seems to me the racing is no better or no worse with this package. The restarts can get pretty intense, but that's about all I see. The one negative I saw was at Atlanta and a little bit at California where the downforce is so great in the corners we didn't see the cars sliding around on old tires like we used to.

I don't have a problem with slowing the cars down on the bigger tracks. But they've slowed them down so much that most drivers can hold the cars wide open for a number of laps on new tires. The cars should be made harder to drive. That's what makes these drivers the top of the sport. They need work to do on this package or scrap it altogether.
Click to expand...

I think you have made a lot of good points. I think the main purpose of changing things up was to have the cars run closer together in order to make it seem like the competition was closer.

The TV ratings have slight upticks this year which is huge compared to all the losses for so many years. IDK if it would have been that way had last year’s rules been in place or not.

I can’t see myself becoming a fan of this racing style but IDK how the general public feels about it. If people like it and it gives new life the series it is the right approach, IMO
 
IanMcVittie said:
I think you have made a lot of good points. I think the main purpose of changing things up was to have the cars run closer together in order to make it seem like the competition was closer.

The TV ratings have slight upticks this year which is huge compared to all the losses for so many years. IDK if it would have been that way had last year’s rules been in place or not.

I can’t see myself becoming a fan of this racing style but IDK how the general public feels about it. If people like it and it gives new life the series it is the right approach, IMO
Click to expand...



Its early in the season, folks are watching to judge the rule changes. 2 or 3 groaners in a row will not yield good results in future races.
 
Nascar or stock cars were never meant to be raced on large tracks. Back when (early 70's) I raced on 1/3 mile and the largest track was 3/5 ths of a mile. Yes lots of cars got lapped but the idea of working your way around these cars and trying to catch or pass the one in front of you was what excited the fans and the sport was growing every where including Nascar.
Then they tried to race the big tracks ( it was all about the money) and the racing kept getting worse as they kept changing the cars to try and make it better. They even went so far as to design a totally new car ( COT ) which was a big failure.
You want to improve racing? Change the tracks NOT the cars. Break up those long straightaways by adding chicanes. Personally I would like to see the whole track made shorter.
 
Team Penske said:
Nascar or stock cars were never meant to be raced on large tracks. Back when (early 70's) I raced on 1/3 mile and the largest track was 3/5 ths of a mile. Yes lots of cars got lapped but the idea of working your way around these cars and trying to catch or pass the one in front of you was what excited the fans and the sport was growing every where including Nascar.
Then they tried to race the big tracks ( it was all about the money) and the racing kept getting worse as they kept changing the cars to try and make it better. They even went so far as to design a totally new car ( COT ) which was a big failure.
You want to improve racing? Change the tracks NOT the cars. Break up those long straightaways by adding chicanes. Personally I would like to see the whole track made shorter.
Click to expand...

So one day a guy says these things aren't meant to race on large tracks? When the story is that big Bill France was building the Daytona and Talledega tracks to compete with the number one motorsport IndyCar at Indianapolis,.consequently catching and passing that racing series and never looking back. No competition to this day, expanding worldwide in Canada, Mexico and Europe as we speak. The fans have spoken that they want more short tracks and road courses..hide and watch what happens in the future. One of the surveys was asking about using the Daytona road course and it got rave reviews. Exciting changes are coming IMO. Like Penske says, drop the hammer. :D
Roger Penske: NASCAR must have Gen 7 by 2021; wants doubleheaders
https://sports.yahoo.com/roger-penske-nascar-must-gen-211247237.html
 
Team Penske said:
Nascar or stock cars were never meant to be raced on large tracks. Back when (early 70's) I raced on 1/3 mile and the largest track was 3/5 ths of a mile. Yes lots of cars got lapped but the idea of working your way around these cars and trying to catch or pass the one in front of you was what excited the fans and the sport was growing every where including Nascar.
Then they tried to race the big tracks ( it was all about the money) and the racing kept getting worse as they kept changing the cars to try and make it better. They even went so far as to design a totally new car ( COT ) which was a big failure.
You want to improve racing? Change the tracks NOT the cars. Break up those long straightaways by adding chicanes. Personally I would like to see the whole track made shorter.
Click to expand...

In a short period of time Nascar 2 races at Wilkesboro, 2 at the old Atlanta, 2 from Rockingham and 1 from Darlington. They were replaced by souless behemoths which led us to where we are today.

While I like shorter tracks I think it is important to have some variety. Nascar is deep down some rabbit holes but if they can get some interesting track configurations and a decent car it could be a nice little series. I hope the stuff they are doing this year is just an ill advised bandaid.
 
StandOnIt said:
So one day a guy says these things aren't meant to race on large tracks? When the story is that big Bill France was building the Daytona and Talledega tracks to compete with the number one motorsport IndyCar at Indianapolis,.consequently catching and passing that racing series and never looking back. No competition to this day, expanding worldwide in Canada, Mexico and Europe as we speak. The fans have spoken that they want more short tracks and road courses..hide and watch what happens in the future. One of the surveys was asking about using the Daytona road course and it got rave reviews. Exciting changes are coming IMO. Like Penske says, drop the hammer. :D
Roger Penske: NASCAR must have Gen 7 by 2021; wants doubleheaders
https://sports.yahoo.com/roger-penske-nascar-must-gen-211247237.html
Click to expand...

“Because the revenue side is not growing the way you want to, and the costs are continuing to go up.”

Not only is the revenue side not growing in many cases it is shrinking. Roger is a smart man and understands that the only way to remain viable is to significantly cut costs.

Hopefully while costs are being cut they will go ahead and cut downforce too!
 
Penske talks strongly about standardized parts and engines that will be raced for three races as a way to cut costs. Detractors will fill the pages with IROC esk comments despite those types of changes specifically have brought Indycar back from the brink and brought IROC the problem of having record entries for their races and having enough room in the pits for them. Using engines for something like 1200 laps plus practice and qualifying could in a way be shades of the old endurance races, and or the doubleheaders could have a single engine rule that could make things a bit more interesting.
 
It really doesn’t matter what any of us think about cutting costs for NASCAR’s teams as it is not optional. Left to their own devices teams will spend themselves into oblivion so someone has to step in and do it for them. More money may equal greater speed but it surely doesn’t always make for better or more entertaining racing.

I don’t have an issue with doubleheaders but why not make it interesting and have the first race be the back markers and have nots and the second race consist of the bigger money teams. It’s all on the table!
 
Reading the posts on multiple threads the one thing that sticks out is we seem to forget that these big tracks really were never this fast. Like the top speeds have absolutely exploded in the last 10-15 years which has caused such aerodynamic problems so the throttling back isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Honestly last years body with this engine would be perfect in my opinion for intermediates as it appears there will not be much drafting so the stability is not needed
 
I like the new package. Ford's OSS gift of last year is over. Back to earning it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom