THE GRMers REINVENT NASCAR THREAD!

How about this, we race stock cars.

You can strip and cage them, total weight must be what it was from factory.

Classes -

$25k and under must sell 10,000 him olfaction units a year

$50k - 5000 sold

$100k - 2000 sold

I do not like the idea of running stock unibody tubs at Daytona at 200 mph. Something's got to give in order to keep the racing safe. So, I'd propose sticking to the formula of a tube framed car, but I'd make some other changes.

The biggest complaint is that the cars look too much alike. So - use a whole body template based on a production car with 4 seats made in the last 3 years with a minimum sales volume of 15,000 units. If a manufacturer wants to deliver a crazy aero package, bring on the homologation specials!

I am not sure if the on track racing would really be better if they ran production engines, although requiring Toyota to build a fleet of pushrod V8 Camries could make commuting a bit more interesting. But I'd like to see something other than restrictor plates for slowing down the cars on superspeedways - something that will get the cars a bit more spread out.

So, here's my proposed substitute for restrictor plates. On a superspeedway, you have an engine choice. One, you can run a standard NASCAR V8, except with a maximum displacement of 180 cubic inches. (Imagine the sound that would make at redline!) Two, you can use a production four cylinder block and head (if there's an option that pairs with the body, you get that motor, if not, NASCAR picks which motor from the manufacture's lineup), naturally aspirated, but anything you can fit in the production block and head is fair game.

Go back to the rules for points, qualifying, and cautions from say, 1991. That's super-easy to implement. If you really must have a "more exciting finish", why not make a handful (say 5 or less) races double points (Daytona 500, Talladega, Charlotte, the last race).

Now, for races, let's dump almost all of the second races at the same tracks. I can see Daytona and Charlotte getting 2, but everybody else can suck an egg. That frees up a bunch of weekends for some better tracks. Let's bring back some more short tracks like North Wilkseboro, Bowman-Gray, etc. Run a dirt classic at Eldora. Do the July Daytona race on the road course (how berkeleying epic would that be?!?). Do the street course at Long Beach.

That should fix a good 75% of the problems. Now, for the cars. NASCAR has been incrementally improving them, but let's get real, there's nothing stock and there's not a whole lot of innovation outside of the valvetrain and shocks on these things. I don't think anybody is crazy enough to take a unit-body car around a superspeedway at 200 MPH, so I don't think we can change the chassis. It would do better with less aero, and honestly that's easy to fix. Stock bodies! Run real Fusion, SS, and Camry sheetmetal and you'll see a dramatic reduction in speed, not to mention way more fan involvement. Unfortunately though, none of those cars are "exciting" except maybe the SS, so let's go ahead and switch to 2-door coupes, too. Mustang, Camaro, Challenger, Lexus RC-F (how hawt would that be?), and that opens the door for more (GT-R? Genesis Coupe? Accord Coupe?). As for the actual mechanicals, leave most of the car alone. Honestly, trying to get an IRS setup to live on a superspeedway would be asinine, so leave the stick axle and suspensions alone. Let them run 18" wheels though! I would do a stock block rule, but corporate (so Toyota could run a Lexus V8 block, etc). Factory bare castings on the heads, then go to town, EFI only. Imagine DOHC 5.2L GT350R motors screaming next to 7.0L LS7's and thumping SRT 392 Hemi's, and add the banshee wail of the RC-F's V8. Dump the 4-speed for a sequential 6-speed, even a spec unit would be okay. If you really want to shake it up, let boosted smaller motors in. Maybe we'd get an EcoBoost 3.5TT Mustang if it was allowed in NASCAR?

Maybe require the chassis to be a beefed-up tube frame reproduction of the car they're intending it to be?

Honestly, the cars are fine the way they are. Cheap, sturdy, fast are all good things when building a race car. I would think about losing the common template and go back to something a wee bit more production looking, but you would have to get the manufacturers on board. They might not be interested in homologating goofy looking Monte Carlos again. I might mandate a super speedway aero body, and a Martinsville body that looks exactly like a Camry. They are completely different cars anyway, a second body style wouldn't add much cost.

I philosophically don't like the restrictor plate stuff, but lots do, and sometimes it creates some spectacular racing. I'd lose the wide 1 1/2 mile ovals, or rebuild them to act like Darlington. Michigan, California, Vegas, etc all bore me to tears. There was a $50 million lottery here a few weeks ago. Winning that, I would have rebuilt North Wilksborough.

A couple more road races would be cool. I think it would be hilarious to watch 40 3500 pound cars pounding through the Corkscrew.

gearheadmb wrote: A lot of these sounds like Pirelli or Trans Am to me. I don't know why those aren't more popular.

Because they're boring as hell to watch?

There are already plenty of race series based on production cars and run on road courses. Nobody cares.

Maybe instead of trying to think of ways to berk up a series that is popular, why not figure out what NASCAR does right and apply it to one of the many poorly attended road racing series.

Good luck with that, since you won't be the first to try. Get it right and you will be a billionaire.

Right hand turns.

Production floor pan must remain intact.

In reply to Ian F:

i think its less applying what nascar does "right" than luck...like cell phone, everyones got an iphone or MAYBE a Samsung, why no nokia, htc, or kyrocera? not cause they are doing anything wrong but the popularity has taken precedence over everything else...

me? id cancel nascar entirely. no more roundy round. if people like car races they will either choose another type or just keep watching football, theres no cure to nascar to make it better, its already been too borked by rules. like some people want fuel injection and dohc yet the other half still wants only carbs and pushrods. the only cure I THINK is to say bork it and start over.

Ian F wrote:

gearheadmb wrote: A lot of these sounds like Pirelli or Trans Am to me. I don't know why those aren't more popular.

Because they're boring as hell to watch? There are already plenty of race series based on production cars and run on road courses. Nobody cares. Maybe instead of trying to think of ways to berk up a series that is popular, why not figure out what NASCAR does right and apply it to one of the many poorly attended road racing series. Good luck with that, since you won't be the first to try. Get it right and you will be a billionaire.

Don't some of the superspeedways have infield tracks? road racing would be more popular if the cars weren't hidden 90 percent of the time. I'd like to have my cake and eat it as well. do 1/2 the oval track, then divert them into the infield for a road course.

In reply to Streetwiseguy: They ran the corkscrew in the past, they could do it again.
I would say it would be more awsome than hilarious.

Now if there were 10 Miatas on the track at the same time, that would be hilarious.

For the series as a whole: I'd reduce the number of races by 30-40% to make races more meaningful. I'd try to setup multi-week events where teams could run a race on an oval and a road race on consecutive weekends either at the same track (Daytona or Indy) or at nearby tracks (Atlanta/Road Atlanta, Richmond/VIR, Milwaukee/Road America, Texas/COTA, etc). I might toy with racing in the rain too. I'd make an effort to reduce ticket costs a bit as well. I see no reason why infield tickets couldn't be $20.

For the cars: I'd lift the powerplant restrictions to anything production based (not necessarily 100% stock), with the only limit being fuel usage. And I'd like to see more differentiation in the bodies of the cars.

bludroptop wrote: Austrailan V8 Supercars Change the accents to North Carolina. Soup.

100% this

Add a chicane to one straight.

Adding a maximum fuel allotment for the race would be interesting, as long as it was kept to gasoline.

In reply to STM317: The number of races means more people around the country get to see racing in person.

I would like to more of all kinds of racing.

The Nationwide series ran in the rain in Montreal. I believe they will run any of their road races in the rain, to a point. The Daytona 24hr race I went to a few years ago was suspended for a while due to rain (what a wet and awesome weekend).

End result of this theoretical exercise should be to: Get more people involved with racing. Especially road racing.

Two words: figure eight

PushrodRWD wrote: In reply to STM317: The number of races means more people around the country get to see racing in person. I would like to more of all kinds of racing. The Nationwide series ran in the rain in Montreal. I believe they will run any of their road races in the rain, to a point. The Daytona 24hr race I went to a few years ago was suspended for a while due to rain (what a wet and awesome weekend). End result of this theoretical exercise should be to: Get more people involved with racing. Especially road racing.

I get that argument. The problem NASCAR is having now though, is they don't come close to filling the stands at their tracks all over the country, so it's almost like they've gone too far in that direction. It's basically supply and demand, and they've increased the supply beyond what the demand is asking for. I think 2 big reasons for that are ticket prices, and the fact that people aren't motivated to travel to a track 5 hours away when there will be a closer race in a month, or they can sit on their couch and catch it for free. To get people in the stands, they need to make it more affordable, and make the racing more interesting/diverse. Think how interesting the championship might be if you had oval specialists vs road course specialists all year at every track?

Scheduling consecutive races with different disciplines in the same region would give people more options for traveling to the events, would provide more exposure to road racing and would bring new fans into the series. Make it a 2 week festival, with events like concerts or car shows in between the races at as many places as you can. If you have to do just an oval, or just a road race in a certain area to get coverage in that region, then so be it. If you spread out the venues a bit, I'm sure you could still have a racetrack within a 3 or 4 hour drive of 90% of the US population, and I think you'd draw in many more people at each race.

I was about to say support series with production based 1/2 ton trucks. (sort of like V8 Utes/V8 Supercars) That would only be interesting on road courses though probably. So I guess save that answer for a different question.

kazoospec wrote: Run 2 Dayton races. Second time on the Road Course.

Run 250 miles on the oval and then 250 on the road course and you have to use the same car with out changing anything. The winner's (if there are two) then have a best 2 out of 3 drag race down pit road to determine the event winner. The drag race has to be done on the same tires and you can not add any fuel.

Storz wrote:

bludroptop wrote: Austrailan V8 Supercars Change the accents to North Carolina. Soup.

100% this

You guys do realize that the Aussie rules are quickly becoming spec, too, right? Like Nascar, the chassis are almost identical, and bear no resemblance to what they are supposed to be.

Just like all other racing, it's 99% entertainment, 1% useful tech.

chiodos wrote: In reply to Ian F: i think its less applying what nascar does "right" than luck...like cell phone, everyones got an iphone or MAYBE a Samsung, why no nokia, htc, or kyrocera? not cause they are doing anything wrong but the popularity has taken precedence over everything else... me? id cancel nascar entirely. no more roundy round. if people like car races they will either choose another type or just keep watching football, theres no cure to nascar to make it better, its already been too borked by rules. like some people want fuel injection and dohc yet the other half still wants only carbs and pushrods. the only cure I THINK is to say bork it and start over.

So get rid of the most popular motorsport in the US? That's pretty extreme, it seems.

alfadriver wrote:

Storz wrote:

bludroptop wrote: Austrailan V8 Supercars Change the accents to North Carolina. Soup.

100% this

You guys do realize that the Aussie rules are quickly becoming spec, too, right? Like Nascar, the chassis are almost identical, and bear no resemblance to what they are supposed to be. Just like all other racing, it's 99% entertainment, 1% useful tech.

No. They've forgotten that.

Denial. It's not just a river in Egypt...

Buy car on Monday from dealer. Don't open the hood. Install a bunch of safety E36 M3. Race car on Sunday. Sell whatever is left on Monday.

Repeat as necessary. Teams are free to switch car companies from week to week if they decide one brand is faster.

alfadriver wrote:

Storz wrote:

bludroptop wrote: Austrailan V8 Supercars Change the accents to North Carolina. Soup.

100% this

You guys do realize that the Aussie rules are quickly becoming spec, too, right? Like Nascar, the chassis are almost identical, and bear no resemblance to what they are supposed to be. Just like all other racing, it's 99% entertainment, 1% useful tech.

Couldn't care less about the spec aspect. I'm focused entirely on the quality of entertainment. What I've seen of the Aussie racing is very compelling, but would still allow for the driver celebrity, sponsorship exposure and traveling circus freakshow that is NASCAR.

Run 1/2 the race the traditional counterclockwise. Then halftime (take a lesson from NFL) followed by the second half of the race running clockwise.

Fun and confusion all around!