Today marks the end of an era...

So why did a Nascar driver say that the technology was 35 yrs old ?

Uh..because it is?

erohslc wrote: Go find the archives from Car & Driver, read about Patrick Bedard's foray into oval racing with NASCAR and Indycar. His comments about driving the car, car control, etc. should serve as a cautionary lesson to anyone talking NASCAR smack.

Linky?

David

DrBoost wrote: I mean, other major forms of racing are using today's technology and even developing tomorrow's technology. NASCAR has done neither for 60 years.

This.

And I raced circle track for years.I appreciate the skill it takes to run these races (and not get bored doing it as well).

So why no just go straight to Direct Injection?

ReverendDexter wrote:

DrBoost wrote: NASCAR has strayed far from it's roots (productin-based cars) and has alienated most of it's fans.

Huh? I thought NASCAR was the #1 most popular sport in the US as of a few years ago, even more popular that football or baseball. How could it achieve that if most of it's fans have been alienated? Or are you referencing old-school fans?

Yeah, I understand that the spectatorship has been declining? I'm not sure as I have NO interest in such an archaic form of racing. Even when they turn right and left it's still boring.

DrBoost wrote:

ReverendDexter wrote:

DrBoost wrote: NASCAR has strayed far from it's roots (productin-based cars) and has alienated most of it's fans.

Huh? I thought NASCAR was the #1 most popular sport in the US as of a few years ago, even more popular that football or baseball. How could it achieve that if most of it's fans have been alienated? Or are you referencing old-school fans?

Yeah, I understand that the spectatorship has been declining? I'm not sure as I have NO interest in such an archaic form of racing. Even when they turn right and left it's still boring.

the amount of people that go to the races is declining from the insane highs it reached during the 90's and the first half of the 00's. the tracks built tens of thousands of more seats to meet the demand of the time, and the places look empty now that they are back to the popularity levels they were at 20 years ago. Daytona even tore down some grandstands a few years ago- that's where the "Budweiser party deck" or whatever it's called came from.

NASCAR hasn't had "production based" cars since at least the early 70's when they started allowing full tube chassis for safety, and the last production sheetmetal was hung on those one-off tube chassis about 10 years ago. Ford started the big trend of getting away from production sheetmetal when they somehow got NASCAR to allow them to put a Taurus nose on what was essentially the Grand Prix/Monte Carlo body for the 98 season. and with the COT that came out a few years ago, NASCAR got away from the "stock" floorpans that the teams had to use up to that point. they still use "production" sheetmetal for the hood, and roof and specific noses for each different make that are provided by the manufacturer, but other than the shape of the rear windows and quarter windows and the contour for the headlight and grille stickers, they bear no resemblance to anything you can buy at a dealer.. but that's ok- go to a local dirt track on a friday or saturday night and the "stock" cars in any of the classes above the entry level "bomber" classes don't have any more "stock" parts on them, either, and they are also powered by archaic OHV V8 engines..

in other words- don't get all caught up in the "stock" part of "stock car" and just enjoy the racing for what it is.. if you can't do that, then watch something else.

novaderrik wrote: in other words- don't get all caught up in the "stock" part of "stock car" and just enjoy the racing for what it is.. if you can't do that, then watch something else.

I can't enjoy the racing. I'm not jumping on the bandwagon here but seriously, watching cars turn left for a few hours is boring. I remember when I was a kid. Man I thought cars were cool! Then I saw RACING! I nearly wet my pants. What!? I can watch cars race at way over 150 mph on TV!?!? Count me in! I was in heaven. Then I watched it. I didn't understand, they just went in a big circle for a few hours. There were crashes every now and then, that was cool. But even at that tender age I didn't see how anyone could sit in front of a tv for a few hours and watch that. Now, WRC, that's a different story. Cars resemble what I see on the road every day. The condition change all the time and it LOOKS like it take balls and skill to do. Not that NASCAR doesn't take skill or balls, it just doesn't look like it.

DrBoost wrote:

novaderrik wrote: in other words- don't get all caught up in the "stock" part of "stock car" and just enjoy the racing for what it is.. if you can't do that, then watch something else.

I can't enjoy the racing. I'm not jumping on the bandwagon here but seriously, watching cars turn left for a few hours is boring. I remember when I was a kid. Man I thought cars were cool! Then I saw RACING! I nearly wet my pants. What!? I can watch cars race at way over 150 mph on TV!?!? Count me in! I was in heaven. Then I watched it. I didn't understand, they just went in a big circle for a few hours. There were crashes every now and then, that was cool. But even at that tender age I didn't see how anyone could sit in front of a tv for a few hours and watch that. Now, WRC, that's a different story. Cars resemble what I see on the road every day. The condition change all the time and it LOOKS like it take balls and skill to do. Not that NASCAR doesn't take skill or balls, it just doesn't look like it.

then watch something else. it's not for you. it's just that easy.

when i watch it, i see more than people turning left for 3 hours.. i see strategy being played out.. mind games.. frustration building and then getting released... coalitions being forged and broken in the heat of the moment at 190mph... using aerodynamics to loosen guys up and move them out of the way, and if that fails, just using the bumper... pit crews winning or losing races over stupid things like that lug nut that got stuck in a socket and almost cost Smoke a ton of time in that one pit stop yesterday. the "low tech" nature of the cars and the way it affects the way they do things is one of the things i like about it, along with the "good ol' boy" camaraderie that exists between not only the people on the same teams but across all the teams along pit road. does any Formula 1 team ever help literally push a competing team in a different make of car to a victory like Jeff Gordon in his Chevy did with Trevor Bayne in his Ford at the Daytona 500?

to all the NASCAR haters...^^^^^ well said ^^^^^^

cwh wrote: Aussie V8 Challenge. That's what NASCAR should have been. Corners, air jacks, sequential trannys, and built on a real car. And some damn good racing.

This.

Aus V8 Supercars is such an awesome series.

I'm not a fan of NASCAR and I really don't like F1, but I like to race and watch racing. Mostly production based cars on road courses, both to race and watch. I'm surprised this forum has so many "high tech" lovers. Personally from a racing stand point I don't see a difference between NASCAR and F1, obviously there are differences but it's still rules restricted racing. The rules are just different. It's too bad NASCAR felt the need to go with fuel injection. I do agree that they should have gone to direct injection if they wanted to gain popularity. Port fuel injection will just be another way to criticize NASCAR as "low tech". Oh well.

200.447 mph at Talladega. Plymouth Superbird: Buddy Baker 1970 NASCAR thanked them with a 1971 rule change from 7.0L (429 c.i.) to 5.8L (358 c.i.)

212.809 mph at Talladega. Ford Thunderbird Bill Elliott 1987 NASCAR thanked him with restrictor plates at Talladega and Daytona (this is actually blamed on Bobby Allison's incident on lap 22 that hurt a couple of fans.)

FWIW I worked with a mechanic that was at Talladega when Elliott set the record. End of the back stretch a state trooper clocked him at 236 mph.

I stopped watching NASCAR because I lost interest. I didn't like what the France's were doing and how they were taking the sport. To many puppet strings and great driver's being ignored because they weren't TV "appropriate" I have enjoyed the grassroots efforts much more. I know there are politics in all racing series but when big money isn't on the line it usually ends up being a fun show.

In reply to e_pie: I agree, Aussie V-8 Supercars is very good racing.

From Wiki:

V8 Supercars is a touring car racing category based in Australia and run as an International Series under Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA) regulations .... The V8 Supercars themselves take as their basis either the Ford Falcon or Holden Commodore. Although they bear some resemblance to the production models outwardly, they are built from the ground up to suit the motorsport application. They are strictly governed in most aspects of performance in an effort to keep all the drivers on an even footing to create closer, more exciting racing. ....

Power A V8 Supercar must have a front-engine design and rear-wheel drive. Every car uses either a 5.0 L Ford "Boss 302" SVO or a 5.0 L Chevrolet small block race-engine (depending on the make) - capable of producing between 460 and 485 kW (620 — 650 bhp) of power, but generally quoted as a little over 450 kW (600 bhp) in race trim. Engines have pushrod actuated valves and electronic fuel injection. Both Ford and Holden engines are based on racing engines from their respective US parent companies. Engines are electronically restricted to 7,500 rpm.

Broadly speaking, the engines have a capacity of 5 litres, with 2 valves per cylinder. Compression ratio is regulated to 10:1. From the 2009 season onwards, cars run on E85 fuel consisting of 85% ethanol, which while reaping the benefits of a fuel largely made from a renewable resource has seen a marked increase in fuel consumption. EFI configuration is that of individual throttle bodies (albeit throttle actuation is linked/synchronised) and one injector per cylinder.

Hmmm, production V-8, 2 V, OHV pushrods. Sounds pretty low tech to me, so I guess it must really suck ;)

Carter

Timeormoney wrote: So why no just go straight to Direct Injection?

Restrictor plates and intake manifold rules would be my guess.