Vitriol on NASCAR

JoeyM wrote:

Moparman wrote: I used to think that this was a very autocross-friendly board, but now I see it is largely populated by low-buck engine swappers who think their street escapades are indications of talent and who believe that real men have limited incomes.

Why do you think anyone here thinks a person's income level has anything to do with how much, or little, of a man they are? FWIW, many people participate in autocross *because* of a limited income. I know that if money was no object I'd like to try some track days, time trials and maybe even road racing.

I was referring to the commonman defense of NASCAR. There are some on this board who seem to believe that autocrossers, road racers and such are elitist and blue collar NASCAR fans have a legitimate right to be defensive. I agree with you. Many people get involved in autocross because of limited incomes. Although I can compete in more costly forms of motorsport, campaigning a Neon in autocross gives me the best bang for my buck. However, many people believe we SCCA types are elitist and local circle track teams are down to earth. Their efforts and talents far exceed mine. It is an image thing.

Circle track appeals to certain fans due to the image it cultivates. It is like Harley-Davidson. They are among the more expensive bikes on the market, but they have a tremendous following among the "common man" while less expensive Japanese bike owners have an elitist image among many middle class and working class Americans.

JoeyM wrote:

Moparman wrote: I used to think that this was a very autocross-friendly board, but now I see it is largely populated by low-buck engine swappers who think their street escapades are indications of talent and who believe that real men have limited incomes.

Why do you think anyone here thinks a person's income level has anything to do with how much, or little, of a man they are? FWIW, many people participate in autocross *because* of a limited income. I know that if money was no object I'd like to try some track days, time trials and maybe even road racing.

Here's a quick observation and a defense of Moparman's statement:

This board is populated by a great group of gearheads who have varied incomes and specific interests. The magic of the interwebz, our collective interests and GRM all attract us to this amazing place. We enthusiastically offer ideas, knowledge and experiences to anyone who asks.

The down side to that camaderie, is that we often expose our limits, prejudices and ignorance. In reality, there is no "one" best of much anything imagineable - no matter how sincerely one is convinced his/her preferences are "superior" to anything else. Guess what, they're no better than anyone else's opinion and no different than stuff that evacuates from another thing we all share.

Get a grip, people.

Honestly, if it's a endeavour that combines machine and direct-human interfacing, I'm on board and supporting it - even drifting.

Rant over, for now..............

Moparman wrote:

forzav12 wrote:

John Brown wrote:

NYG95GA wrote: As far as the drivers from other series is concerned, I think it's just about the money. Why else would Montoya go from being a F1 champ to driving a 4 speed stick?

And WHY is it all about the money? Advertising space, series marketing, carnage, drama, international television rights, manufacturer recognition it's all folded in there to make racing a show, and people pay for the show. THERE IS BETTER RACING AT AN AUTOCROSS but until you can figure out how to get paid six figures a week for 37 weeks autocrossing I think we should let the professionals "show" us how it's done. We will keep spending our weekends RACING.

Thank you for the best laugh I've had all week. Yeah, your little stroll around the cones is "real racing" and the pros in one of racing's most difficult and competitive series are wankers compared to you-hahhahahahhhaaaha. Thanks again. I guess all the pros from other disciplines that have tried Nascar and failed miserably and those that have proclaimed it some of the most difficult, yet satisfying racing don't know jack either, right? Priceless. Oh, and just to be clear-I'm no fan of the current Nascar series, but to claim it isn't real racing is stupendously ignorant.

Hmm, the speed to distance in autocross is similar to F1. Many road racers credit autocross for their skills, especially on tight courses. Autocross is one of the more challenging tests of driver skill. Don't believe it, ask some real pros. Arguably, it teaches car control better than any other activity (professional driver instruction excepted, but that usually involves autocross-like activities). Yes, we think our little runs through a parking lot are challenging and require more skill than many other amateur motorsport events. Try it sometime. I used to think that this was a very autocross-friendly board, but now I see it is largely populated by low-buck engine swappers who think their street escapades are indications of talent and who believe that real men have limited incomes.

My intent wasn't to disparage auto-X. I have tried it(in everything from a Ferrari 250GT to a 455 GTO 'vert-even set FTD recently at a local club event) and I enjoy it. I just find the constant need to belittle Nascar to be tiresome and ignorant. Many drivers with far greater skills than us Internet warriors have gone on the record to state that Nascar is very difficult racing. Sure, they have phantom "debris" cautions and silly stuff like allowing drivers to make up lost laps,etc,etc. The organizers do what they think works best to maintain close racing and fan interest.

Whatever-fact is, a very high level of skill is needed to run at the front of a Nascar event. Additionally, most sanctioning bodies engage in similar activities-witness the continual shenanigans in F1, "push-to-pass" in Champ Cars, the constant fiddling in ALMS and Grand Am, etc,etc,etc.

oldsaw wrote:

JoeyM wrote:

Moparman wrote: I used to think that this was a very autocross-friendly board, but now I see it is largely populated by low-buck engine swappers who think their street escapades are indications of talent and who believe that real men have limited incomes.

Why do you think anyone here thinks a person's income level has anything to do with how much, or little, of a man they are? FWIW, many people participate in autocross *because* of a limited income. I know that if money was no object I'd like to try some track days, time trials and maybe even road racing.

Here's a quick observation and a defense of Moparman's statement: This board is populated by a great group of gearheads who have varied incomes and specific interests. The magic of the interwebz, our collective interests and GRM all attract us to this amazing place. We enthusiastically offer ideas, knowledge and experiences to anyone who asks. The down side to that camaderie, is that we often expose our limits, prejudices and ignorance. In reality, there is no "one" best of much anything imagineable - no matter how sincerely one is convinced his/her preferences are "superior" to anything else. Guess what, they're no better than anyone else's opinion and no different than stuff that evacuates from another thing we all share. Get a grip, people. Honestly, if it's a endeavour that combines machine and direct-human interfacing, I'm on board and supporting it - even drifting. Rant over, for now..............

I agree-except for the drifting. Just kidding-I enjoy most forms of motorsports, some more than others. Really rather pointless to spend so much time bashing Nascar when so many gearheads are obviously fans. I prefer road racing, but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate the efforts that go into fielding a top Nascar team.

In my life, I have embraced Indy racing, NASCAR, NHRA, Can-Am, Trans-Am, Rally and autocross. It just turns out that the only one I could conceivably afford to do is autocrossing. Or maybe slot cars.

Oldsaw brings up many good points; people will do what they want to do, and you won't convince them otherwise.

Case in point: there's a fellow in our region who makes big money, drives a shiny Corvette with all the "right" parts, wears expensive driving shoes and gloves, etc. He is certain he is the shiznet. I'm always at least a second quicker than him.. in a Neon. It drives him crazy, and even though the AXware doesn't lie, he still looks down on my car as inferior.

It's human nature, and to survive on this planet, you have to live it, or live with it. Some folks are just snobs by nature.

But they tend to be slow thru the cones

Surprisingly, I think I've seen more "F1 is retarded/run by retards" type threads than "NASCAR can suck it" threads in the time I've been here.

I'd like to think much of the angst comes from Speed pushing out other racing programs in favor of NASCAR.

Appleseed wrote: Surprisingly, I think I've seen more "F1 is retarded/run by retards" type threads than "NASCAR can suck it" threads in the time I've been here. I'd like to think much of the angst comes from Speed pushing out other racing programs in favor of NASCAR.

yeah, other than ALMS, F1, Grand Am, rally cars, Aussie V8 Supercars, AMA Superbikes, motocross, and Monster trucks, Speed hardly ever shows anything racing related besides NASCAR.

what about all those hours they spend showing F1 practice and qualifying live as it happens? i'd guess that they probably show as many hours of actual F1 race cars going around the track as they do NASCAR Cup series cars on any given week- which works out because F1 is generally half a world away and happens late at night here in the USA.

novaderrik wrote:

Appleseed wrote: Surprisingly, I think I've seen more "F1 is retarded/run by retards" type threads than "NASCAR can suck it" threads in the time I've been here. I'd like to think much of the angst comes from Speed pushing out other racing programs in favor of NASCAR.

yeah, other than ALMS, F1, Grand Am, rally cars, Aussie V8 Supercars, AMA Superbikes, motocross, and Monster trucks, Speed hardly ever shows anything racing related besides NASCAR. what about all those hours they spend showing F1 practice and qualifying live as it happens? i'd guess that they probably show as many hours of actual F1 race cars going around the track as they do NASCAR Cup series cars on any given week- which works out because F1 is generally half a world away and happens late at night here in the USA.

To some degree, you're right. When in season, Speed pays a fair amount of attention to road racing. On an F1 race weekend Speed devotes 6-7 hours towards those who want to see F1. THANKS, Speed!

Road-race fans (a viewing minority) seemingly don't like the fact that all the Nascar programming pays the bills so the network can afford to buy broadcast rights. Road-race fans pay the tips, but don't buy the whole meal.

But who paid the bills in the days of Speedvision? Maybe it was the, now long gone, WRC content.

Having spent (wasted) time reading through this whole debacle, I feel compelled to add my tuppence: Even as a kid in the Sixties, watching King Richard go zoom around various tracks, I knew I could never 1) afford the car he drove, 2) get the kind of sponsorship that would let me do that, or 3) get anyone to believe I could maybe do that. There is something to be said for dynasties (the Petty clan, for instance), that I will never be anything more than an observer of. Maybe things like the 200x Challenge can give me the chance to be something more than an observer. Auto-x was a mystery to me before I found Grassroots Motorsports magazine; then I found there is a local (well, within a couple hours' drive) enclave of that very sport which is willing to infect me with the bug. And there are members of that group in my town. Yeah, they race in parking lots, and have a bitch of a time getting Powers That Be convinced there will be little reason to get extraordinarily expensive liability insurance, to put on an event in a high school parking lot, but the events are LOCAL, and have local folks involved who want to have fun through the weekend. To get 'involved' in NASCAR, I either spent several hours watching it on the telly, or get tickets/vacation time/ motel reservations for insane amounts of money to someplace like Charlotte or Daytona. I can't get really excited about that: Who has that much time or money to do that more than a couple times in a lifetime? I work a rotating shift for a living, the only wage earner in my household, and that just isn't in the cards. Auto-x might just be possible, where NASCAR isn't.

The crazy thing is that I like NASCAR, but have been ripped for calling it what it is, high speed entertainment and not racing in the truest sense. It is still fun to watch from time to time and appeals to more people than other forms of racing which would probably bore viewers with their lack of commotion and cacophony.

I've either raced or crewed in 4 different sanctioning bodies, one being Nascar. In some ways they are worse, in some ways better. What they do best first and foremost, is create an atmosphere that brings in fans and entertains them. Whether we like or not, they are by far the best racing series in the US for doing this. The fans like it, and they could care less what we think. And if you want to play in their game, you have to play by their rules. No manufacturer can "guide" the series to their liking or get an advantage like in so many other forms. When we were working with Toyota to get their first car approved, it was not an easy process and not much was given to Toyota.

While manufacturer participation is preferred, and the teams like the dollars spent, they are not required to go racing. Name one other professional series where this is true? Most other sanctioning bodies absolutely require manufacturers to fill the field, and when one goes, the car count drops and the competition suffers.

Other series feed off the fans identifying with the cars, and sure there are still Ford vs. Chevy diehards, but mostly it is the 48 vs. the 24 etc. Nascar has done a great job of making the driver and crew the stars, and not the cars they drive. In many ways I think this is the hard part for us to grasp, as we always look to the car first, as in "what are they driving". The general sports fan is looking at personalities first, machinery second.

As for autocrossing, I was thinking about this just this morning. Back when I started in the mid '80's, it seemed like it was much cheaper than it is today. While you can still compete without a lot of money, it takes a ton more to run at the front in national classes. And cars today are simply light years faster in stock form.

Wow, this has been, shall we say, interesting. I like motor sports. NASCAR happens to be one of them. I have been involved in various forms fo racing. I started out in SCCA when you drive your car to the track, put on a helmet, raced then drove home. That got to be more and more expensive same as autocross with it's tire of the month. Over the years each form of racing, be it karts or stock cars has increasingly gotten more expensive. So I have found that there are things out there that are affordable for the common man. What does this have to do with NASCAR ? Not a lot. It is just that I enjoy watching highly talented drivers push a heavy taxi cab on skinny tires to increadable speeds. More so than the open wheel series with tons of down force etc. sure there are questionable calls but that happens in all sports. Look at soccer and baseball. Both have had "bad" calls recently. So, everybody cool down, enjoy what you do, whatever it is. One of the things I like about this forum is things like this can be cussed and discussed without any name calling and insults that occur on other sites.

Don't get me started on open wheel. I would much rather watch NASCAR than IRL. I liked CART much better. I really liked Indy from the early 60s to the mid 90s when chassis and engine combinations would make your head spin. Lotus / Ford, March / Cosworth, Lola / Ilmor-Chevy and whatever they could stuff a Buick Turbo 6 into.

I'm here to post that I agree with all of you who are being agreeable, and disagree to all who are being disagreeable.

That, and I still need over 600 posts.

ALL sport is entertainment at its core for fans. It only becomes something else to participants. To pretend to gain more than entertianment from watching is being untruthful to yourself- you have to compete to make it more than entertainment.

That being said, there is NOTHING wrong with entertainment. In any form. It's all a distraction from what we call life. However a disaster or success that may be. Entertainment is good. It's why cavemen painted things on the walls, why they danced around while people watch, why during the first car race, someone thought it would be fun to watch. Entertainment is an escape.

Anyway- if I were John Brown- I would have figured out how to say that in 15 posts.

E-

NYG95GA wrote: In my life, I have embraced Indy racing, NASCAR, NHRA, Can-Am, Trans-Am, Rally and autocross. It just turns out that the only one I could conceivably afford to do is autocrossing. Or maybe slot cars. Oldsaw brings up many good points; people will do what they want to do, and you won't convince them otherwise. Case in point: there's a fellow in our region who makes big money, drives a shiny Corvette with all the "right" parts, wears expensive driving shoes and gloves, etc. He is certain he is the shiznet. I'm always at least a second quicker than him.. in a Neon. It drives him crazy, and even though the AXware doesn't lie, he still looks down on my car as inferior. It's human nature, and to survive on this planet, you have to live it, or live *with* it. Some folks are just snobs by nature. But they tend to be slow thru the cones

Had to be 10-years ago, a newbie came out to one of our autocrosses with a Boxster. The car was bone stock with the original tires. I remember him snickering at my Charger 2.2 in grid. He was not happy when my Charger was several seconds quicker than is Boxster. I never saw him again. What he did not understand was that my Charger was prepared for Street Prepared competition. Just my R tires gave me a huge advantage, plus I had already been competing for a number of years. Snobs are everywhere.

I still have the Charger. I may bring it out to play at CPR's Cone Killer Classic next month.

Moparman wrote: I used to think that this was a very autocross-friendly board, but now I see it is largely populated by low-buck engine swappers who think their street escapades are indications of talent and who believe that real men have limited incomes.

Wow. Just... wow. When you want to be wrong, you really jump all the way over to that side of the line, don't you?

In reply to Chris_V:

When I go, I go big. I guess I was just frustrated. I apologize for my insensitive comments, which were factually incorrect.

Mikey52_1 wrote: Having spent (wasted) time reading through this whole debacle, I feel compelled to add my tuppence: Even as a kid in the Sixties, watching King Richard go zoom around various tracks, I knew I could never 1) afford the car he drove, 2) get the kind of sponsorship that would let me do that, or 3) get anyone to believe I could maybe do that. There is something to be said for dynasties (the Petty clan, for instance), that I will never be anything more than an observer of. Maybe things like the 200x Challenge can give me the chance to be something more than an observer. Auto-x was a mystery to me before I found Grassroots Motorsports magazine; then I found there is a local (well, within a couple hours' drive) enclave of that very sport which is willing to infect me with the bug. And there are members of that group in my town. Yeah, they race in parking lots, and have a bitch of a time getting Powers That Be convinced there will be little reason to get extraordinarily expensive liability insurance, to put on an event in a high school parking lot, but the events are LOCAL, and have local folks involved who want to have fun through the weekend. To get 'involved' in NASCAR, I either spent several hours watching it on the telly, or get tickets/vacation time/ motel reservations for insane amounts of money to someplace like Charlotte or Daytona. I can't get really excited about that: Who has that much time or money to do that more than a couple times in a lifetime? I work a rotating shift for a living, the only wage earner in my household, and that just isn't in the cards. Auto-x might just be possible, where NASCAR isn't.

just like the SCCA isn't only the Trans Am series, and FIA isn't only F1, NASCAR isn't only the Cup or Nationwide series. there are hundreds of NASCAR sanctioned dirt and paved oval tracks all over the country that have classes that pretty much anyone can enter. if there isn't a NASCAR track in your area, then there might be an IMCA or WISSOTA sanctioned track.

the lowest classes are pretty much Chump/Lemons style cars where you knock the glass out, gut the interior, put in a cage, seat, and some basic safety gear and go racing. some tracks even have cars like these that you can rent for the night for a couple hundred $$$ to see if you like that style of racing without having to build a car.

racerdave600 wrote: Other series feed off the fans identifying with the cars, and sure there are still Ford vs. Chevy diehards, but mostly it is the 48 vs. the 24 etc. Nascar has done a great job of making the driver and crew the stars, and not the cars they drive. In many ways I think this is the hard part for us to grasp, as we always look to the car first, as in "what are they driving". The general sports fan is looking at personalities first, machinery second.

I never thought of it that way, but you're right. Have you ever looked to see what shoes Spud Web was wearing or what stick Jeremy Roenick uses? We always look at the car first.

Moparman wrote: In reply to Chris_V: When I go, I go big. I guess I was just frustrated. I apologize for my insensitive comments, which were factually incorrect.

The world needs more of this. Thank you.

In reply to Tom Heath:

No worries. We all get worked up from time to time. The key is to admit when you are wrong. I view this as a strength,not a weakness. This is probably because I am wrong so often, as per my wife.

Appleseed wrote: But who paid the bills in the days of Speedvision? Maybe it was the, now long gone, WRC content.

might be why it's Speed now instead of Speedvision....

I went autocrossing once as a guest at a cincy SCCA event. I drove my SVT contour. I had no idea what I was doing. When asked what tire pressures I was running, I just said I dunno, if you have a tire gauge I will tell you. But I recall I ended up being faster than some mustangs, even a mustang cobra. The event was at the Kentucky Speedway by the way, well, not really the Speedway but the Speedway parking lot! And there was some Nascar testing going on at the time so both worlds can peacefully coexist lol.

At the end of the day, NASCAR of course still sucks. It is real racing for sure but as long as the cars are all the same, I can't get wound up about it. At least out in the speedway parking lot, we had some variety and some ingenuity. Corvettes, Mustangs, BMW's, Cadillac's, Miatas. There was zero variety on the track that day or any other day nascar is racing or testing.

wbjones wrote:

Appleseed wrote: But who paid the bills in the days of Speedvision? Maybe it was the, now long gone, WRC content.

might be why it's Speed now instead of Speedvision....

WB, what you say has far more truth that most realize.

In its' original format, Speed was never a money-maker; it subsisted, but barely. When the network was sold, the Nascar-centric programming started generating viewership and revenue far beyond the capabilities of plain, old Speed. The current version (SpeedTV) brings in sponsors and even if those companies buy time on crap reality shows and never-ending auctions, that's where the money comes from.

I'm no apolofgist for SpeedTV, but at least they make some effort to use some of their income to purchase the broadcast rights to road racing series, which is (and always will be) my preference.

If the US had millions more road racing and rally fans, the Nascar flag-carriers would be complaining that their series wasn't getting enough attention.