Nascar: All the same car?

The cars have a standard body template and basic chassis. The powertrains are manufacturer specific

 

If the cars were different shapes, they would have different aerodynamics and thus a great difference in the super speedway races. So the cars are different by name and graphics only.

 

Well, that is the point these days, to make all models similar in competitive style so nobody has an advantage. So, they all end up running nose to tail for hours and hours. How boring is that? I enjoyed these kinds of races back when a Dodge looked like a Dodge in my local dealer, same for a Chevy, or Ford, or Buick. I think the NASCZR's decision to balance the table was a mistake. I fell asleep several times during the Daytona race, finally gave up and walked out to the barn to feed my sheep, much more entertaining.

 

It was a boring race but you're mixing your points. Nose to tail for 500 laps is boring now? It would still be boring to you if the cars were styled differently. Say what you mean. Also we've seen what happens to a series when cars are so different. Domination from one team and only 4 or 5 drivers have a chance of winning a race. F1 is nose to tail except when one of the two passes occurs but with less cars and only one leader for the whole race. Many of the points made about today's boring NASCAR race is the same stuff you guys complain about during F1 races and have been for years.

 

You're totally off base, 1. The change of the cars had nothing to do with "cost savings" 2. Why would Toyota dump soo much money into NASCAR and the teams if it didn't see a return on th investment? During the race it was mentioned that Automakers still see NASCAR as their number one form of advertising even in the current economical slump. 3 When was the last time you watched a NASCAR race? It seems like it's been years or you just don't pay attention to what you're seeing.

 

+1

However, I thought the engines had to be "production based pushrod motors".

AFAIK, Toyota hasn't had a motor like that for years - Do they build pushrod lumps just for this? - How is that a "production" engine?......

Insights much appreciated,
Cheers,
Ian

 

"Stock" cars? Give me a break. They should rename the organization NAFCAR: National Association for Funny-Car Auto Racing.

 

The Toyota engine was a clean-sheet design, much to the chagrin of the big 3 who are using highly developed versions of production designs (I believe the engine used by Chevy is a derivation of the original, mid-50's 350 small block!) Toyota's engine was designed from a clean sheet by TRD in California when they first got into NASCAR in '04 or whenever it was.

To the best of my knowledge, Toyota has never had a pushrod V8 in anything...trucks and Land Cruisers used an inline 6 until they started using a version of the Lexus V8 (with OHC).

 

Its been awhile since they raced "stock" cars.

Funny Cars = an existing race series on 1/4 mile asplhalt strips at mind blowing speeds


The Car of Tomorrow...wait, that should now be The Car of Today is a spec body that is so much more forgiving in wabbles, spins, accidents, etc. Did you notice how many guys got loose at 180+mph and saved it? That wing on the back is pretty critical in making that possible. Once things go horribly wrong, Vicker/Dale, Jr, then the rest of the flaps and such to help slow the cars down help.

I find it all more boring with them all running the same thing. I don't want to see a spec race. I want to be able to recognize a Ford from a Chevy from a Dodge from a Toyota. Let them figure out how to run-what-they-brung and go racing.

 

nascar is a driver's series as opposed to f1's manufacturer focus.the new cars put the focus on them and their teams [remember iroc?] which is just how nascar likes it.
i must admit,my interest went up when roush teamed up with john henry/fenway,giving me a local rooting interest.

 

More or less. Chevy devoloped the 283 V8 in the fifties, which became the 327 by the late fifities through the mid-late sixties and then became the 350 starting in 68 ish....depending on th application. They are all essentially the same block, just re-bored to get the extra cubic inches.

Corvette offered the 350 for the first time in 69. The Camaro/Chevelles/trucks/etc might have been a little earlier, I don't remember.

 

Yeah, but it's still in their name -- the "S" in "NASCAR". And these cars are as "funny" in their own way as the nitro-burning "floppers" that the NHRA races.

I prefer the days of Torino Talladegas and RoadRunner SuperBirds.....

 

NASCAR is fine with me, I watch the road races, but as for the cars ...

[size=-2]carburetors[/size]

 

The good old days are LONG gone...let it go. Yes, we can clearly see theres nothing stock about them. You obviously don't like NASCAR so why do you even bother clicking open a thread clearly dedicated to discussing NASCAR? Just to come a let us all know how crappy you think it is? Save it.

N

 

Don't get me wrong, I really dislike nascar, but 800 HP from an NA V8 is fine with me! Even if it's carbed!

 

Do you US fans think NASCAR is more secure as an entertainment than as a sell on monday racing series?
Can GM and Chrysler maintain the budget spend and get govt hand-outs at the same time?
We get to see very little here in Australia despite an attempt to run them here, an oval built for it and driver interest, eg Marcus Ambrose.

 

And the powertrains are so tightly rule-bound it's hard to gain any 'real' advantage.

Race on Sunday sell on Monday has been dead for almost 10 years, more like 20.
The only 'jump' in that was when the Dodge Intrepid won in like 2001-2002 (?)

About as boring as watching an NFL team run for 400 years, pass for 50 yards, and win.

It isn't entertainment so much as it is the 'in' thing to do, anymore.

The automakers have cut back their motorsports expenditures, but it IS a form of marketing they cannot totally drop, because whoever would stay in it - wins. Racing fans are among the most loyal purchasers of sponsor products in the world.

 

I'm going to ask the questions since I'm not quite sure:

1. Are the chassis all identical now?

2. If so, then what's the point?

3. How much input do the manufacturers have in the sporting development?

 

At least the F1 guys get to turn right from time to time...

 

The big three (or maybe I should say the small three) have been talking to Brian France about changing the look, to make them look more like the actual street car. Not so much changing the CAT completely, but making the front end and rear of the cars shapes different.

 

All of the chassis are the same tube frame and meet so ridget specs for safety. They use body templets for Chev , Pont. , Ford Fusion , Dodge and Toyota Camray. The body skins must meet the mfg. guidelines with some NASCAR tweeks. Each car must run mfg. production engines. GM , Ford , Dodge and Toyota. They are all around 380-385 CID pushrod engines. They all run 4 bbl carbs and in Dayton and Talladage (high banks) they run a restricture plate below the carb to cut down on HP. Transmissions are the same as well as the rears.They run around 700HP and if you tuned into the Ca. race yester the motors were pulling 9000rpm at a little over 200 mph. The way you watch these races are to see the 1st 20 laps then the middle 10 laps and then the last 10 laps. Usually you get to see the crashes near the end of the race where they do a recap of the action during the race. Sometimes it's fun and sometimes it's as boring as an F1 race with no passing. Personally I thought that the CANAM series was the greatest racing.

 

They really should have changed the name. It is no longer stock car racing, and it is no longer a national sport with Toyota in the mix.

I find something like ALMS much more interesting as you can tell the cars apart without reading the graphics and they turn right.

 

National Assoc. of Stock Car Auto Racing

would become....

Assoc. of Auto Racing, or AAR. Maybe Gurney can sue for some time of trademark infringement?