True fans of NASCAR will agree that the “R” for Racing was replaced by Revenue long ago.
The France family, owners of NASCAR, has found it more profitable to manage a series based on entertainment factor, rather than the spirit of racing (some guy named McMahon figured this out with pro wrestling a while back too).
But in the past 20 years we’ve seen the “SC” of “Stock Car”, or at least the appearance of such, go by the wayside. Aero-coupes—with twisted bodies and frames, morphed out of their street-dwelling brethren.
Due to several driver deaths in the early 2000’s, most notably seven-time champion Dale Earnhardt Sr., NASCAR has worked to improve driver safety on the track and in the car design.
2007 saw the introduction of the “Car of Tomorrow” (CoT). The boxy designs all appear the same—save the nose and an insert in the rear-side windows. Otherwise only the decals of the grille openings, headlights, and manufacturer logos set them apart.
While the innovations in driver safety are a plus, there have been drawbacks.
Many purists claim NASCAR has become nothing more than a “Glorified IROC Series”, with drivers in similar machines. Numerous complaints have been voiced about the handling, or lack thereof, of the new cars.
However the numbers show something different.
Passing is up. NASCAR recently dropped the hammer on the drivers during a closed-door meeting at Michigan Speedway by telling them to, “Shut up and drive.” The car is what it is, and it ain’t changing.
My solution (and I won’t claim it to be original, because I’ve heard it voiced and agreed with so many times) is for NASCAR to return to racing “Stock” cars.
Under my plan, each manufacturer will provide their 4-door sedan with an “X” (about 110) inch wheelbase (the current four makes in NASCAR are from 107” (Camry) to 120” (Charger)), as their model. These cars will be built with frames and safety features to meet NASCAR requirements and incorporate developments in the CoT.
A series of body templates joined together, known as the “Claw”, must fit over the cars with similar tolerances to the street version. The difference from current specifications is there would be different “claws” for each make, whereas today there is a different nose piece, but the rest of the body shapes all fit one template. Allowances will be made for ground effects, so as to prevent air from flowing under the car and creating lift.
The new “Stock” cars will likewise be fitted with the company’s small-block V8 engine. Displacement will be limited to five (5) liters, but this amount is negotiable. This would result in lower horsepower and improved fuel consumption.
At this point, the cars would be shipped to race teams; where modifications for driver comfort, adjustability, and paint would be applied. Performance parts for engines and handling alterations must be approved by NASCAR, as is the standard today.
I would go so far as to suggest that adjustments such as weight-jacking and center of gravity over the rear axle should be prohibited. This would eliminate “Wedge” and “Track bar” changes during pit stops.
The point of the exercise is to get back to the days of “Stock Car Racing”.
Benefits: The manufacturers’ return to being actively involved (as opposed to passively) has a trickle-down effect. It means that their cars are racing, rather than something built by the teams to a specification.
This will lead to direct competition on the track, which will increase marketability (return to “Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday”), improved brand recognition (the race cars will truly appear like the street version, and vice-versa), and all these factors will lead to increased sales. Cheering for a driver in a certain brand is cheering for that brand, rather than something wearing a decal.
For the teams it will result in a reduction of costs—primarily in payroll. They will not need to pay for wind tunnel time or have aerodynamicists on staff, and can reduce the number of shop personnel since cars will arrive in a fairly complete state.
The fans will see this as a return to the roots of the sport, and I can’t see a downside to that.
Drawbacks: This change will not be without pains. An enormous amount of time and money have gone into the development and build up of the CoT.
But this is nothing new to NASCAR. The cars have evolved with the times, and this is simply another evolution, or merging of new racing technology with production model cars.
Also, the costs are pushed back onto the manufacturers. Teams would purchase racing chassis and engines from them, and thus the incentive to win is increased at the higher level.
The Manufacturer’s Championship would actually mean something again.
Jobs in the Charlotte area would obviously be affected, as shops would not require as many people, but these positions could be absorbed as an experienced workforce by the manufacturers.
On the track there may be periods where it appears a certain make can’t be beaten. The lack of performance by one make should create incentive to improve. I would submit that Chevy’s dominance in 2006 and 2007, and Toyota in 2008, make this a moot point.
But the performance gains being made at the manufacturer level will benefit all teams running that car type, rather than just one team finding something that allows them to compete where others struggle.
Then the topic of driver complaints arises. But really, how many more times can these guys say the new car “Sucks”, even when they win?
Most understand the history of the sport, and from the days when drivers took minimally improved street cars to the track—to the hand-built performance machines of today—they still raced, and found ways to win.
Wouldn’t it be great to walk into the local dealership and there be a racing car sitting next to the street-legal version, and they appear almost the same?
Talk about getting your heart rate up…Can I get a big number 13 and my name above the door? I’ll even take the Aero Package with ground effects and the rear wing.
Going back to "Stock Car" Racing would help get NASCAR back on track. It's a "Win-Win-Win" scenario for everyone.
comments (12) write a comment »
write a new comment
2 months ago
One of the reasons why NASCAR's not "on track" per se, isn't really about the change in body. That was always going to change at NASCAR involved. It's the price of fuel. Why not reduce the amount of laps drivers drive and fans watch?? I watched the Chicagoland race last night, and I nearly went to sleep through the first 100 laps of the race. It really wasn't that interesting..
from 2 months ago
NASCAR has a history of this. During the energy crunch of the early 1970s, NASCAR shortened races by 10%. They would accomplish this by "starting" the race on a lap number that would still result in the race ending on the scheduled distance. (Example: The Daytona 500 is 200 laps, they started the race on lap 21, reducing the distance by 50 miles).
Another part of this was reducing race lengths on tracks shorter than a mile to a maximum of 400 miles.
Reducing race length has been a topic of discussion for years. Many series run shorter events that will end in a predetermined time frame if they are looking to go long. I'm not sure what to do about this...
Shorten races by 100 miles? I wouldn't change the two Daytona, Talladega, Indy, or the road races. But if you could cut the run time of others from 4 to 3 hours, that may help keep an audience.
Then again, seasoned racing fans aren't necessarily watching Kyle Busch (or whoever) drive away, they're looking at other races on the track. The TV cameras sometimes stray from action, other times they cover it.
I think your point is valid, and NASCAR, being in the business of providing entertainment, tries to keep things interesting by keeping a balance.
2 months ago
great article, adam. i do indeed think that nascar is going downhill. i don't think that the CoT was necessary, honestly...they were doing just fine, and if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
from 2 months ago
I think the safety innovations could have been incorporated into the existing fleet of vehicles.
At the same time I like the fact that they have removed the twisting of chassis from the game. I think going back to stock cars with the current safety standards would be the best way to go.
2 months ago
Wonderful article. Makes me think about my dad's era in NASCAR. He said it was three guys working in the shop pulling 18 hour days.
2 months ago
I agree I miss the way racing used to be now it's just doing what all other sports have done which is surrender to the bussiness aspect of things and well i hate to say but nascar has almost lost its touch. that is the home grown "were just like you" feel.
2 months ago
Another outstanding article. Good ideas throughout. Really enjoy your writing.
What NASCAR also needs is for more David Pearsons to come along. I sense that some drivers are chosen for pop culture appeal instead of how they handle a car. Tim Flock taught us looks mean nothing compared to driving skill.
I wonder if all this would have come to pass if Tim Richmond and Davey Allison had lived. Those two knew how to handle the wheel as well as the fans. We probably skipped a generation there.
from 2 months ago
Thanks, BT.
2 months ago
Do cars "closer" to factory specs produce better racing? They certainly (current examples apply) do not produce more balanced racing, something that NASCAR has a fair handle on comparitively.
Will changing the cars again get more people interested? Isn't that what the COT was for? (safety aside).
Does NASCAR's fanbase want to see stockish cars racing against each other? Do they even care?
Whats the point of trying to make a Camry or Fusion closer to the street car if its still going to have a tube chassis, unconventional suspension and a V8?
What about all the money tied up in race engine and chassis development?
Interesting theory, but I doubt we'll see NASCAR return to its roots any time soon.
2 months ago
The first "Cup" race I attended was the World 600 in 1963.
In some ways it certainly was the Golden Era, but seeing the black smoke rise from the backstretch during the 1964 '600' [Fireball Roberts' accident] showed we had a long way to go on safety. Firestone introduced the fuel cell [helicopter technology] in 1965 and the safety improvements have continued since. {If anyone is interested, I would suggest they read Brock Yates' book about the 1955 racing season (a world wide perspective, Indy, LeMans and other events) and there are other books out about the 1955 LeMans race, all of these books will tell you just how dangerous racing was, especially the farther you go back in time.} (Here's a scary thought: when I saw Bobby Allison's car rip down the fence at Talladega, I was immediately relived that the car did not go into the stands: That's basically what happened at LeMans in 1955.)
I'd love th see 'truly stock cars' running, but I believe we have gone beyond that point. NASCAR used to declare what models were eligible to race in "Cup" {I wish I still had that old rule book!} but now the car makers decide which nameplate they want to race. No more Mercurys, Lincolns, Cadillacs, etc.
I vividly remember the 'aero wars' while the FoMoCo products were subtle but effective, while Chrysler went to the extreme, to say the least!
Too much time/money has been spent [wasted?] on the COT, but, perhaps there is hope regarding the "B" series [Nationwide Series, if you prefer.] NASCAR HAS listened to the car owners in the "B" series, as they told NASCAR that they couldn't afford to change cars right now. The "B" series has needed it's own identity for quite some time, and with the addition of the Truck series, which is taking over some of the "Stepping Stone" status that the "B" series was supposed to have.
Perhaps we'll see a revival of the old Grand-Am series [Mustang, Camaro, Firebird, etc.] at least in terms of the body styles for the "B" series. The only problem with that is if the Feds go through with the increased CAFE fuel standards {kind of silly for them to do that now, as $4.00 a gallon seems to be causing people to finally be concerned about fuel consumption!} there are rumblings that the new ponycar competitors for the Mustang may not be produced for many years, if higher CAFE numbers are mandated. We'll see.
about 1 month ago
NASCAR has evolved into formula racing and a rigid formula at that. I agree it ought to return to "Stock Cars". Everything on the track is rear wheel drive while the supposed parent or donor car is sold as front wheel drive. Toyota does not offer a pushrod engine in any of its production cars.
I don't think todays 15 to 30 year old is going to think something on a NASCAR track is available at a local dealership. Where is the incentive for any of the manufacturers to continue to lend their nameplates to the sport? If it went back to stock car racing, I for one think even the engines ought to not have limits as to size or anything else. If the gas tanks have a maximum size then wining the race could easily be a matter of efficency and teams would seek the best power to economy in order to win. Good solid basics for safety (crash cage, fuel cells and the like) should be mandated and auto manufacturers should supply frames that meet safety standards (how many of the current stock versions of NASCAR racers are acutally unibody or unibody/frame hybrids?)
But then who listens to an old fart who still puts his foot in it? My Ford Diesel Truck will run off from a Dodge Diesel everytime. I can't find any duramax drivers that will give it a go. The damn city has over grown our local dirt track and closed it. NASCAR has gone to hell and I won't watch anymore. Whats an old man to do?
Bob
from about 1 month ago
Wow... Tough question. I'd say watch Grand Am. That's pretty exciting stuff and at least has some manufacturer support to back up the decals on or the actual car.
write a new comment