Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

    Originally posted by Speedzzter.blogspot
    Really? I'd like to see the comparative sales figures that prove your claim. My recollection is that the Achieva didn't really set the sales world on fire and that the star-crossed Quad Four had already been replaced by the LD9 Twin Cam 2.4. Moreover, the Taylor's Aurora had virtually no relationship to the bland FWD sleds that killed the storied Oldsmobile brand.
    I think he's talking about the Achieva SCX - a 2.3 liter, quad four powered, 195 hp homologation special. When it came to performance, it was pretty much comparable to the Prelude VTEC of its time. From a marketing standpoint, it was a total flop - not many people ever realized it existed.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

      Originally posted by Matt Cramer
      Originally posted by Speedzzter.blogspot
      Really? I'd like to see the comparative sales figures that prove your claim. My recollection is that the Achieva didn't really set the sales world on fire and that the star-crossed Quad Four had already been replaced by the LD9 Twin Cam 2.4. Moreover, the Taylor's Aurora had virtually no relationship to the bland FWD sleds that killed the storied Oldsmobile brand.
      I think he's talking about the Achieva SCX - a 2.3 liter, quad four powered, 195 hp homologation special. When it came to performance, it was pretty much comparable to the Prelude VTEC of its time. From a marketing standpoint, it was a total flop - not many people ever realized it existed.
      olds never pushed it..
      speedy forgets that the old car (pre cot) nascar lost alot of drivers in it.. and the truck
      that is why.. c.o.t. came about.. the other reason was cost...
      no it's not all that much cheaper for the teams..to build the car
      but It's cheaper than having to change the car every few races because fords winning to much. take some areo out.. chevy's killing pontiac.. give pontiac so more downforce..
      that old car was a cost nightmare..
      it is also CHEAPER for NASCAR.. one body.. one set of templetes,, no more.. the tech is favoring one team/etc
      they all have to run the same body..
      it also.. made nascars life of a tight race easier to control..
      but they (the teams) found a few things that unseat that.. the two car run away... and the restart.. first car gets to bolt ahead as the train take a slow and steady ,catch up...
      to run the cars the way speedy thinks.. would cost a ton.. with all the rule changes as the weeks pasted..
      the other classes he. goes back to.. don't run 36 races a year..
      speedy should study up on rusty wallace and jaws remarks about what the constant rule changes cost..
      when you got 20 cars ready to start a season .and nascar changes a rule..

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

        Originally posted by IRONHEAD
        but It's cheaper than having to change the car every few races because fords winning to much. take some areo out.. chevy's killing pontiac.. give pontiac so more downforce..
        that old car was a cost nightmare..
        it is also CHEAPER for NASCAR.. one body.. one set of templetes,, no more.. the tech is favoring one team/etc
        they all have to run the same body..
        That's what I like about Speedy's rules. Just throw the whole bother about keeping everything equal out the window, and let the tech favor whoever can build the fastest car!

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

          Originally posted by Matt Cramer
          Originally posted by IRONHEAD
          but It's cheaper than having to change the car every few races because fords winning to much. take some are out.. Chevy's killing Pontiac.. give Pontiac so more downforce..
          that old car was a cost nightmare..
          it is also CHEAPER for NASCAR.. one body.. one set of templates,, no more.. the tech is favoring one team/etc
          they all have to run the same body..
          That's what I like about Speedy's rules. Just throw the whole bother about keeping everything equal out the window, and let the tech favor whoever can build the fastest car!
          that's great..BUT
          nascar is entertainment.. and that to not go belly up.. requires fan base that spends money..
          if one make is killing everyone else.. bye bye fan base..
          that's why the hemi/ the ohc/ big blocks/etc
          got the axe..
          everyone forgets it's a business first. racing 2ND.. like it or not

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

            I'm wouldn't say that having identical cars racing in a tight group makes for good entertainment, either. There's a good bit of room in these rules to allow new developments to even up the score, which could make for an interesting arms race ("Ford's just sold enough of their new King Cobra aero packages to get it on track for the Daytona 500. Let's see if it's enough to make up for the intake and header package Chevy brought out in the last race!") You're more likely to see one brand dominate one race, followed by another trying to get revenge, and that makes for more drama in my books.

            It might be a good idea to put a rule in the books that slaps any brand that's too dominant with an automatic weight penalty or something similar, such as "Any brand that takes 3 out of the top 4 slots gets 100 lbs added to their minimum weight" or some such. That would keep any one group from completely running away with the series. The Speed World Challenge has a similar rule.

            One rule I'd change would be the claimer rule - at that level, it would be more likely to get builders to only plan on using the motor one race. (Or was the idea to deliberately get some teams to build high dollar motors and have the other teams grab them?)

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

              Originally posted by Matt Cramer
              I'm wouldn't say that having identical cars racing in a tight group makes for good entertainment, either. There's a good bit of room in these rules to allow new developments to even up the score, which could make for an interesting arms race ("Ford's just sold enough of their new King Cobra aero packages to get it on track for the Daytona 500. Let's see if it's enough to make up for the intake and header package Chevy brought out in the last race!") You're more likely to see one brand dominate one race, followed by another trying to get revenge, and that makes for more drama in my books.
              Part of the reason for the "5,000 units minimum" rules is that it balances the probabliliy of homologation specials with the realities of specialty car marketing. Since many special performance cars are marketed in small 5,000 to 10,000 annual builds, this would allow the factories to establish a business case for common-sense, "real world" homologation cars, and probably avoid the low production excesses of odd stuff such as Superbirds and Pontiac 2+2s (the '86-'87 model, not the big one from the 1960s).

              I do think you're right that there will be ebbs and flows in development . . . but we have that now, even in the "common template" era (e.g. Hendrick Chevrolets).

              It might be a good idea to put a rule in the books that slaps any brand that's too dominant with an automatic weight penalty or something similar, such as "Any brand that takes 3 out of the top 4 slots gets 100 lbs added to their minimum weight" or some such. That would keep any one group from completely running away with the series. The Speed World Challenge has a similar rule.
              That sort of rule might be necessary if the NASA-style power-to-weight rule doesn't equalize competition enough. Of course you've got to balance the incentive to make "real world" production advances with the need for brand-loyal fans to think their favorite make has a chance. Intake restrictors and weight penalties seem to be currently in vogue in most production sports car/touring series I'm aware of.

              One rule I'd change would be the claimer rule - at that level, it would be more likely to get builders to only plan on using the motor one race. (Or was the idea to deliberately get some teams to build high dollar motors and have the other teams grab them?)
              Claimer rules are great for equalizing the haves versus the have-nots and to provide somewhat of a disincentive for over-spending. There will be some poaching by bottom-feeder teams (and some intentional post-race sabatoge, such as the gratuitious, valve-spring-killing burnout (which curiously came into vogue around the time NASCAR really started doing more post-race dyno testing, and which I speculate was partially motivated by teams trying to mask power advantages)). But overall, claimer rules should cause racers to "budget" development around the "claimer" value of the parts. I suggest the claimer price points are high enough to make claims only slightly more or less expensive than where I expect serviceable production-based new parts to cost.

              Of course I didn't suggest the real bombshell rule that I've toyed with: The open specifications rule (i.e. every key specification and variable of the top five cars, from suspension to cam, is posted on the internet for the whole world to see after the race). I figured that one was just too much change for an initial go-round.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

                Originally posted by Speedzzter.blogspot
                Of course I didn't suggest the real bombshell rule that I've toyed with: The open specifications rule (i.e. every key specification and variable of the top five cars, from suspension to cam, is posted on the internet for the whole world to see after the race). I figured that one was just too much change for an initial go-round.
                That's an interesting one, sort of an "open architecture" rule for race cars. This is analogous to a concept that is already applied to software and hardware by the US Navy and, increasingly, other militaries around the world. It has dramatically cut the cost of new weapons and sensors and forced companies who in the past would sooner fight to the death to actually cooperate with one another.

                Regardless, and noting that NASCAR is technically conservative, watching some of the pre-Daytona historical NASCAR stuff being narrated by Dave Despain on SpeedTV reinforces for me how far 'stock' car racing has evolved as both a sport and entertainment concept. Certainly your ideas are very intriguing and you have obviously given this a lot of thought.
                Michael from Hampton Roads

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

                  Originally posted by IRONHEAD
                  that's great..BUT
                  nascar is entertainment.. and that to not go belly up.. requires fan base that spends money..
                  if one make is killing everyone else.. bye bye fan base..
                  that's why the hemi/ the ohc/ big blocks/etc
                  got the axe..
                  everyone forgets it's a business first. racing 2ND.. like it or not
                  ...And it's sucking wind. Seems that attendance & viewership has been on a consistant downhill slide since the the introduction of the COT....

                  Year after year, slowly it slides to oblivion.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

                    what qualifies the author of these rules ? at least gary nelson won a nascar championship , and had decades working on [cheating up ] racecars
                    this proposal will cut nascar spectators and tv ratings down to scca showroom stock level
                    nil

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

                      Originally posted by SpiderGearsMan
                      what qualifies the author of these rules ? at least gary nelson won a nascar championship , and had decades working on [cheating up ] racecars
                      this proposal will cut nascar spectators and tv ratings down to scca showroom stock level
                      nil
                      give it up spidy..
                      these guys don't go to live nascar races..
                      one race every few years don't count..
                      but they'll tell ya. what nascar needs to do..
                      speedy's ideas would make nascar like indy or cart..
                      empty seats .. and on life suppport

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

                        Originally posted by IRONHEAD
                        Originally posted by SpiderGearsMan
                        what qualifies the author of these rules ? at least gary nelson won a nascar championship , and had decades working on [cheating up ] racecars
                        this proposal will cut nascar spectators and tv ratings down to scca showroom stock level
                        nil

                        speedy's ideas would make nascar like indy or cart..
                        empty seats .. and on life suppport
                        And that's different from NACOTR (sorry I had to, because they're not even remotely close to stock now) how?
                        "Somewhere the zebra is dancing". Garth Stein's The art of racing in the rain.

                        Matt

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

                          Originally posted by IRONHEAD
                          Originally posted by Matt Cramer
                          Originally posted by Speedzzter.blogspot
                          Really? I'd like to see the comparative sales figures that prove your claim. My recollection is that the Achieva didn't really set the sales world on fire and that the star-crossed Quad Four had already been replaced by the LD9 Twin Cam 2.4. Moreover, the Taylor's Aurora had virtually no relationship to the bland FWD sleds that killed the storied Oldsmobile brand.
                          I think he's talking about the Achieva SCX - a 2.3 liter, quad four powered, 195 hp homologation special. When it came to performance, it was pretty much comparable to the Prelude VTEC of its time. From a marketing standpoint, it was a total flop - not many people ever realized it existed.
                          olds never pushed it..
                          What does that mean? Are you saying that Olds never advertised its FWD four-cylinder homologation car enough? In Oldsmobile's all-FWD car era, Olds tried to sell FWD performance several times (remember the "International Series" and the "Quad 442"?) But the cars never went viral or even remotely caught on because: (a) the necessary power-to-weight just wasn't there; (b) the FWD tuner market grew up around smaller, lighter, better supported foreign cars; (c) the street cars didn't produce the necessary "hard numbers" to stand out; (d) GM's odd styling of the period and quality glitches hurt the brand.

                          As for "pushing it" in racing, the success or failure of a FWD four cylinder in a poorly-funded support series run for a couple of years on a handful of road racing tracks really isn't very predictive of what a much higher profile V8 RWD production car series would do on a wider variety of tracks.

                          speedy forgets that the old car (pre cot) nascar lost alot of drivers in it.. and the truck
                          that is why.. c.o.t. came about..
                          The safety claim is a red herring. Adequate driver compartment stiffness and protection is featured in any number of touring series cars and sports cars racing around the world. The COT isn't the only way to protect drivers. It's just NASCAR's way. A strong cage with a properly designed carbon fiber seat pod and absorption material could be rigid enough to maintain crash integrity as well as protecting the driver from excessive g forces. The mere fact that an ugly box of a car is hung on top of a less-than-state-of-the-art tubing frame does not inherently translate into greater safety. Moreover, no non-transferrable aspects of the COT safety system have been identified by its defenders on here.

                          the other reason was cost...
                          no it's not all that much cheaper for the teams..to build the car
                          but It's cheaper than having to change the car every few races because fords winning to much. take some areo out.. chevy's killing pontiac.. give pontiac so more downforce..
                          that old car was a cost nightmare..
                          The real cost problem for the "old car" was that teams built several different specification cars for various kinds of tracks. Returning to strict production specifications will mostly eliminate this. Furthermore, note that many GT and touring car series running across the globe "equalize" performance with added weight, intake restrictors and bolt-on aero trims. These are not costly redesigns as implied in the erroneous comparison between the non-production "old car" and the horrible COT.
                          it is also CHEAPER for NASCAR.. one body.. one set of templetes,, no more.. the tech is favoring one team/etc
                          they all have to run the same body..
                          Is this really a factor in NASCAR's billion dollar world? If so, why doesn't Grand-Am force its GT classes into COT-type cars?

                          it also.. made nascars life of a tight race easier to control..
                          but they (the teams) found a few things that unseat that.. the two car run away... and the restart.. first car gets to bolt ahead as the train take a slow and steady ,catch up...
                          So NASCAR should stay with the COT that both the fans and OEM marketers apparently hate because they're lazy? How would production-based bodies and a more production-based 5.2 liter/2.5 liter supercharged formula do anything adverse to make the aerodynamic problems of NASCAR worse?

                          to run the cars the way speedy thinks.. would cost a ton.. with all the rule changes as the weeks pasted..
                          the other classes he. goes back to.. don't run 36 races a year..
                          (a) What weekly rules changes are necessary? (b) Back when NASCAR ran real production-based stock cars, they ran with smaller teams, many of which ran in 50+ events per season; (c) what rule would prevent teams from running 36 or more races per season or platooning cars (as is currently done)?

                          speedy should study up on rusty wallace and jaws remarks about what the constant rule changes cost..
                          when you got 20 cars ready to start a season .and nascar changes a rule..
                          Why are "constant rules changes" assumed in production-car-based racing? Does NASA have "constant rules changes?" Grand Am? ALMS? V8 Supercars? DTM? BTCC? What in the proposed rules would require "constant changes?"

                          Originally posted by SpiderGearsMan
                          what qualifies the author of these rules ? at least gary nelson won a nascar championship , and had decades working on [cheating up ] racecars
                          this proposal will cut nascar spectators and tv ratings down to scca showroom stock level
                          nil
                          Why? Are spectators different from the ones who appreciated real stock car racing in the 1950s and early 1960s? Are they so enamored with the COT that they'll reject anything that actually is derived from an OEM car? What is it about the COT that drives so many fans to races and television.

                          Because NASCAR controlled all of the best ovals and virtually sucks all the air out of the racing media, we've had no opportunity to test any production-based series on ovals, or in a unified series run on combinations of ovals, dirt tracks, road courses, drag strips and other venues.

                          But there are legions of journalists, OEM executives, sponsors and racing fans who desire a return to more production-based, "relevant" stock car racing. Either these folks are lying or they're ready to abandon the slippery slope that NASCAR started taking us down in the late 1960s and which ultimately culminated in the nothing's stock COT.

                          Why is Gary Nelson some sort of infallible genius of motorsports rulemaking? Is winning a championship the test for being able to make logical decisions about rules? If so, then even Bill France, Sr. wasn't qualified to promulgate the "Strictly Stock" rules that started the evolution toward the COT.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

                            Originally posted by IRONHEAD
                            give it up spidy..
                            these guys don't go to live nascar races..
                            one race every few years don't count..
                            but they'll tell ya. what nascar needs to do..
                            speedy's ideas would make nascar like indy or cart..
                            empty seats .. and on life suppport
                            I think most of us understand where you're coming from...why not take a break and congratulate young Bangshifter Walt on his scholarship?
                            Michael from Hampton Roads

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

                              speedy says : " too many commercials mess up my nascar makeover "
                              if it sucked so bad , there would not be that many commercials
                              irl , american lemans , nhra have to buy tv time , nascar gets paid

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Speedy Says: Here are the Rules NASCAR Should Adopt

                                I watched the qualifying races last night and was suitably entertained! The bumping and grinding is fun to watch.
                                That which you manifest is before you.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X