The worst daytona 500 ever?

[38P]

That theory just doesn't explain the poor performance of the second (bottom) groove. Most certainly the inability to consistently bump draft made it impossible to make the bottom groove work for more than a handful of laps.

The only time the bottom groove really worked for more than a lap was when the 48 was up against a damaged car in the outside lane . . . and even then, the slowed outside lane was generally able to keep pace.

It's also likely that the Gen 6 is somewhat less stable than the Trucks or the Nationwide cars, considering the shorter rear overhang and the small spoiler.

Another uncertainty is whether Goodyear brought the right tire to work the bottom.

Considering all that hot air about the "greatest drivers in the World" (not that anyone believes that), it's unsatisfying to suggest that nearly all of them were consumed by a 500-mile attack of follow-the-leader conservatism.

[Scott Liggett]

That theory just doesn't explain the poor performance of the second (bottom) groove. Most certainly the inability to consistently bump draft made it impossible to make the bottom groove work for more than a handful of laps.

The only time the bottom groove really worked for more than a lap was when the 48 was up against a damaged car in the outside lane . . . and even then, the slowed outside lane was generally able to keep pace.

It's also likely that the Gen 6 is somewhat less stable than the Trucks or the Nationwide cars, considering the shorter rear overhang and the small spoiler.

Another uncertainty is whether Goodyear brought the right tire to work the bottom.

Considering all that hot air about the "greatest drivers in the World" (not that anyone believes that), it's unsatisfying to suggest that nearly all of them were consumed by a 500-mile attack of follow-the-leader conservatism.

It pretty obvious that the gen 6's current aero package doesn't work on the low lane. I imagine that Nascar will make adjustments to improve the racing. The old COT were changed nearly yearly to improve racing and ease of passing. This is the first race with the Gen 6, so don't complain this is how the racing will be with forever.

[Bob Holmes]

I think better yet is leave the cubes as they are and make the tracks better and remove the restrictor plates. I would love to see a track that has inverted turns....... Or where the guys are riding on the "walls" while in the turns......

You could buy them all engines for a year for the cost of changing one track per your suggestion.

[Cyclone03]

You could buy them all engines for a year for the cost of changing one track per your suggestion.

True Bob,But....
Earnhart Sr. once said put the Fans in the infield,take off the plates and let em run,or something to that effect. With TV and Jumbotrons that may be an idea who's time has come.
Another idea is to flatten the banking. Indy is 6*,it's near twin Ontario was 9*,200mph laps were run at the Big O a year before Indy.Yes Indy Cars not stock cars but the idea is the same.
At Dayton lower the banking,raise the back strait (up hill exit of 2,down hill out of 4),flat tri oval. That would take 20+mph off.
For years I've said make the tire narrower,an 8" tread on the ground would slow em up.

Build a huge Chicane in the back strait at Daytona,Flat as a Pancake ,Roadval.

The only way to force the drivers to race is force them to change speeds.

Not cheap I know,but how much is the insurance going to go up now that BIG racecar parts made it 12 rows up?Had that happened Sunday those stands would have been PACKED.

NASCAR's answer has allways been a smaller plate, the AERO on the cars is too good for that now. It time for BIG track lay out changes.

As for the most borring,I dont have Outsiders memory. The race had good stories,most everybody knew they were going to the back if they got out of line,so they didn't. I was surprised that there was very little trying things out for later in the first 50-100 laps,when we watch at the track you see that if you know how to look for it,on TV its hard to report in real time.It looks like a mistake if it does'nt work. Danica was treated like the near newbe she is,nobody was ready to take a chance on her.That said she didn't know to help,or who,when. She got lots of time up front and unless NASCAR muzzelled everybody nobody has bashed her.She does need to hit the street in an old muscle car with no traction control and learn how to launch a hot rod without blowing the tires off. She smoked the tires nearly to turn one coming off her pit stops.

[Bob Holmes]

Never going to happen.

Who pays for changes to the track...track owners and given that NASCAR, through its affiliated companies is one of the biggest track owners, they aren't going to pay for that. Especially when they can make car changes...at a cost to the team owners, costing NASCAR nothing.

Build a Chicane at Daytona...they already exist. As part of the roadcourse. Nobody wants the Daytona 500 to become anything other than it already is. You are suggesting a fundamental change in the type of racing.

Insurance is based on risk, one event does not make a trend. Furthermore, although both track construction costs and insurance costs can be passed off to the consumer, the cost of track construction will be far higher, will have a different tax treatment and will take far longer to recoup.

In the end, its a business.

[38P]

I agree with Bob.

Cutting down the banking at Daytona and Talladega has been talked about for a couple of decades. ISC (Read: the France Family) won't do it because of tradition and cost. Also, Pocono is a good model of what might happen to race attendance if the high banks are cut back.

Moving everyone to the infield also won't happen. Many American race fans are used to being able to see the whole track from their seats (which seems to be a problem holding back most road racing in America). The F1/sports car Jumbotron substitute will not satisfy most of the fans.

While I would love to see NASCARs run all or part of the Daytona "roval," it wouldn't be the Daytona 500.

(BTW, if I ran NASCAR/Grand-Am, I'd add a Cup-based Stock Car class to the Rolex 24 . . . most of the superteams have enough drivers to "team up" three or four to a car, and still give some road course experience to some Nationwide, Truck, and ARCA drivers. )

As for TC's suggestions of running on the wall . . . even if it wasn't cost-prohibitive, recall the Indy Car race at Texas which was cancelled about a decade ago because the drivers were blacking out from the g-forces. Would the drivers run fighter pilot pressure suits? Would anyone be able to withstand that many gs for nearly three hours?

And how would that fix the "no passing" problem.

[38P]

An endurance racing "stock car."

[38P]

Le Mans Charger

[TheSilverBuick]

And how would that fix the "no passing" problem.

Easy, watch the competition just fall away when you brake check them

[BigDad]

[realsteelfreak]

But one-groove, single-file "parade" "racing" at speeds too high to "use the bumper" . . . and the virtually elimination of bump drafting, except for perhaps Biffle and Keselowski when the 48 was threatening before the last caution . . . isn't exactly "pack racing."

However, compared to the 74 lead changes of the 2011 Daytona 500 -- which was the zenith of "tandem" racing -- the 2013 Daytona 500 was almost like the stereotypical Formula One "follow-the-leader" race (before KERS and movable wings).



Not true. A more stock-based formula could yield decent speeds that would use enough fuel and tires to need pit crews. Relief drivers would not be any more necessary than they were during the first decade of Daytona racing.



The GM teams also narrowed their cars (compare Petty's 1984 "200th Win" Grand Prix to a production GP). The Thunderbirds had a slight aerodynamic advantage until NASCAR allowed the "cheater" "Aerocoupe" and 2+2 conversions. In 82-84, the Thunderbirds had a slightly lower ride/roof height as well.

Elliott's big mechanical advantage was Ernie Elliott power under the hood. Ernie's cylinder head work was briefly ahead of the other Ford builders, and -- as shown by all the current NASCAR spec engines having splayed valves, instead of traditional inline "wedge" heads -- Cleveland-type heads had more power potential than 22-degree SBC heads. Ernie seemed to lose his advantage once Robert Yates was back in the Ford camp (Yates started with Holman-Moody before FoMoCo pulled the rug out from under the Ford teams. Yates built some dominating Chevrolet engines before Ranier-Lundy (which became RYR) switch to Ford)

I like Fords ,but you run it in the ground.
Somebody refresh my memory and and tell me what car the Ford drivers was racing in Busch series during the Tbird heyday. I believe it was a Buick, powered by a Buick V6 mainly built by Carl Wegner.
You seem to be one sided in your automotive journals here on BS.
Surely not a racing fan, or fan of history. You need to speak the truth.
That little Buick had more of a impact than anyone wants to admit to, in Busch and Cup.

[Cyclone03]

I agree with Bob.


(BTW, if I ran NASCAR/Grand-Am, I'd add a Cup-based Stock Car class to the Rolex 24 . . . most of the superteams have enough drivers to "team up" three or four to a car, and still give some road course experience to some Nationwide, Truck, and ARCA drivers. )
.

Now this would be cool.
But allow eng.rearend and transmission replacements if required. IIRC a cup team did a trans swap in 7mins.

[yellomalibu]

9. When even drafting masters like Dale Earnhardt Jr. cannot make the traditional slingshot pass or the bottom lane work, NASCAR's still got a problem at restrictor plate tracks.
.

What was that pass that Jr. made on the final lap? It looked like he hung back a bit, than floored the go pedal, and slung around Danica so fast she couldn't block him.

Several of the drivers said that in the draft they were something considerably less than full throttle, so in the short term, I the slingshot pass will work. Without drafting help, however, it needs to be timed just right, as the cars out of the draft were down almost 10 mph.

...but I agree it was quite boring to watch. I was on the infield in turn 3, and lost interest early when Stewart crashed. I also pulled Johnson in a pool - but since this pool picked the paying spots randomly (14, 11, and 29th) , all I was doing was wanting Jimmy to go backwards so I could win some money... but no, he won.

[38P]

IYou seem to be one sided in your automotive journals here on BS.
Surely not a racing fan, or fan of history. You need to speak the truth.
That little Buick had more of a impact than anyone wants to admit to, in Busch and Cup.

Oh yeah . . . there sure are a lot of V6s in oval track cars today . . . . Big, big, big, big impact. . . .

[Matt Cramer]

2. Daytona's frontstretch wall is too low and the catch fence is too weak.

Got to take issue with that one - the catch fence may be too low, but not too weak. Kyle Larson had his car slammed into one of the gates - most likely the weakest point in the whole fence - and you ended up with an engine on a section of walkway, a spectacular fireball, but nothing really big actually got into the seating are through the fence. I didn't see how the tire got in firsthand - was too distracted by some of the other flying parts - but some of the videos taken showed it sailing over the fence.

They had completely removed the gate by the time they were running the 500. I'm not sure if they concluded a gate at the end of the turn was too much risk, or couldn't find one on short notice.