Annual 'What Would You Change' Thread

[call_me_andrew]

I believe it's been a year since the last call for change. Naturally, I've been looking forward to it.

Management
-Get rid of Mike and Brian. REASON: Obvious!

Racing
-Single file restarts with 30 miles to go (or 20 miles on short tracks) rather than just the last 10 laps. REASON: 10 laps aren’t enough.

Vehicles
-Switch NNC to the Daytona Prototype engine formula (minus the rev limiter) and use gear rule to limit the engines to the vicinity of 10,500 rpm. REASON: The cars would be within about 50-75 horsepower of where they are now, but they'll appease the Sierra Club, bean counters, and technophiles.

See here for details: http://www.grand-am.com/CONTENT/Docs/PDF/2007/DPEngines.pdf

Common PCM's would also be used to eliminate traction control.

-Make NNC cars 200lbs. lighter. REASONS: 1-Saftey. The cars won't roll as far when in a crash. 2-Competion. If cars can brake deeper into the corner, then a car that exits the corners well is more likely to pass entering a turn.

-Make the fuel cells smaller. REASONS: 1-Given the lower weight and the lighter, more fuel efficient engines, it's almost a given. 2-Saftey. If someone's fuel tank ruptures in a crash, there will be less fuel to burn.

-Keep COT chassis, but return to stock hoods, roofs, and deck lids. Wings and splitters would also stay. REASON: To please me and those like me.

-Bring back rain tires at road courses. REASON: Fun

Schedule
-Move races from California, Phoenix, and Loudon to Mexico, Portland, and Montreal. REASON: Expanding to less boring tracks.

-Switch Sears Point date with June Richmond date. REASON: Easier travel.

[BenRoethig]

I believe it's been a year since the last call for change. Naturally, I've been looking forward to it.

Management
-Get rid of Mike and Brian. REASON: Obvious!

Racing
-Single file restarts with 30 miles to go (or 20 miles on short tracks) rather than just the last 10 laps. REASON: 10 laps aren’t enough.

Vehicles
-Switch NNC to the Daytona Prototype engine formula (minus the rev limiter) and use gear rule to limit the engines to the vicinity of 10,500 rpm. REASON: The cars would be within about 50-75 horsepower of where they are now, but they'll appease the Sierra Club, bean counters, and technophiles.

See here for details: http://www.grand-am.com/CONTENT/Docs/PDF/2007/DPEngines.pdf

Common PCM's would also be used to eliminate traction control.

-Make NNC cars 200lbs. lighter. REASONS: 1-Saftey. The cars won't roll as far when in a crash. 2-Competion. If cars can brake deeper into the corner, then a car that exits the corners well is more likely to pass entering a turn.

-Make the fuel cells smaller. REASONS: 1-Given the lower weight and the lighter, more fuel efficient engines, it's almost a given. 2-Saftey. If someone's fuel tank ruptures in a crash, there will be less fuel to burn.

-Keep COT chassis, but return to stock hoods, roofs, and deck lids. Wings and splitters would also stay. REASON: To please me and those like me.

-Bring back rain tires at road courses. REASON: Fun

Schedule
-Move races from California, Phoenix, and Loudon to Mexico, Portland, and Montreal. REASON: Expanding to less boring tracks.

-Switch Sears Point date with June Richmond date. REASON: Easier travel.

I agree with most of what you say, but I'd like to make a couple additions.

-single file: 10 laps for tracks a mile or over, 10 miles for tracks under a mile.

-Engine: Similar to Daytona Prototype, but 6.0L Displacement and more horsepower. DP formula used in Busch and truck series.

-Cosmetic additions such as fake door handles and openings. Real front and taillights.

-Eliminate chase.

-Mexico City, Montreal, Portland, Gateway, Kentucky, Milwaukee, Nashville, and Iowa added to schedule replacing second dates at other tracks.

-Wins bumped to 200 points, 5 bonus points for pole.

-Fuel switched again from gasoline to E100 ethanol.

[Abo]

-Cosmetic additions such as fake door handles and openings. Real front and taillights.

Like it, they could use those lights during night races :D


-Mexico City, Montreal, Portland, Gateway, Kentucky, Milwaukee, Nashville, and Iowa added to schedule replacing second dates at other tracks.

Rockingham UK, just to be selfish. Besides, there's plenty of US servicemen and women based in the UK and Europe who'd love to attend, I reckon.


-Fuel switched again from gasoline to E100 ethanol.

Good call.


Like the idea of moving the double line restarts back on short tracks, but 40 laps at Bristol is a bit much I reckon. Keep it as it is for tracks a mile and over.

[Lee Roy]

My changes:

Points system that gives points only through the 25th or 30th spot. Hopefully would stop the rolling wrecks.

Single file restarts during the last 25% of the race.

Reconfigure the following tracks:

Daytona & Talladega - Reduce the banking to eliminate the need for restrictor plates

Pocono - Tear up the current track and install a first class road course.

Michigan & California - Tear up the current tracks and build different types of tracks that are somehow interesting. I don't really care what, just something other than what they are.

[BenRoethig]

Rockingham UK, just to be selfish. Besides, there's plenty of US servicemen and women based in the UK and Europe who'd love to attend, I reckon.


That Rockingham only has 30,000 seats and would be a logistical nightmare.

[BenRoethig]

My changes:
Daytona & Talladega - Reduce the banking to eliminate the need for restrictor plates

I hate to say it, but I agree. Daytona and 'Dega would get by just as well if they were banked 24 degrees like Texas and Atlanta.


Pocono - Tear up the current track and install a first class road course.


Not a chance. Pocono is my favorite track.

[blakebeatty]

The only logical thing mentioned in this bizzare list of pipe dreams is to stop paying points after a certain position.

[Abo]

That Rockingham only has 30,000 seats and would be a logistical nightmare.

52,000 seats, and yes it would be a logistical nightmare but CART managed to bring their show over. No-one said this thread had to be practical :D

[BenRoethig]

Two things I forgot to add

-Cup series entries must represent a V8 powered sedan (preferably RWD). Busch series cars must represent a mid-size V6 sedan.

-Wheelbase on cup cars stretched to 115 inches to better represent production cars.

[jeffmr2]

Loads of good interesting here.
Single file restarts are a must in my opinion.
I would also like to either get rid of road courses or race on the using local yellow flags,these races are ruined bringing out full course cautions for every minor spin.
Add rockingham UK to the chase (ok never going to happen i know but what the heck!!)

[e2mtt]

Pipe dreams people... I'm not going to ask for much.

points paying positions stop at ~35, fewer rolling wrecks.
Take away 2nd date from California, Pocono, etc. (boring tracks.)
Add more road courses, give Darlington back labor day. (Only really great tracks like Daytona & Watkins Glen get 2 events!)
Keep the CoT, the additional cosmetics to make them look more stock would be cool.
Start the dang races on time, and
PLEASE FEWER CAUTIONS, NO MORE PHONY DEBRIS CAUTIONS, AND GET STARTED AGAIN QUICKER. (The current state of cautions is the most annoying thing about NASCAR... I could write an entire thread about how NASCAR does cautions wrong.)
No more "Lucky Dog" unless the 1-lap-down car is IMMEDIATLY behind the leader.

[harvick#1]

Single-file restarts the entire race :D (with the lucky dog, there is no point for double) ((main reason was the Brenden Gaughan incident with Harvick that topped the cake))

Jeff, Nascar doens't know what a temp yellow is :mark: I love road course racing, but Nascar doesn't know jack how to run one.

no more 1.5 mile and 2 mile D-ovals :devil:

everyone must make short tracks ranging from .5 miles to 1 mile with any banking they want, except for Road Courses, Daytona and Talladega

remove the foam padding from the passenger side :mad:

[Erki]

I would add one more little thing: cut the pre-race crap. I want to see racing, not gas'n'go. :s

[dwboogityfan]

The following are changes that I would make -

1) Scrap the top 35 rule and allow the fastest 43 to race. On larger tracks such as Daytona and Talladega allow 45 starters. Qualifying should be over two days like it used to be.
2) Scrap the second races at New Hampshire, Pocono and California in favour of a race at The Rock, another road course and the Southern 500 back at Darlington on Labour Day.
3) If a team breaks the rules in practice or qualifying (i.e. Mikey at Daytona this year) eject the whole team from the meeting and prevent them starting the race.
4) Get rid of Nextel. They have caused nothing but problems for the teams by preventing new telecommunications companies sponsoring teams (i.e. AT&T with BAM Racing in 2005 and now again with the #31 team and Motorola with the #7 team).
5) Shorten some of the races. 500 miles at some tracks is too long - 400 would be plenty i.e. Pocono.
6) Have more consistency when throwing cautions and ensure TV shows us where debris is on the race track.
7) Award 5 bonus points to the Bud Pole Winner.

[harvick#1]

I would add one more little thing: cut the pre-race crap. I want to see racing, not gas'n'go. :s

YES :D :up:

I don't like giving points to a top Qualifier. you earn the points in the race, not running fast in one lap

I agree with getting rid of Nextel, also Sunoco, (where is Sunoco anyway), I also noticed they left ALMS sice the Audi/Shell Proto keeps winning :D

also Lowe's gives up the right to Charlotte. (too many connections)

I also like a team cheating, kick them out.

[DonnieDarco]

Get rid of the stupid chase thing, its pointless. And learn how to run a race without so many cautions, and I don't give a stuff what the sponsors want :D

It would also help newcomers to the series if every single race had the word Nextel at the front, instead of all these different races like the goody's food something or other, or whatever the current sponsor is. Having the track location in the race name would help too :D Its a small thing, but its flippin' confusing :D

[call_me_andrew]

I agree with getting rid of Nextel, also Sunoco, (where is Sunoco anyway)

They're all over the place around here! Where's 76 at?

I don't see what would make a 115" wheelbase more realistic. The Fusion and Camry are both shorter than 110". The Impala is almost exactly 110". The Charger is the only exception at 120".

I forgot about getting rid of the Chase and phantom cautions. If you want to bend the rules to make the races look more impressive for the sole purpose of fan "entertainment", you might as well give everyone a gun and a barrel full of fish.

I did consider including moving the All Star race to a neutral track out of the U.S. (Rockingham UK or Brands Hatch) but I didn't want to get carried away.

I wouldn't use 100% ethanol fuel though. 10-25% would be sufficent. 100% would be a problem because 1-a lot of fuel is spilled during a NASCAR pit stop and pure ethanol burns with an invisible flame, and 2-If you've got 100% ethanol in your car the ATF is going to tailgate you.

[slorydn1]

Add a road course race at Spa-Francorchamps in Belguim...


I could see it now:

Rookie: "I thought you said you could take Eau Rouge flat out"!?
Harvick: "No....I said YOU could :) "

[BenRoethig]

They're all over the place around here! Where's 76 at?

I don't see what would make a 115" wheelbase more realistic. The Fusion and Camry are both shorter than 110". The Impala is almost exactly 110". The Charger is the only exception at 120".


As I said earlier, the cars should represent "full size" sedans with V8s with a similar length to the cup cars. Mid sizers like the fusion, Camry, Avenger, and Malibu should have to race in the busch series. The 2009 Impala is going to be on the same RWD zeta platform as the Pontiac G8 and have at least a 114.8" wheelbase. Ford is going to have something based on their new E8 platform to compete against the Impala and replace the crown Vic. Likewise, with Hyundai's V8 powered RWD Genesis sedan debuting at New York, you can bet money Toyota isn't going to sit idly buy and let the Avalon get smacked around by the Koreans.

[Old3Fan]

My changes would be:
1 - No provisionals.
2 - 43 fastest qualifiers are in, rest are out.
3 - No Lucky Dog pass.
4 - All restarts are singlefile.
5 - No points given for finishing 20th-43rd.
6 - The Chase becomes 20 cars and the rest of the 43 car field is eliminated.
7 - Better yet, no chase.

[Bob Riebe]

My changes:
Reconfigure the following tracks:

Daytona & Talladega - Reduce the banking to eliminate the need for restrictor plates

ROFLMAO
Eliminate the two tracks that put NASCAR on the national map.


Just get rid of the restrictors; those not belonging in the series will soon be eliminated.

[Lee Roy]

ROFLMAO
Just get rid of the restrictors; those not belonging in the series will soon be eliminated.

And when the first car flies into the stands that'll be the end of racing as we know it today.

[e2mtt]

How about we make them run "stock" SCCA type sporty sedans! Then apply handicapping the way they did in DTM (German Touring car series)

[Lee Roy]

How about we make them run "stock" SCCA type sporty sedans! Then apply handicapping the way they did in DTM (German Touring car series)

Can you imagine the squealing that we'd hear if Jeff Gordon's Chevy got to run 200 pounds lighter than Matt Kenseth's Ford???? You think people are bitching and complaining about the COT (or anything else that NASCAR does), they'd be appoplectic over handicapping. :D

[call_me_andrew]

Can you imagine the squealing that we'd hear if Jeff Gordon's Chevy got to run 200 pounds lighter than Matt Kenseth's Ford???? You think people are bitching and complaining about the COT (or anything else that NASCAR does), they'd be appoplectic over handicapping. :D

Yes, we can imagine that. It will be like 1997 when everyone was happy with the politics of racing.

[Hoss Ghoul]

Can you imagine the squealing that we'd hear if Jeff Gordon's Chevy got to run 200 pounds lighter than Matt Kenseth's Ford???? You think people are bitching and complaining about the COT (or anything else that NASCAR does), they'd be appoplectic over handicapping. :D

All of NASCAR's handicapping is what led to the current COT. Big blocks vs small blocks, wings vs no wings, homogolation rules, 1/2 inch on a spoiler here, 1/2 inch on a valence there, etc, etc...

[Lee Roy]

All of NASCAR's handicapping is what led to the current COT. Big blocks vs small blocks, wings vs no wings, homogolation rules, 1/2 inch on a spoiler here, 1/2 inch on a valence there, etc, etc...

Yep. No one was satisfied with the politiking over the differences in spoiler and valence heights. There was all kinds of squealing over that.

The big block, wing stuff was over 30 years ago so it really doesn't have much relevance on today.

[djarumdudley]

1. eliminate the free-pass rule. if you want a lap back it must be earned
2. eliminate the chase
3. points given thru 30th place
4. no more phantom debris cautions!(since that won't be happening call them competition yellows for what they really are)
5. cut the top 35 back to top 25 in points
6. eliminate the green-white-checkered. races should run to prescribed distances
7. allow racing back to the yellow with under ten laps remaining.
8. single file restarts with 20 laps remaining
9. bring back Rockinham, dump 2nd California date , return Southern 500 to Labor day.
10. return Atlanta to it's original oval configuration(why was it changed to begin with?!?)
11. when a team fails pre/post race inspection a significant penalty will be handed out on first occurence. 2nd infraction of similar kind by same team results in immediate ejection/disqualification without appeal.

[call_me_andrew]

Yep. No one was satisfied with the politiking over the differences in spoiler and valence heights. There was all kinds of squealing over that.

Of course no one was satisfied, but no one really likes to be satisfied. Being satisfied is dull. It's more fun to bitch and moan about spoiler height than it is to watch a spec series.

[Lee Roy]

Of course no one was satisfied, but no one really likes to be satisfied. Being satisfied is dull. It's more fun to bitch and moan about spoiler height than it is to watch a spec series.

A spec-series??? Each team still can build it's own chasis and engine. If you want spec series, then that would be the IRL and Champ Car where you have to choice of one car, delivered from the manufacturer in a box stamped "BATTERIES NOT INCLUDED, SOME ASSEMBLY REQUIRED", and a single engine from the manufacturer with no opportunity to improve it's performance.

The engine room for an IRL or Champ Car team is just the room where they store the crate the engine came in.

[Cole_Trickle]

I agree with getting rid of California, or at least one date, Michigan isn't as bad though.

Don't agree with taking banking away from 'Dega and Daytona, wouldn't be quite the same without it, and the speeds would still be pretty high, there are still 2.66 and 2.6 miles respectively.






-Cosmetic additions such as fake door handles and openings. Real front and taillights.





Would cause too much debris, they wouuld break too easily, even from some light front 1/4 contact.







I wouldn't use 100% ethanol fuel though. 10-25% would be sufficent. 100% would be a problem because 1-a lot of fuel is spilled during a NASCAR pit stop and pure ethanol burns with an invisible flame, and 2-If you've got 100% ethanol in your car the ATF is going to tailgate you.

Assuming it's similar to Methanol, then it should be able to be extingushed with water.

[Lee Roy]

Don't agree with taking banking away from 'Dega and Daytona, wouldn't be quite the same without it, and the speeds would still be pretty high, there are still 2.66 and 2.6 miles respectively.

Actually Daytona is 2.5 miles.

The Indianapolis Motor Speedway and Pocono are both 2.5 miles long and restrictor plates are not needed at those tracks. The main difference is that they are not banked as steeply at Daytona and Talladega. They are also configured differently, and I could also accept a reconfiguration of Daytona and Talladega along with reducing the banking if it would get rid of those damnable restrictor plates.

[BrentJackson]

Complete overhaul of the car setup.

- All cars must have bodywork that is similar to the stock machine that is on the street. Tube chassis are of course allowed, but the bodywork must be able to be interchanged with the stock car, meaning a bodywork from a stock Ford Fusion must be able to fit on a Fusion cup car. Templates WILL be used to check this, and infractions result in immediate disqualification.
- Cars must meet minimum size requirements.
- Overfenders are allowed, as are custom-made front valances, side skirts and rear bumpers. But above 5 inches from the bottom of the body, parts must interchange. Cars including overfenders must have a maximum width of 80 inches.
- Fiberglass bodies, with quick-release latches allowed. Smash a fender? No problem, pull in and fix it right there, pop the latches, replace the fender, set the latches and get back out there.
- V8 engines, max displacement of 427ci, overhead cams allowed, max RPM of 9600, fuel injection and electronic engine management via a spec ECU setup. Bigger displacement = less compression allowed. Set the cars up to make roughly 800 horsepower.
- The Fuel for the cars is 85% 104-octane unleaded gasoline and 15% Ethanol. High-test versions of E85 in other words.
- Minimum weight of 2850 pounds dry with driver.
- Real working taillights.
- Minimum wheelbase of 115 inches
- Because of the stock aero on these cars, you wouldn't need restrictor plates because they would create a LOT more drag than current cars.

Series Changes:

- Ditch the chase. It's pointless.
- One date per track per year, only exceptions at Daytona, Talladega, Bristol, Martinsville and Michigan.

Revised 2007 Schedule:

2/18 - Daytona (2.50-mile)
2/25 - Rockingham (1.017-mile)
3/11 - Las Vegas (1.50-mile)
3/18 - Pikes Peak (1.0-mile)
3/25 - Bristol (.533-mile)
4/1 - Martinsville (.526-mile)
4/15 - Mexico City (3.27-mile road course)
4/21 - Phoenix (1.0-mile)
4/29 - Talladega (2.66-mile)
5/5 - Iowa (.875-mile)
5/12 - Mid-Ohio (2.25-mile road course)
5/19 - All-Star Challenge (this race would move between tracks from year to year)
5/27 - Charlotte (1.5-mile)
6/3 - Road America (4.0-mile road course)
6/10 - Pocono (2.5-mile)
6/17 - Michigan (2.0-mile)
6/24 - Sears Point (1.95-mile road course)
7/1 - Portland (1.96-mile road course)
7/7 - Daytona (2.5-mile)
7/15 - Chicagoland (1.5-mile)
7/29 - Indianapolis (2.5-mile)
8/5 - Milwaukee (1.0-mile)
8/12 - Watkins Glen (3.45-mile road course)
8/19 - Michigan (2.0-mile)
8/25 - Bristol (0.533-mile)
9/2 - Darlington (1.366-mile)
9/9 - Mosport (2.45-mile road course)
9/16 - New Hampshire (1.058-mile)
9/30 - Kansas (1.5-mile)
10/7 - Talladega (2.66-mile)
10/13 - Richmond (.750-mile)
10/21 - North Wilkesboro (.625-mile)
10/28 - Martinsville (.526-mile)
11/4 - Atlanta (1.54-mile)
11/11 - Texas (1.5-mile)
11/18 - Laguna Seca (2.24-mile road course)
11/25 - Barber Park (2.3-mile road course)
12/1 - Homestead (1.5-mile)

[RaikkonenRules]

Ban Cup Regulars from Busch Series. It's a feeder series not a testing ground.

[Lee Roy]

Ban Cup Regulars from Busch Series. It's a feeder series not a testing ground.

The Busch series has never been a feeder series.

[Lee Roy]

Complete overhaul of the car setup.

- All cars must have bodywork that is similar to the stock machine that is on the street. Tube chassis are of course allowed, but the bodywork must be able to be interchanged with the stock car, meaning a bodywork from a stock Ford Fusion must be able to fit on a Fusion cup car. Templates WILL be used to check this, and infractions result in immediate disqualification.

- Because of the stock aero on these cars, you wouldn't need restrictor plates because they would create a LOT more drag than current cars.

Since at a quite a few of the tracks raced on the average speed (during green) is over 150 MPH, how would you address the differences in the drag for the different models? In other words, if the Ford Fusion turned out to be a lot "slicker" than other makes to the point that the other makes couldn't compete, either there would have to be some kind of "equalizing" formula like every other full body racing series in the world uses, or every team would have to race a Ford Fusion. What method would you suggest? Weight penalties, different intake restrictions, differing rev-limits, different fuel capacities . . .



Series Changes:

2/25 - Rockingham (1.017-mile)


Since hardly anyone was attending this race by the time they moved the date, what would you suggest to actually get people to attend this event?

[Cole_Trickle]

Actually Daytona is 2.5 miles.

The Indianapolis Motor Speedway and Pocono are both 2.5 miles long and restrictor plates are not needed at those tracks. The main difference is that they are not banked as steeply at Daytona and Talladega. They are also configured differently, and I could also accept a reconfiguration of Daytona and Talladega along with reducing the banking if it would get rid of those damnable restrictor plates.

You're right, was a typo ;)

However, Pocono and Indy don't have as much side-by-side stuff that Daytona or Talladega would if there was no plates, Unfortuantely there is no real way to run without plates with the those track as they are. I don't really mind the plate races though, having cars 3 and 4 wide is exciting, and I like the high banking, it's just they look a little slow...

[Lee Roy]

You're right, was a typo ;)

However, Pocono and Indy don't have as much side-by-side stuff that Daytona or Talladega would if there was no plates, Unfortuantely there is no real way to run without plates with the those track as they are. I don't really mind the plate races though, having cars 3 and 4 wide is exciting, and I like the high banking, it's just they look a little slow...

I attended a number of races at Talladega and Daytona before they had the plates. I prefer the races without the plates. But that's just me, I realize that other people have different preferences. Keeps life interesting.

[pentti]

I like how it's now just like to add few dirt tracks to Nextel Cup and have brake and throttle lights(longer the light more it's been pressed)on top of rear screens. This is nothing to do help drivers behind, it is for spectators to see how different drivers do it.

[R. Mears]

1. Go back to the origional points system. The driver with the most points wins. Just the way it should be.
2. Eliminate the restrictor plates. Nuff ced here.
3. Have the 22 gallon fuel cells all the time. None of the 13 gallon ship.
4. Eliminate the "luckey dog" it's not fair for someone a lap down to come back to have the chance to win the race. If you earn it you earn it. Relative to #1 above.
5. Eliminate Bristol and Martinsville from the race schedule. It just doesn't make sense to cram 43 cars with 800HP each on to a 1/2 mile track.

[RaceFanStan]

I don't need any changes to NASCAR.
I am quite happy with it the way it is.
I don't think a winning formula needs to changed much.
The recent tweak to the Chase & the COT have pleased me.
I will leave plotting the changes to the people @ NASCAR.

The worst thing NASCAR could do is to adapt rules or changes to match another series.
NASCAR is unique & great effort should be spent to keep it that way ! http://www.motorsportforum.com/forums/images/icons/tongue-anim.gif

[harvick#1]

oh come on Stan, you know you want to change some rules :p :

[RaceFanStan]

Nope, I can accept NASCAR just the way it is because I feel it is the GREATEST racing series. :D :up:

[Lee Roy]

The worst thing NASCAR could do is to adapt rules or changes to match another series.


Amen!!!!

[e2mtt]

1. Go back to the origional points system. The driver with the most points wins. Just the way it should be.
2. Eliminate the restrictor plates. Nuff ced here.
3. Have the 22 gallon fuel cells all the time. None of the 13 gallon ship.
4. Eliminate the "luckey dog" it's not fair for someone a lap down to come back to have the chance to win the race. If you earn it you earn it. Relative to #1 above.
5. Eliminate Bristol and Martinsville from the race schedule. It just doesn't make sense to cram 43 cars with 800HP each on to a 1/2 mile track.

good points 1 thru 4

Eliminate Bristol & Martinsville? BLASPHEMY! HERETIC! BEGONE FROM THIS FORUM!

[DonnieB]

- Because of the stock aero on these cars, you wouldn't need restrictor plates because they would create a LOT more drag than current cars.


Cars started flying due to aero influence in the early 1980's, when they had stock bodies. NASCAR only introduced the R-plates when one of them finally flew in the direction of the grandstand, which was inevitable, given the circumstances. Had someone ripped out 200 feet of catch fencing at Daytona or Talledega in 1981, R-plates would have been implemented then. Current stock bodies are very likely much slicker than the Buick Regal that Phil Parsons flew at Talledega around '82 or '83, and the engines significantly more powerful. A stock 2007 Monte Carlo would make significantly less drag than a COT, and with an 800 hp engine would go fast enough to fly if it got sideways at Daytona, roof flaps notwithstanding.

There are 15 ovals for every road course in the U.S. The Nextel Cup schedule is about right. Too many road courses would significantly change the driver demographic to the point that grassroots American oval racing would cease to be a part of the feeder tree, and we'd have the same situation in stock car racing that exists with open wheel racing, where the top level of American open wheel racing has no relevance to 90+ % of American open wheel racing.

[DonnieB]

I don't need any changes to NASCAR.

The worst thing NASCAR could do is to adapt rules or changes to match another series.
NASCAR is unique & great effort should be spent to keep it that way ! http://www.motorsportforum.com/forums/images/icons/tongue-anim.gif

Yep from me, too. Why do so many point to a series that doesn't draw flies in this country, and say NASCAR should be like this? Never mind that the technology and venue mix they want would wholly disconnect it from the traditional feeder system.

I probably would have done something different than the COT if I were in charge, but the end product would still be much the same as it is, and the same ones whining about how NASCAR is now would be whining about my version.

The biggest difference I would like is that the Charlotte clones would all be Richmond clones. Some of those clones would be Richmond, the 3/4 D-oval and some would be Richmond, the 1/2 paved oval and some would be Richmond, the 1/2 dirt oval.

[Lee Roy]

Hey DonnieB, always love your posts.

[tbirdmedic]

Nascar has changed and evolved many times since its inception. Remember, they used to race on dirt tracks!!!!!!!!!!!!! And they ran as many as 60 races in a year. Heck, they even ran races in Canada for many years. Richard Petty had his first victory up here I think. I dont agree with a lot of the recent changes, but then again, I dont make the rules or pretend to have the marketing savvy that it takes to run a major corporation like this. I will continue to watch, attend races, support my driver and spend gazillions of dollars on Nascar merchandise, throw things at the TV with phantom debris cautions, hate the COT, get pissed when they spend half the broadcast discussing JUAN PABLO and the other discussing FLAME BOY and MINI ME.
BUT, D**** IT ALL, its NASCAR :D

[harvick#1]

oh baby, how about hearing these badboys at Bristol, you'd go deaf :D

anyone got a better car :p :

http://www.motorsport.com/photos/alms/2007/stp/alms-2007-stp-jd-0134.jpg

[R. Mears]

good points 1 thru 4

Eliminate Bristol & Martinsville? BLASPHEMY! HERETIC! BEGONE FROM THIS FORUM!
LMAO, I knew #5 would stir the pot!! But that's my opinion. It's nothing but a demolition derby but that's what most fans like. :D

[Erki]

I don't think the last race at Martinsville was a demo derby. I liked that race very much. (And I'm not into demo derbies)

[R. Mears]

I don't think the last race at Martinsville was a demo derby. I liked that race very much. (And I'm not into demo derbies)
Not every time but you know what I mean. Yes Martinsville was a pretty cleam race for a 1/2 mile. Bristol is usually much worse than Martinsville though either can be clean but the odds are not. I've always been a big track guy myself. Open wheel is where it's at but since Tony George kicked the CART cars out of Indy I've gotten away from open wheel. It was a great time long ago. :eek:

[harvick#1]

the Truck race was horrible at Martinsville.

the problem is that the guys from that race from 15th on back were all mad at each other and kept spinning each other out. while the guys in the front couldn't do anything with Skinner because cautions just kept coming out.

[call_me_andrew]

A spec-series??? Each team still can build it's own chasis and engine. If you want spec series, then that would be the IRL and Champ Car where you have to choice of one car, delivered from the manufacturer in a box stamped "BATTERIES NOT INCLUDED, SOME ASSEMBLY REQUIRED", and a single engine from the manufacturer with no opportunity to improve it's performance.

The engine room for an IRL or Champ Car team is just the room where they store the crate the engine came in.

Can, but doesn't bother.


Assuming it's similar to Methanol, then it should be able to be extingushed with water.

For NASCAR, that means flooding pit road after every stop.


it's just they look a little slow...

Well if you want them to look faster, we can line the back stretch with palm trees spaced 30' apart for a better sense of relative motion.


There are 15 ovals for every road course in the U.S. The Nextel Cup schedule is about right. Too many road courses would significantly change the driver demographic to the point that grassroots American oval racing would cease to be a part of the feeder tree, and we'd have the same situation in stock car racing that exists with open wheel racing, where the top level of American open wheel racing has no relevance to 90+ % of American open wheel racing.

Did NASCAR adopt an oval to road course ratio based on the existing ratio of tracks, or were these ovals built for the demand NASCAR created.


Yep from me, too. Why do so many point to a series that doesn't draw flies in this country, and say NASCAR should be like this? Never mind that the technology and venue mix they want would wholly disconnect it from the traditional feeder system.

We want pure racing. We don't want to manipulate the spirit of the rules to "create entertainment". I'd rather watch a boring race, than an entertaining show.

And maybe they would draw flies if NASCAR wasn't funding an operation to keep OW racing on the back page.

[Lee Roy]

Can, but doesn't bother.

Quite a few of the NASCAR teams build their own engines. Hendrick has over 100 people in his engine departement.



We want pure racing. We don't want to manipulate the spirit of the rules to "create entertainment". I'd rather watch a boring race, than an entertaining show.

I thought you were the one who wanted equivalency formulas??? :confused:


And maybe they would draw flies if NASCAR wasn't funding an operation to keep OW racing on the back page.

NASCAR isn't doing anything to keep OW racing on the back page. American Open Wheel racing is doing everything it can to keep itself on the back page by providing a sh!tty product.

[call_me_andrew]

Quite a few of the NASCAR teams build their own engines. Hendrick has over 100 people in his engine departement.


I thought you were the one who wanted equivalency formulas??? :confused:

NASCAR isn't doing anything to keep OW racing on the back page. American Open Wheel racing is doing everything it can to keep itself on the back page by providing a sh!tty product.

1. Well of course Hendrick has that many people working in his engine department. He's got a lot of customers to buy those engines.

2. There's a difference between equivalency formulas and phantom yellows.

3. They've got a great product, but no one to buy it.

[Lee Roy]

1. Well of course Hendrick has that many people working in his engine department. He's got a lot of customers to buy those engines.

Many other teams build their own engines also. Further, anyone is allowed to build their engines. How many Champ Car or IRL teams are allowed to build their own engine . . . or car?


2. There's a difference between equivalency formulas and phantom yellows.

Equivalency formulas are real. Phantom yellows are internet rumors.


3. They've got a great product, but no one to buy it.

They've got a "great product" is a matter of opinion. "No one is buying it" is a fact. (Guess what, they're not buying it for a reason, most people's opinion is that it's a shi!tty product.)

[DonnieB]

Did NASCAR adopt an oval to road course ratio based on the existing ratio of tracks, or were these ovals built for the demand NASCAR created.
The venue mix in NASCAR is a reflection of the feeder tree upon which it was built. The big ovals NASCAR races on now are just bigger and more spectacular versions of the little ovals NASCAR started out racing on.

The road courses are there mainly as a novelty, rather than as a test of driver prowess. A driver can biff both road races and still be champion. Adding enough road courses into the mix to make them relevant to the championship would trigger a change in driver demographics that would eliminate 90%+ of the domestic talent pool that NASCAR currently draws from.


And maybe they would draw flies if NASCAR wasn't funding an operation to keep OW racing on the back page.

Formula OW doesn't draw flies, for sure, but I was talking about the existing domestic sedan-based road racing series, which also don't draw flies. Lee Roy is right, the OW formula crowd did themselves in, NASCAR didn't have anything to do with it. They are more than happy, though, to take all the short track open wheelers that the CART, Son of CART and the Evil Twin of CART have ignored for the past 20+ years

Oh, and for all the folks who have a working headlight and taillight fetish, I have some proposed names for that idea. Try "Portable Debris" or "Debris on Demand". We'd see new records for yellow flags at Bristol and Martinsville if that were ever implemented.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Ok. First off, there isn't a lot wrong with NASCAR, but unlike Stan, I do see some rules that can be tweaked and changes to be made.
That said, I will stay realistic, there is no proposals for levelling half the tracks, taking away second dates (Bruton Smith has GREAT lawyers y'all)from some tracks or radical change. It is obvious that NASCAR has their formula pretty much down, for they are not hurting for ratings or fans in the stands.

Ok 1) reward people for winning races by a 30 point bonus for winning a race and give no points out for finishs below 25/and being on the lead lap. Reward everyone on the lead lap to 25th place; and if you cant stay on the lead lap, go away. You would have some desparate drives to get that lucky dog reward then. That way, you reward winning, but half-@ssed efforts limping around for points are gone. It also means you still are rewarding staying around but you have to be competitive, not just killing time back there.

I would keep the COT because it is too late to go back now, but I do wish NASCAR would allow a safer fueling system such as a double hose refuelling rig used in OW and Sportscar racing. It would mitigate the splashing of fuel all over you see with the catch cans, but I do understand part of the show of a pitstop would be lost. Heck, it is the only reason NASCAR is the only racing with a hand carried jack, and 5 lug nuts on the wheels, but if NASCAR is really about safety, they would ditch the jackman and go with on board jacks, but the show is part of it. Ditch the gas cans and see what people think.
If you did go to ethanol, the gas cans would have to go for sure.

I would like to see the Chase stay at 10 races and only be 10 drivers. I don't see the point of having 12 in there. It addressed nothing IMO, except reward excellent drivers having bad seasons. If Jeffy and T-Stew didn't have miss the chase in the way they did, the 12 drivers in the chase wouldn't have happened.

I would love to see two more road courses but maybe take two dates of the sched to make room, not add more to a 36 race sched. Why? Simple, the cost of running a special car for road courses (and there is a car they use JUST for road courses) is not rewarded with enough racing for teams to justify the investment. Since road courses are just enough of a difference to give the drivers a new challenge, they have to stay in. That and understand that it allows NASCAR to go into markets without Ovals (international for those of you not reading between the lines). So Road Courses will allow NASCAR some flexability in where they can go racing, while satisfying new markets. I just hope Darlington is NOT the race they take away. I just think some ovals provide for dull racing by anyone's standards. I wish like hell more tracks were built like Richmond, and less like Kansas. What is more, both Bristol and Richmond prove that you can get 150000 fans around a race track less than a mile. The mile and a half tracks are often just a waste of land, resources and time.

Now what would I like to see but isn't realistic??

I would love to see a few ovals gone, but I doubt it will happen. That said, there is so much pent up demand for races, I would like to maybe see two leagues of NASCAR with common events for the big events, that is the Brickyard, Coca Cola 600, Daytona 500 and the like. Take the Craftsman Truck teams, ditch the trucks, and have enough teams and venues to run a two division sched. Divide NASCAR in two, put stars on both sides, and have about 20 common races to both halves of the series. Expand the number of entries or have heat races for when 60 cars show up. (this is only on "common" events).

You could have a "Petty Division" and an "Earnhardt Division", and have common races to both, but it would allow NASCAR to reach new markets and still give double dates to the established tracks that have em. You would also put more names in the sport. To do all of this, you would have to really reduce the cost of running teams however though, because you would need about 70 teams running full time to run a "super series of NASCAR".

I would have the split series dates swap back and forth, so every team running in one division would be seen at each track at least every 2 years. The super common dates would be 10 or so, and would be the major races we have always known. Indy, Daytona, Texas, Talladega, Bristol, Darlington, Charlotte, Richmond, Las Vegas, Watkins Glen would be the venues for the "common races" Divvy up the rest, and give track owners the option of having both divisions visit on separate dates. You could have a place like Charlotte putting on 3 dates a year, one common, and one with each division racing on their own weekends.

Now, if you have 70 plus full time teams, two divisions running 25 of their own dates, 10 common dates at the tradtional favourites and providing a mix of venues, and create a point system that would allow for a 2 race finale at Homestead for all the marbles ( a super chase ) you could have something. I am leaving out TV and how it would work, but maybe two networks would go for it. Not sure if it would kill things or not, but I would like to see a way for NASCAR to reach all the markets that want it in some way, and I think my plan would allow the Nashville, Kentucky, Montreal, Calgary, Seattle, New York plans to work. Right now, you have too many dates, tracks that wont give up the dates, and too many people not willing to build tracks to find out like Kentucky did that just because you build it, it is no guarntee that anyone will come.

IS my idea radical? hell ya, but I aint asking to change NASCAR into being something it isn't. It is what it is, stock car racing, and if I want to watch open wheeled racing or tin tops on road courses, for the most part, I can do that. I watch NASCAR because it is on ovals and it is a spectacle. It is different. What I would to do is bring it to more people.....

[Alexamateo]

I would love to see a few ovals gone, but I doubt it will happen. That said, there is so much pent up demand for races, I would like to maybe see two leagues of NASCAR with common events for the big events, that is the Brickyard, Coca Cola 600, Daytona 500 and the like. Take the Craftsman Truck teams, ditch the trucks, and have enough teams and venues to run a two division sched. Divide NASCAR in two, put stars on both sides, and have about 20 common races to both halves of the series. Expand the number of entries or have heat races for when 60 cars show up. (this is only on "common" events).

You could have a "Petty Division" and an "Earnhardt Division", and have common races to both, but it would allow NASCAR to reach new markets and still give double dates to the established tracks that have em. You would also put more names in the sport. To do all of this, you would have to really reduce the cost of running teams however though, because you would need about 70 teams running full time to run a "super series of NASCAR".

I would have the split series dates swap back and forth, so every team running in one division would be seen at each track at least every 2 years. The super common dates would be 10 or so, and would be the major races we have always known. Indy, Daytona, Texas, Talladega, Bristol, Darlington, Charlotte, Richmond, Las Vegas, Watkins Glen would be the venues for the "common races" Divvy up the rest, and give track owners the option of having both divisions visit on separate dates. You could have a place like Charlotte putting on 3 dates a year, one common, and one with each division racing on their own weekends.

Now, if you have 70 plus full time teams, two divisions running 25 of their own dates, 10 common dates at the tradtional favourites and providing a mix of venues, and create a point system that would allow for a 2 race finale at Homestead for all the marbles ( a super chase ) you could have something. I am leaving out TV and how it would work, but maybe two networks would go for it. Not sure if it would kill things or not, but I would like to see a way for NASCAR to reach all the markets that want it in some way, and I think my plan would allow the Nashville, Kentucky, Montreal, Calgary, Seattle, New York plans to work. Right now, you have too many dates, tracks that wont give up the dates, and too many people not willing to build tracks to find out like Kentucky did that just because you build it, it is no guarntee that anyone will come.

IS my idea radical? hell ya, but I aint asking to change NASCAR into being something it isn't. It is what it is, stock car racing, and if I want to watch open wheeled racing or tin tops on road courses, for the most part, I can do that. I watch NASCAR because it is on ovals and it is a spectacle. It is different. What I would to do is bring it to more people.....

Mark,

When the chase came out, I envisioned it as a way to expand the schedule without requiring the drivers to run every race as they are at the burnout limit now. You've fleshed out how it might possibly work nicely, but of course the devil is in the details. I wouldn't have a two race super chase, I think the "chase" races should number at least 8, to eliminate the 2 or three race hot or cold streaks that drivers and teams inevitibly get on.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Alex, I wouldn't have a long chase. I think 5 races would be fine. Make them five common races at the end of the season, and let the chips fall where they may....nothing is more boring than a guy winning the championship while finishing 20th....

[e2mtt]

I know this is just pipe dreams (nobody liked my street stock cars + equivalency formulas & weight handicapping suggestion???) but Mark In Oshawa's idea is a recipe for disaster & stock-car racing burnout.

Splitting into 2 series, switching dates, only part of the drivers in any given race, etc., would probably work out about as well as the CART-IRL split.

Right now NASCAR is at the peak of national popularity. However the season is long, grueling, difficult, & expensive for everyone, especially the crew out of the limelight. I think the right direction to go from here is to hone the season a little shorter, work to put races in the tracks that draw the best crowds and/or TV ratings, and do everything possible to make the best show without over-saturating the market to where the individual events suffer.

Meanwhile leverage the Busch & Truck series to fill out the rest. Run more events at non-Cup weekends, on smaller tracks, in areas Cup never goes. Maybe make some rules to limit or discourage the top Cup drivers from running Busch, while making it easier for the second and third tier Cup drivers to slide down to Busch to hone their skills & help draw fans.

(An idea I just had would be for the Busch & CTS to not pay points & prize money to Cup drivers who are currently qualified for the Cup chase. This would make it so that it would be a money-losing preposition for top Cup drivers to run Busch, but would make it attractive for Busch teams to let (for instance) Joe Nemachek, Michael Waltrip, & JJ Yeley try and get their cars up front, and draw crowds.)

[Mark in Oshawa]

e2mtt., you could be right. I was softballing my idea up there, but I saw it as a solution for the incredible demand for dates, and the lack of days on the calender to handle them all. Burnout? Hell I thought they would reach that when they had 32 dates, and now we have 36 points races plus two allstar weekends. As for the split, because of the common rules, and common dates, and a rotation of the two leagues to all the tracks, I don't think it would have the effect that the split has done to open wheeled racing.

NASCAR has done some radical things before when we have least expected. Who would have predicted the chase?

Hey, I know they wont do what I suggested, I had a radical idea to a problem that seems like it wont go away. I think it could work with the right sell, because god knows under my idea, I could envision about 20 split events and 10 or so common events, and still put Cup cars on the track at all the places they are asked for.

Your idea works though too, and maybe is more feasible...

[Robert Ryan]

The 2009 Impala is going to be on the same RWD zeta platform as the Pontiac G8
run the Holden Commodore as it is the basis of the Pontiac G8 and both are built here.

[call_me_andrew]

The venue mix in NASCAR is a reflection of the feeder tree upon which it was built. The big ovals NASCAR races on now are just bigger and more spectacular versions of the little ovals NASCAR started out racing on.

The road courses are there mainly as a novelty, rather than as a test of driver prowess. A driver can biff both road races and still be champion. Adding enough road courses into the mix to make them relevant to the championship would trigger a change in driver demographics that would eliminate 90%+ of the domestic talent pool that NASCAR currently draws from.

1. But the small ovals are still there. That would certianly throw the ratio way off.

2. When did the SCCA become a breeding ground of foreign drivers?

3. I don't know if you've noticed this, but NASCAR stopped being American a long time ago.

[Lee Roy]

3. I don't know if you've noticed this, but NASCAR stopped being American a long time ago.


How do you figure that?

[call_me_andrew]

How do you figure that?

Sorry for the long wait.

When you factor in races in Canada and Mexico, buying Canadian and Mexican series, Brian France visiting China, exhibition races in Japan, and an exhibition race in Australia in 1988 (+/- a year), NASCAR has always been bent on world domination.

[Lee Roy]

Sorry for the long wait.

When you factor in races in Canada and Mexico, buying Canadian and Mexican series, Brian France visiting China, exhibition races in Japan, and an exhibition race in Australia in 1988 (+/- a year), NASCAR has always been bent on world domination.

It sounds more to me like feeling out markets instead of planning for world domination.

[tstran17_88]

It sounds more to me like feeling out markets instead of planning for world domination.Damn that capitalism, huh? :D

[Mark in Oshawa]

I would hardly say NASCAR wasn't "American". It is looking outside America, but very carefully, and very slowly, which is natural for NASCAR. They tend not to rush into radical change....that is why the "Chase" knocked people on their rear....

[muggle not]

A change at Bristol.

http://instacam.aws.com/showcam.asp?id=KTRI&size=L