Nascar on "Road" circuit

[Subaru WRX]

why Nascar is doing only 2 road racing events, at Infenion Sears Point and Watkins Glenn :confused:
i think that is very poor even I know its all about "stock cars" running on big ovals.

[Mihai]

It's been debated on the old forum whether NASCAR should have more road courses or not.

http://archive.motorsportforums.com/vb2/showthread.php?threadid=123833

I believe NASCAR Nextel Cup will stick to just two in the mid-term future (with the possible addition of the "Gilles Villneuve" track in Montreal, Canada) because the 'predominant oval series' is a stock-car recipe for success. Besides that, they don't want too many European drivers who master road courses better than most current NNC regulars. :)

[Cole_Trickle]

I like it how it is..

[Labonte Massa]

I wish they would run more road courses. It would be great to see stock cars at Road America, Laguna Seca, Miller Motorsports Park, Road Atlanta, etc.

The road races are the most exciting (not like that says much...try to name 1 race that was exciting for ALL FOUR HOURS...you just can't), and they will be the only races I watch next year, besides maybe Richmond and the races I already planned to attend.

However, I'd honestly prefer to see NASCAR fall apart on ovals and F1 take all the US road courses (never gunna happen).

[Subaru WRX]

Nascar cars are not suitable for tracks like Laguna Seca or Road Atlanta, but it will be great of course to see them there, at least the Busch

[Lee Roy]

why Nascar is doing only 2 road racing events, at Infenion Sears Point and Watkins Glenn :confused:
i think that is very poor even I know its all about "stock cars" running on big ovals.

In the US, most professional auto racing has always been done on ovals. It's the tradition here. Traditions don't change easily.

[Sparky1329]

None of NASCAR's race vehicles are suitable for road courses. That's why those races are so much fun to watch. I'd like to see more added to the schedule.

[harvick#1]

yes, they are the only cars that can pass on a road course, hense they are not suitable cars :p :

I would like to see Portland come back to the CTS or NBS. Road America would be funny especially if some one would run out of gas on the last lap,

[Jonesi]

Nascar cars are not suitable for tracks like Laguna Seca or Road Atlanta, but it will be great of course to see them there, at least the Busch

I saw 3 or 4 Winston West races at Laguna Seca in the 80s. There's really nothing wrong with the cars at road courses, it was most of the drivers didn't know how to drive them. There were maybe 3 drivers that could drive well, Jimmy Insolo in partiular was fast.
With the current group of Cup drivers at LS, 1 or 2 would hit the perfect setup and run off, another half dozen would be close, half the field would be mediocre, and a few struggling at the back. Hardly different from most other Cup races.

[oldhippie]

nascar should drop all the road courses :p

[harvick#1]

what Watkins Glen has been the best race of the season the last two years, and the Busch race with Robby and Kurt was awesome

[Cole_Trickle]

I race in the game Nascar Heat, you can download Laguna seca for it, I'm not sure what series/who is driving, but there is a pic black Pontiac GP with Suzuki on the bonnet takiong the corkscrew, so they can race there..

I thknk the cars not being made for road racing makes it good, not particularly big brakes (apparantly, they still look pretty big to me), big heavy cars, lots of power, soft tyres and no electonics really makes it a 'drivers' car if you know what I mean, I think driving a Cup car would be alot more fun to driver around a road course then say, a V8 supercar.

[BenRoethig]

It's been debated on the old forum whether NASCAR should have more road courses or not.

http://archive.motorsportforums.com/vb2/showthread.php?threadid=123833

I believe NASCAR Nextel Cup will stick to just two in the mid-term future (with the possible addition of the "Gilles Villneuve" track in Montreal, Canada) because the 'predominant oval series' is a stock-car recipe for success. Besides that, they don't want too many European drivers who master road courses better than most current NNC regulars. :)

I don't worry about the european drivers. I don't know if they could drive a car without electronic aides and I don't think they know how to perform an on track pass either. ;)

I'd love to the New Hampshire races replaced by Montreal and Mexico City. Assuming they have some kind of assurance from the criminals to behave that weekend at the later.

[Rollo]

I thknk the cars not being made for road racing makes it good, not particularly big brakes (apparantly, they still look pretty big to me), big heavy cars, lots of power, soft tyres and no electonics really makes it a 'drivers' car if you know what I mean, I think driving a Cup car would be alot more fun to driver around a road course then say, a V8 supercar.

A Typical NASCAR is:
358cid
725bhp
and crucially 3400lbs

A V8 Supercar in comparison is:
300cid
620bhp
and only 2970lbs

A smaller car with less weight should equate to (and does in practice) a car which should be quicker on an undulating road course by virtue of the fact that it takes less energy to accelerate and slow down the vehicle.

A V8 Supercar should be less of a handfull and not as clumsy ergo a better car to drive on such a course.

[Cole_Trickle]

Yeh I agree, V8 supercar would be quicker, but a Cup car would be much more spectacular, there is no EFI so driveability would be slightly less too (ie: less smooth)

To me that's a drivers car, being hard to drive, and that's great to see :D

[lugnut_usa]

I've always enjoyed the road courses in NASCAR, probably because my favorite drivers have always been good at them (Rusty Wallace, Tony Stewart, Robby Gordon).

I'd love to see more of them, though I have nothing against ovals. I live about an hour away from Martinsville, growing up so close I've been to plenty of races both there, and at other tracks in the region.

Being there live is always more interesting than watching on TV, as far as ovals go. There's always something happening that you might not see on TV. Sure, the front five might be running single file, but the racing around 20th or so is usually pretty exciting because everyone there is in a big hurry not to get lapped. ;)

Road course racing, by contrast, I think is better on TV since you can't see much when you're at one live.

Same applies to the superspeedways...I got to sit in victory lane at Daytona during the Pepsi 400 in 2003 (Biffle's first win), and while that was extra cool to be right there at victory lane, I barely saw any of the race. Luckily some of the media guys had TV's set up nearby.

[DonnieB]

Since there are 15 ovals for every road course in the U.S., having 2 on a 36 race schedule is about right. When the schedule gets up to around 45 races, they can add a third road course.

[Hayden Fan]

The Car of Tomarrow looks like a Touring Car from Europe. Many think it looks bad, but I am a fan of DTM and that is the only cool thing about NASCAR. And wouldn't a car that looks alot like a TC, do well on a road course. How about an IndyCar, NASCAR double at ST.Pete.

[Lee Roy]

How about an IndyCar, NASCAR double at ST.Pete.

With the exception of Monaco, street races are lame and are only run because a racing series has trouble attracting paying fans out to a race track. NASCAR does not have that trouble.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Lee Roy, I think Monaco is one of THE WORST street courses. Narrow, no room to pass, no straightaway of note.

NASCAR could run anywhere they wanted to, but they never really have looked seriously at doing a street race because it isn't what they are about. That doesn't mean the show wouldn't be great. You know enough about road racing to know that it isn't a bad show when you have 43 cars on a tight road course. I can tell you that the CASCAR late model series up here has been racing at Toronto for years and has put on some terrific races. They put on a great race as a support for CCWS at Montreal. So if you took 43 Cup cars and them on the RIGHT street race, one with room to move, pass and stretch the cars out a little, it would be SPECTACULAR. Would it be NASCAR?? Well, most of the hard core NASCAR fans would say no, but I think it would be a hoot. I love the Glen and Sonoma every year, and I think big overpowered, undertired race cars are always fun on a road course. Contrary to popular belief, it wouldnt allow the Euro's to get a handle on winning a race either. Look how many road course ringers have been running Cup dates and Busch dates on road courses. Only Ron Fellows has actually been successful at winning at Busch as a "Ringer" and no one has beat a Cup regular yet since Dan Gurney won at Riverside.

Contrary to popular belief, there are some damn fine road course drivers in the NASCAR Cup garage, and some come from out of nowhere, just look at Denny Hamelin winning this year at Mexico.

[tassiedevilAB]

I for one can not wait to see those Busch & cup cars racing on the road courses.
Ambrose will have to look at some of the 70's & 80's australian touring car championships vids to see how to wrestle the cars in 4 wheel drifts & sliding past cars by inches to spare, those were the days when you could say you enjoyed your racing, driving from the seat of your pants!

But in the COT car it could be a little different, & more like a v8supercar feel to him?

either way it should be fun!

[Mark in Oshawa]

Tassie, he wont look at old video of Aussie Touring Car races from the 70's to learn. He will just do what he does best and drive. I think Ambrose will be happy to run road courses, but he will also find out that the NASCAR boys can do this road course thing much better than he realizes....

[monaroCountry]

Ambrose wouldnt need to watch old vids.

Ill be just like racing in V8 supercars, with just some differences.

NASCAR drivers will drive fairly well. Something many Europeans tend to underestimate.

[24thunder]

I love the road courses,require a heck of a setup and a driver that's either suited to running the road courses or is clever enough to actually go to a racing school to better his/her ability at navigating such courses!
There should be at least 1 more road course and that being among the final 10 races of the season,let the potential future Champion have to negotiate a road course at cruch time!
If you want to drop any type of tracks/events,then let the plate events go by the wayside,boring IMHO!Hoping there's no "big one" this year at the plate events!

[call_me_andrew]

I recall someone here called the road courses in NASCAR a niche. I did a little research and found that last year, the Sears Point race alone had almost twice as many TV viewers as both Loudon races combined.

[BenRoethig]

I recall someone here called the road courses in NASCAR a niche. I did a little research and found that last year, the Sears Point race alone had almost twice as many TV viewers as both Loudon races combined.

I also don't seem to remember the moonshiners who created stock car racing running into too many high banked ovals running from the law in the backwood of the south.

[tstran17_88]

I also don't seem to remember the moonshiners who created stock car racing running into too many high banked ovals running from the law in the backwood of the south.I think they did run on dirt ovals to prove who had the fastest car though.

[call_me_andrew]

I think they did run on dirt ovals to prove who had the fastest car though.

How many dirt ovals have/had 31 degree banking?

Not counting that thing Bristol tried.

[DonnieB]

I also don't seem to remember the moonshiners who created stock car racing running into too many high banked ovals running from the law in the backwood of the south.

Big Bill didn't start NASCAR because he saw a bunch of moonshiners running from the law on backwoods roads. He started it because he saw a bunch of guys racing souped up cars on little quarter-mile dirt tracks around the south. It is just coincidence that the guys racing on the dirt tracks were also moonshiners. If Big Bill had lived in Dayton instead of Daytona, he could have seen the same thing going on in the midwest, and he could have started NASCAR there just as easily, and then folks wouldn't have the moonshiner mystique to lean on to support the idea of more road races in NASCAR. Besides that, it would have overtaken open wheel racing much, much sooner if Big Bill had started NASCAR in the midwest.

[Bob Riebe]

Remember NASCAR ran on more road circuits, as did other stock car sanctions, in the early years.
Fireball Roberts and Curtis Turner were very much proponents of more road races.

Bob

[R. Mears]

Most drivers never have had expierience on road courses untill Bush/Nascar. That's why they don't like them and don't want more. Now a few like Tony Stewart and most recently Juan Montoya do, that's why Tony is king of Nascar road courses. Jeff Gordon is also king, but don't ask me why. That's why I've always said he should move up to Cart/Champ cars. LOL

[Alexamateo]

How many dirt ovals have/had 31 degree banking?


Lehi, Arkansas was a huge 1.5 mile highbanked dirt track that ran from about 1954-1957. It was a fast dangerous track, a car killer and driver killer literally. They were probably ahead of their time, and paving might have saved it but it was not to be and the track failed. My dad went to a Nascar race there as a teenager and hated it. It was hot, dusty and there was no water or anything at all for the fans in the infield, and of course they were stuck there and couldn't leave until the race was over.

What's left is still there and you can make out the banked turns especially. It must have been quite a sight in it's day.

http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&q=&z=14&ll=35.138441,-90.315857&spn=0.031515,0.05785&t=k&om=1

Have to say though, the current property owners are a little humorless about people coming on their property :p : :eek:

[William S]

It might surprise you that a Cup car is about 8 seconds per lap faster around Sears Point than a 2007 Porsche GT3 (street car with street-legal tires), according to the April issue of Excellence magazine.

[Jonesi]

Were they running the exact same course? Besides the big course differences, there's a few minor variations like Turn 7 & 9.

[call_me_andrew]

I know some guys who went to Watkins Glen for some club races a few years back. Someone had the brilliant idea to race some mid 90's (then) Winston Cup cars against Porche GT3's. The Winston Cup cars had a 20 second head start and still lost.

Let's not forget that at the Daytona 500, they mentioned that the Z06 pace car has a top speed of 198, while the restrctor plate cars have a top speed of 192 (and that's draft assisted).

[BenRoethig]

The plate restricted cars are putting out about 450 horsepower compared to over 800 regularly. You don't want to see cup cars going 240.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Andrew, for a guy who posts on the racing forum for NASCAR, you really need to stop and give your head a shake about what the sport is about. First off, of course the GT3 Porsche beat a NASCAR on the long circuit at the Glen, but those NASCAR's were also not regular cup cars nor drivers. Put the GT3 on the shorter Glen track against a Cup Car, and the difference would not be that large. The Long course is not really fair to the heavier Cup car, so what are you really pointing out? What is more, on the short course the Porsche would be making all its time on the faster cornering speeds, because in a straight line, the Cup car would eat it up. AS for your assertion about the z06 being faster than the cars it was pacing, big deal, as it was pointed out, the Cup cars are being muzzled from their usual ferocity by the plates. Again, instead of proving a point, you merely make your selective ignorance make your arguments look sad.

NASCAR doesn't race on many road circuits because for the most part, its roots are on ovals, and that is what the drivers have become familiar with. What is more, the management of the series is very coginizant of the fact many NASCAR fans don't get road racing, and that is something that NASCAR will always cater to. Watching a road race live means you cant see the whole track, you have to watch battles that are in front of you, you have to watch the gaps between cars and you have to be aware of the positions a car can be making up when you don't see the passes. That said, last time I looked, they had over 100000 fans at both the Glen and Sonoma so I guess the races are not going anywhere. People watch anyhow. Maybe NASCAR fans are smarter than people give them credit for. AS for the drivers, well, some like Sterling Marlin hate road racing, while others like Mark Martin, Tony Stewart and Jeff Gordon love it. A good driver wins no matter what the course, and the argument that more road races would attract more Euro's is bunk. They will come because of the money and opportuinity, and if they can beat out an American for the ride on skill. Considering that even if NASCAR added two road races, and took away two ovals, I don't think it would change the fact it is an oval heavy series, and in that, you would have to pretty much grow up around stock cars to really understand the culture.

No "ringer" has won on a road course in Cup since Gurney last won in 1970 at Riverside, and he was hardly some foreigner now was he? NASCAR would be enhanced in my opinion by two new road course dates, but it would mean likely 2 dates from ovals would disappear to make room. That just doesnt seem to work. Face it, there is a ton of a demand for Cup dates, they run 36 now, and that is about the limit. That is the reason there are no more road courses than the 2 we have. I suspect the teams would like 2 more so they would get more of their money's worth out of the special cars they build for road racing, but the COT maybe will mitigate that extra cost.

All I know is big heavy high powered stock cars turning left and right is a lot more entertaining than some of the snoozy afternoons I have spent watching races from Fontana, Michigan, New Hampshire, Chicagoland and Kansas. It is of course just my opinion, and I have enjoyed many oval NASCAR events and wouldn't want them to go half road courses, but I must say, they do a better job on road courses than many series that race on road courses only. Could it be 43 cars all pretty close in performance being a factor?? OH ya....and that is what makes NASCAR work so well. Anyone has a shot....even at Watkins Glen....

[William S]

Were they running the exact same course? Besides the big course differences, there's a few minor variations like Turn 7 & 9.

Yes, both were running the same course. It was Johannes van Overbeek testing the GT3 and they compared the lap time to Jeff Gordon's Cup track record.

And note that it was a GT3 street car, not a ALMS GT3 racecar.

[Bob Riebe]

If the NASCAR boys could choose decent tires, instead of the mediocre things they are forced to use, their lap time would be quite a bit quicker.
Bob

[Bob Riebe]

The plate restricted cars are putting out about 450 horsepower compared to over 800 regularly. You don't want to see cup cars going 240.

I would travel a long distance and pay a lot to see that.
Bob

[Cole_Trickle]

If the NASCAR boys could choose decent tires, instead of the mediocre things they are forced to use, their lap time would be quite a bit quicker.
Bob

mediocre tyres are another part of what makes it good, if they had super grippy awesome tyres, there would be less overtaking, higher cornering speeds = less opertunity to overtake.

[call_me_andrew]

The plate restricted cars are putting out about 450 horsepower compared to over 800 regularly. You don't want to see cup cars going 240.

Well of course I don't want them going 240. But I think they can manage 210. The plate cars have gotten a little slower over the last 10 years, but they're a lot safer.


Andrew, for a guy who posts on the racing forum for NASCAR, you really need to stop and give your head a shake about what the sport is about....

Slow down there skippy. I'm only repeating the story as told. I wasn't there. I can't veryify anything. I'm just saying it.

[Mark in Oshawa]

NASCAR wont let the speeds creep up now at Talladega or Daytona because the Insurance men wont let them. That is the dirty little secret......

As for your statements Andrew, you should state that "I heard ...." or " this is not my opinion" but you didn't state it in that fashion....

If you believe in something, say so...and say it is your opinion if it isn't an obvious fact.

That said, pointing out how the Porsches are so fast compared to a Cup car again misses the point. Stock car racing is not about pure speed. If it was, Goodyear would give them rubber that would make a cup car a veritable rocket ship based on the lap times. NASCAR is about entertainment as much as it is about the purity of the sport. The reason NASCAR is successful is the show is entertaining to people who have no knowledge of the science of racing. It is a good battle of drivers who all have a shot. To demean NASCAR for this was my point Andrew. The cars are not the fastest cars in the world of racing, but they are putting on one of the most successful shows. My point is you cant criticize NASCAR for putting slow race cars on a track ( relatively slow...still damned fast) because their purpose isn't to race Porsches on road circuits. Let the Porsche run a 500 lap short track event at Martinsville.....and see how long it lasts....

[call_me_andrew]

I'm sorry, I thought I made that point clear. I'm also pretty sure that I've argued in favor of road courses in other threads. I'm all for bringing in foreign drivers and nameplates.

It's the entertainment aspect that's killing the purity of the sport. It's no longer a matter of "my Ford is faster than your Chevy", it's "my generic vehicle with a Ford badge is faster than your generic vehicle with a Chevy badge".

I don't think they need to be the fastest cars in the world, I just think they need to be faster than they are now.

[Hoss Ghoul]

NASCAR wont let the speeds creep up now at Talladega or Daytona because the Insurance men wont let them. That is the dirty little secret......

As for your statements Andrew, you should state that "I heard ...." or " this is not my opinion" but you didn't state it in that fashion....

If you believe in something, say so...and say it is your opinion if it isn't an obvious fact.

That said, pointing out how the Porsches are so fast compared to a Cup car again misses the point. Stock car racing is not about pure speed. If it was, Goodyear would give them rubber that would make a cup car a veritable rocket ship based on the lap times. NASCAR is about entertainment as much as it is about the purity of the sport. The reason NASCAR is successful is the show is entertaining to people who have no knowledge of the science of racing. It is a good battle of drivers who all have a shot. To demean NASCAR for this was my point Andrew. The cars are not the fastest cars in the world of racing, but they are putting on one of the most successful shows. My point is you cant criticize NASCAR for putting slow race cars on a track ( relatively slow...still damned fast) because their purpose isn't to race Porsches on road circuits. Let the Porsche run a 500 lap short track event at Martinsville.....and see how long it lasts....


Ha, actually I happened across an interesting article in the Sept. 06 issue of Excellence magazine about just that. Seems in the late 60's Porsche won a Manufacturer's Championship in NASCAR's Grand Touring Series(and nearly the overall Drivers Championship). The series was a "take on the SCCA's then wildly popular Trans-Am series" and consisted of 5 liter and under 2 liter classes and ran on everything from Daytona's road course to Darlington to paved and dirt bullrings. Little known but interesting(if off topic) historical tidbit.

[William S]

My point was not "how the Porsches are so fast compared to a Cup car". Rather, I was surprised at how much faster the Cup car is than the Porsche. Stop being so defensive. I'm on your side.