What is this thread even about, exactly? I can't make hide nor hair of it.
Ended up the usual "pushrods and turn left" bigoted jibberish.
Posted 02 March 2012 - 12:35
What is this thread even about, exactly? I can't make hide nor hair of it.
Advertisement
Posted 02 March 2012 - 13:45
Posted 02 March 2012 - 13:49
The EU demands 30% less oil than the United States. Furthermore, the EU more or less operates under the theory of balanced trade. Trade deficits and current account deficits are not something that trouble your economy, while in the US they are a serious problem, politically and economically. For this reason, the US auto industry and the US Federal government have agreed to CAFE 2025 which will make 5.0L V8s undesirable for a majority of the population.
Fuel is relatively cheap in the US compared to Europe, but we don't like paying for it. Furthermore, when the price of oil increases, our economy is more sensitive to the changes b/c the inflation percentage is much greater. Theoretically, we could put a 100% excise tax on the cost of gasoline, and after 30 years our economy might adjust, but, generally, Americans hate spending money on gasoline, even if it is "cheap". We also have a penchant for fuel-saving technology and Japanese cars, thus, Americans do strange things like buy 500% more Prius than Europeans, though gas is "cheap".
It's a weird world. What can I say? $4 gas takes the wind out of our sails, and it causes cost-push inflation throughout our entire economy.
Posted 02 March 2012 - 13:57
Why do you think NASCAR and the manufacturers switched from production cars to bespoke space frames and strictly regulated bespoke engines?
Posted 02 March 2012 - 15:00
Posted 02 March 2012 - 17:05
ROFLMAO-- thumb twittlers unite, you will be millionaires.I agree.
Retro race series', for the likes of us, will be the only surviving motorsport, while we're still around to watch it.
We've already lost the next generation of potential fans; subsequent generations won't be interested in watching, when they can compete themselves in high-tech virtual racing across the internet.
In 20 years some teenager will be more famous as motorsport world champion, and richer, than Seb Vettel is now, without leaving their lounge.
In 50 years our kids entire life experience will be provided by computers !
Posted 02 March 2012 - 17:27
Posted 02 March 2012 - 17:29
Why do you think NASCAR and the manufacturers switched from production cars to bespoke space frames and strictly regulated bespoke engines?
Edited by Bob Riebe, 02 March 2012 - 20:29.
Posted 02 March 2012 - 18:12
Advertisement
Posted 02 March 2012 - 18:52
They adapted the tube-frame not related to any thing cluster-f because FORD quit making a RWD vehicle that could be homologated for NASCAR racing.
By this time Big Bill was dead and his son was not even a shadow of his father as far as racing management.
When NASCAR allowed FORD to put a farce on the track, Chevy figured if they can do so can we, so FWD 4 dorr crap-wagons became the farce parent.
When Chevy built the Monte Carlo body which was supposed to be their ace hole just for NASCAR and it turned out to be a turd, rather than do as Big Bill would have done and told Chevy that is your problem, Little Bill caved in and let Chevy run something not even close to the shape of the street car.
As far as engines go two reasons they use non-street based engines is: A: NASCAR told Chevy they could not use the LS, B: NASCAR told Dodge that there block gave them a bore advantage so they changed the rules that using a production block was a waste of time, C: Ford quit putting push-rod engines in their vehicles, even though they were the last manufacturer to use a street based engine.
Washington is involved as their sh-t for brain arrogant, we are god laws, killed family sedans because asinine mpg rules made producing and selling truck and utility vehicles more profitable and easier than trying to fight or deal with Washington passenger car laws.
I.e. that helped kill the RWD passenger car.
One last factor was for Detroit, FWD crap-wagons were cheaper to produce and Detroit did not care that they are more expensive to repair, have performance disadvantages compared to RWD, and when they get old rather being capable of being fixed comparatively cheaply, at home by many owners, so as to soldier on for decades, they are pretty much junk worth scrap metal within a decade.
My cousin had Dodge Intrepid which a utility truck owner backed into the front wheel of. The fender repair was no worse than any car, but what the impact to the front wheel did to the drive train, caused the car to be scrapped. It was rust free and had never been in any other accident, but repair was more that the car was worth.
Had that happened to a RWD car, I or my cousin and I could have replace any front suspension pieces needed and fixed it ourselves
Posted 02 March 2012 - 19:01
Edited by MatsNorway, 02 March 2012 - 19:03.
Posted 02 March 2012 - 19:47
Posted 02 March 2012 - 20:07
Yes, thanks for the good info. A few things I'd not heard before. I was hoping that if VP answered the question, he would realize there was a long list of political, technical, and governmental regulatory reasons why NASCAR looks the way it looks today. If NASCAR were to return to production bodies, all of these complexities would have to be unwound, or cars would simply re-evolve into spec tube frames with bespoke engines.
The government definitely killed American V8 saloons with CAFE regulations, and I doubt the new footprint rules are going to alleviate the situation.
Edited by Vanishing Point, 02 March 2012 - 20:12.
Posted 02 March 2012 - 20:17
Posted 02 March 2012 - 20:24
One winter a car ran a red-light, so late and so fast, it spun my '66 Plymouth Fury around 180 degrees over a curb, neatly slicing off a road sign. (There was a semi in the turn lane, so I could not see it coming. Had I not waited briefly because of local red-light runners, it probably would have gone through behind me.)Yeah but if a RWD car had significant rear end damage...
This has become an argument about wishing RWD was more prevalent on the road. Which is honestly nothing more than nostalgia.
Edited by Bob Riebe, 02 March 2012 - 20:31.
Posted 02 March 2012 - 20:25
Posted 02 March 2012 - 20:36
Some Chevrolet employees did that to a Lumina/Monte Carlo, with the idea of marketing a kit to do so.They could just allow the manufacturers to convert their FWDs to RWD. and still run original bodies. It would have made series like WTCC much better.
Its quite a common thing in national rallycross series.
Edited by Bob Riebe, 02 March 2012 - 20:36.
Posted 02 March 2012 - 21:22
If people loved production racing something like Speed World Challenge or Grand-Am Cup would be top billing in North America.
The 24 Hours of LeMons would beat Daytona, Chump Car would have more prestige than the Indianapolis 500.
Edited by Vanishing Point, 02 March 2012 - 21:24.
Posted 02 March 2012 - 21:49
I'm trying to work out where you're getting your evidence that big V8 rwd saloons are dead .
Posted 02 March 2012 - 22:14
Posted 02 March 2012 - 23:12
IT IS 2012
Edited by phoenix101, 02 March 2012 - 23:12.
Posted 02 March 2012 - 23:33
We're not driving around in cars from the 1980s (1960s before Daytona). You need to forward this message to NASCAR. If they need to be in 2.0L turbocharged inline-four-bangers, feel free to let them know the 21st century has dawned.
I think the rest of us are more content to analyze how V8 sedans, then all V8s, have died an ignoble and acrimonious death. Also, we think that the production market has a dearth of decent exhaust notes. In my last post I floated the idea of a blown miniblock. That's a V4, if you're unfamiliar with the parlance. Blown four-cylinders are, like, so 2012.
Killing the V6 with a blown V4. Now that could get interesting. Those blown V4s would sound like their great great grandpappies who still race in NASCAR Sprint Cup.
Edited by Vanishing Point, 02 March 2012 - 23:35.
Posted 02 March 2012 - 23:34
IT IS 2012
Posted 03 March 2012 - 00:26
Posted 03 March 2012 - 01:30
So you're all about downsizing using mickey mouse engines in probably equally mickey mouse cars and you want ovals replaced with mickey mouse tracks to suit your mickey mouse cars.I think what you're looking for is something like our so called British 'Touring Cars' on mini tracks built somewhere like Disney World where you'll probably find plenty of fans who wouldn't know the difference between a CTSV to a Honda Civic.Or at least if not now they soon won't when they've all let Obama finish with his idea of wrecking US car culture.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 02:25
What is this thread even about, exactly? I can't make hide nor hair of it.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 03:31
If you want 1960s style racing, that's fine.
If you want road relevant, or production based, or whatever term you want to use; style racing that is also fine.
But you can't have both. Because it's no longer the 1960s.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 03:45
Magoo,
The OP linked to a short article in the Economist proposing NASCAR should make regulation changes in order to grow revenues for some of the teams and race promoters. The article was more about the business of NASCAR, and not NASCAR's technical sophistication (or lack thereof). But even from a business standpoint, the Economist misses most of the relevant issues.
First, the Economist seems to think that NASCAR is in bad shape because some teams have far more financial resources than others. All racing series are like this, even at the amateur/club racing level. It's just the nature of the sport.
The Economist also seems to think that NASCAR's success is because fans can relate to the appearance of the race cars. "......one of NASCAR’s attractions is that its cars look like those in fans’ driveways." Once again, the Economist demonstrates its ignorance of why NASCAR's business model works. Cup cars don't bear any resemblance to the car of an average NASCAR fan, and the fans don't care. Instead, NASCAR fans relate to the drivers, teams, and crews.NASCAR racing is popular because it rebels against modern forms of political correctness, like environmentalism, rather than conforming to them.
Lastly, the Economist thinks NASCAR racing overall is in financial trouble because the revenues of some teams and race promoters has declined in the past 3 years. Unfortunately, the Economist fails to appreciate that almost every other US business in entertainment or marketing has suffered financially as bad, or worse, than NASCAR. NASCAR didn't get where it is by thinking short term. NASCAR survived much worse US economic conditions, such as those in the late 70's. It will do just fine in the years to come.
Hope that helps clear things up for you.
Regards,
riff_raff
Edited by Vanishing Point, 03 March 2012 - 03:50.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 04:00
Advertisement
Posted 03 March 2012 - 08:55
This has become an argument about wishing RWD was more prevalent on the road. Which is honestly nothing more than nostalgia.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 08:58
They could just allow the manufacturers to convert their FWDs to RWD. and still run original bodies. It would have made series like WTCC much better.
Its quite a common thing in national rallycross series.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 11:55
Posted 03 March 2012 - 12:39
Jags in NASCAR and races at Le Mans.
Right.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 13:01
Posted 03 March 2012 - 14:17
I accept your point, and agree that strategy is often overlooked by those wanting instant entertainment.So try again and watch for the thinking racing rather than the redneck racing and it may just surprise you.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 14:19
Nostalgia that's apparently winning over if you look at current trends and plans manufacturers have - just have a look at the current publicity the Toyota 86 is getting worldwide.
Of course the beancounters will never let them go away from FWD cause it's just too cheap to make and most people don't care but the ones that do care are a big enough market to swing it, Kia and Hyundai seem to think so along with others.
Will be interesting to see what happens with the Australian Ford Falcon sales when it inevitably goes FWD.
Edited by Vanishing Point, 03 March 2012 - 14:27.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 14:22
Yeah, in the 1950s
NASCAR isn't going to become a DTM/ITC-series.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 15:53
Posted 03 March 2012 - 17:02
Pony cars already exist and the market it doing just fine. (it would make sense for NASCAR to adapt those as the bae cars for the cup)I only know of one mini-block that has ever been built for production in the last 40 years. LINK It's built by Katech for Motus Motorcycles, and the engine will allegedly be available in crate form. It's not Mickey Mouse, and it could potentially recreate the American pony car segment. While Ross might think it's too 1960s, GM unveiled a new Gen Y pony car with RWD. It wasn't a great concept, but they see the need.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 17:11
Mainly because the current France boy has not even a tiny fraction of instinct and knowledge that Big Bill France did.Yeah, in the 1950s
NASCAR isn't going to become a DTM/ITC-series.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 17:23
Posted 03 March 2012 - 18:05
Anyone who says in an interview, as he did, he is soooo busy and overwhelmed he cannot sit down and enjoy a NASCAR race, is a whiny metrosexual little boy.Brian France is Metrosexual? Do you live in a mudpit?
Posted 03 March 2012 - 18:05
Anyone who says in an interview, as he did, he is soooo busy and overwhelmed he cannot sit down and enjoy a NASCAR race, is a whiny metrosexual little boy.Brian France is Metrosexual? Do you live in a mudpit?
Posted 03 March 2012 - 18:20
Brian France is Metrosexual?
Posted 03 March 2012 - 18:35
Posted 03 March 2012 - 20:46
Listen dipshit, pick a side. Either you want 1960s historic racing or you want current luxury car RWD racers. They're not going to race an E-Type with a fire bottle at the Nordschleiffe nor a Cadillac GT car at Le Mans. Whether Cup or Nationwide.
Edited by Vanishing Point, 03 March 2012 - 20:47.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 20:54
Mainly because the current France boy has not even a tiny fraction of instinct and knowledge that Big Bill France did.
Bill was a former racer and a gear-head; Brian is a panti-waist metrosexual.
A series could be made with production chassis (the space-frame roll cage would function as the real chassis as was done in the Trans-Am) but unless Detroit demanded it, it will not happen.
To those who keep saying "unresticted" NASCAR engines have NEVER BEEN unrestricted, they had homologation requirements and only approved carbs could be used.
Gear ratios, jet settings etc. were open to what was available over the counter.
Posted 03 March 2012 - 20:57
Posted 03 March 2012 - 21:01
To be a true metrosexual, I would think one's suit would have to fit properly.
I think I know something about NASCAR, and I think I know something about the North American passenger car market. And yet this discussion makes no sense whatsoever.
Advertisement
Posted 03 March 2012 - 21:15
Wtf would we want to do that? Does something magical happen when we get to 7 litres?