Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is a serious question. After all, there are a number of racing specs and series out there, all of whom claim manufacturers should participate because it helps to advance automotive technologies. But while FIA's various races specify 4 cylinder engines with direct injection, turbocharging, advanced transmissions and suspensions, NASCAR is specifying pushrod V8 engines, recirculating ball steering, 4 speed manual transmissions (not 5, 6, or 8, four, and carburetors up to this year, when they finally adopted port fuel injection as the market moves on to DI.
So tell me, other than putting really fast relatively primitive cars into a small box so they can crash into each other and sell concessions, what purpose does NASCAR serve?
So tell me, other than putting really fast relatively primitive cars into a small box so they can crash into each other and sell concessions, what purpose does NASCAR serve?
what is your real concern or reason you don't approve of NASCAR or raceing?
When we had to dump a bunch of money into keeping GM afloat, and they continue to dump money into NASCAR, I think a little introspection is called for.
NASCAR has advanced technology. Consider this-F1 cars produce a similar amount of HP to a NASCAR pushrod V8, using the finest up-to-the-second tech, armies of engineers, and exotic materials. NASCAR uses technology that has been around since the beginning of cars. F1 cars are out of a race if they do much more than rub tires. NASCAR rips off the damaged parts, slaps on some tape, and goes back out.
NASCAR is for the fans. F1 is a tech platform exhibition. I like both, but they can't be compared.
I never understood NASCAR's apparent disdain for superior technology either, but other than cars that seem like throwbacks to 1960's, it looks like they're having a pretty good time.
NASCAR seems to be more about the drivers than the cars. If I want to read about race cars, I read about F1.
They get "corporate sponsors" they pay most if not all of the bill not the tax payer.
Know where your money goes.
If your worried about govt spending there are much bigger pork projects to go after.
Nascar is not subsided by the GOVT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by npaladin2000
When we had to dump a bunch of money into keeping GM afloat, and they continue to dump money into NASCAR, I think a little introspection is called for.
I agree. Not that I'm anti-NASCAR or that I disrespect anybody who follows it, but until 30 years ago or so in order to run a car on the NASCAR circuit the public had to be able to walk into a dealership and buy the exact same car (sans safety equipment and full-race drivetrain). To me it was much more interesting in those days, but I acknowledge that I'm in the minority on the issue.
I never understood NASCAR's apparent disdain for superior technology either, but other than cars that seem like throwbacks to 1960's, it looks like they're having a pretty good time.
NASCAR seems to be more about the drivers than the cars. If I want to read about race cars, I read about F1.
It's not disdain. It's about staying within the original idea of stock cars, grass roots racing, and keeping the costs down. Obviously this is relative, but if the highest tech, unlimited budgets, and cars that have nothing to to do with anything the rest of us can drive are in play, well, that's F1 and Indycar.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.