If it keeps them there, it's not all bad.
NASCAR and Japanese brands
- Thread starter GT Mike
- Start date
- Status
"and taking advantage of rural people"
Let's see. They are taking “advantage of rural people”. Let's say Product Company "X" located in geographical region "Y" was selling products to people in geographical region "Z". For some reason geographical region "Z" could not get facilities to produce this same product (even though they are well up to the task). So, they had to pay company "X" whatever price they demanded for a product produced in geographical region "Y". Geographical region "Y" was living high on the hog because they were taking money from geographical region "Z" (which included many rural people) because there was no competition. Now company AA moves in and offers these "rural people" jobs to produce product "BB" and company "AA" is accused of "taking advantage of rural people”?
[ August 05, 2006, 09:50 PM: Message edited by: JavaMan ]
Let's see. They are taking “advantage of rural people”. Let's say Product Company "X" located in geographical region "Y" was selling products to people in geographical region "Z". For some reason geographical region "Z" could not get facilities to produce this same product (even though they are well up to the task). So, they had to pay company "X" whatever price they demanded for a product produced in geographical region "Y". Geographical region "Y" was living high on the hog because they were taking money from geographical region "Z" (which included many rural people) because there was no competition. Now company AA moves in and offers these "rural people" jobs to produce product "BB" and company "AA" is accused of "taking advantage of rural people”?
[ August 05, 2006, 09:50 PM: Message edited by: JavaMan ]
Hate taking this off topic again, but as long as the guys putting my car together didn't need PhDs,or even BAs or BSs, to qualify for the job then $14 bucks I believe is fair. There are people out there who make way less than that. Also, if you think that providing those jobs for people who need to put food on the table isn't doing this country a favor, then imagine all those people without jobs and living on welfare. Maybe that would be doing this country a favor.
I believe Dirt Track Racers should be the ones credited with inventing drifting. Apparently something got lost in the translation and the Japanese thought it should be done on asphalt instead of dirt.
I live in Michigan and have worked in the auto industry for a while. I can tell you that I have not had a good job since I was downsized. All of the jobs are going to Canada,Pakistan,India and Mexico. The jobs that are left are controlled by temp. employers that only let you stay their for about 89 days as opposed to hireing you in after a 90 day trial period. Their was a time I would not even look at a job paying $14 an hour but now I would jump at the chance!! I would relocate to the south in a hurry if I was guranteed a job! When you do not know how you will pay next months bills any reliable job looks good. Just so you know shareholders at GM make up a preety ecclectic(sp) group. Most of the money they get goes off shore! The EU is offering greater risk to reward ratio in terms of speculation and that is were most of the profits are going.
You're making it sound like Toyota invented factory support and engineering development. They've invented nothing of the sort.
NASACAR was formed in 1949 (where exactly was Toyota and their racing program in 1949?). In the early 1950's, mfr's like Hudson and Oldsmobile were offering special performance parts directly developed by the factory and given to their top NASCAR team, ostensibly to make the cars safer but the real benefit was to help their cars win.
By the mid-1950's, Ford, Chevy, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Buick, Chrysler and others had ratched up the levels of factory parts and engineering support to unheard of heights. In 1957 the AAA banned factory involvement in auto racing in the US. Domestic mfr's were deeply involved in the engineering and development of race cars and racing technology long before Toyota sold their first car in the US.
Today the "big three" spend hundreds of millions on NASCAR engineering and development. Toyota ain't doing nuthin' that Ford and GM haven't been doing for 50 years.
As for wind tunnel testing, all the NASCAR teams spend extensive amounts of time in the tunnels. How many wind tunnels does Toyota own in the US? (Hint: The answer is between zero and zero). Most NASCAR teams use the Lockheed tunnel in GA or the NASA tunnel in Langley, VA. Roush Racing uses a tunnel in Canada and many GM teams use the GM tunnel in Michigan.
As a NASCAR fan I'm glad to see Toyota entering NEXTEL Cup. But everyone I know believes Toyota will struggle in Cup for at least the first few years. For proof, just look at the ungodly amounts of money Toyota has spent in Formula One. And for what? To get waxed race after race after race by Ferrari, Renault, Mercedes, and after today, Honda.
Clearly, money can't buy wins in F1, and it won't buy them a thing in Cup.
What makes you think there is no cheating or innovation in NASCAR? If you really believe that, you have no idea what is going on in the sport.
At the beginning of this season, one of NASCAR's best crewchiefs, Chad Knaus, was banned for 4 races by NASCAR officials. If he wasn't banned for cheating, what was he banned for? Tying his shoes wrong?
Dude, come on, cheating exists in all forms of auto racing. Just because the rules in NASCAR are strictly enforced doesn't mean people aren't spending endless hours trying to bend them to their limits.
And using drag racing is a poor example. Drag racing is a far simpler form of motorsport than most others. You don't need a lot of rules to effectively police it. And drag racing and the NHRA has certainly had their issues with cheating. Do some research about the Wayne County Speed Shop if you don't believe me.
Well, I guess F1 will get it's day in NASCAR as JP Montoya left the pinnacle of motorsports for the 500 miles of left turns.
While NASCAR and F1 are 2 different sports, the technological advancement of F1 over NASCAR is pretty phenomenal. F1 in every way is more advanced. The cars are faster at most points, and overall it is more physically demanding on the driver. (Good lord.......let the opinions roll in on this paragraph.)
On topic, the statement made about all 43 cars finishing at the same time was spot on.
GO RICKY BOBBY BABY!!!!
While NASCAR and F1 are 2 different sports, the technological advancement of F1 over NASCAR is pretty phenomenal. F1 in every way is more advanced. The cars are faster at most points, and overall it is more physically demanding on the driver. (Good lord.......let the opinions roll in on this paragraph.)
On topic, the statement made about all 43 cars finishing at the same time was spot on.
GO RICKY BOBBY BABY!!!!
So it was those Duke boys like I've been lead to believe?quote:
Originally posted by 427Z06:
I believe Dirt Track Racers should be the ones credited with inventing drifting. Apparently something got lost in the translation and the Japanese thought it should be done on asphalt instead of dirt.
This might ruffle some feathers?
WRC > F1 > Indy > Nascar > nothing
It is truly all about the money. NASCAR is starting to have to work a little harder at finding event sponsors and Toyota is certain to jump in on that too as they have in the truck series. Also with them having total control over the body shell with the new "Car of Tomorrow" soon they'll be able to hand any manufacturer a set of prints for the body and an engine and they'll be able to let them jump in.
No thanks, I quit watching the restrictor plate races about 3 years ago, and since they did away with the Southern 500 on Labor Day, and went to "common body templates" my interest has gone south (sorry). I think this will do it for me. I'm sure NASCAR will make a lot of money even without me, but I'll have a lot more time for other hobbies.
No thanks, I quit watching the restrictor plate races about 3 years ago, and since they did away with the Southern 500 on Labor Day, and went to "common body templates" my interest has gone south (sorry). I think this will do it for me. I'm sure NASCAR will make a lot of money even without me, but I'll have a lot more time for other hobbies.
I have yet to understand this logic. They attempt to equalize the playing field so it's more about driver skill, strategy and team effort, and people are turned off by this?
The restrictor plate business doesn't make sense to me either.
If they want to slow the speeds,(they've said as much), then just reduce the engine size to 5 liters(302-305 ci.), the big three and Toyota have engines that size or smaller and that would tighten the pack up as well.
My 2¢
If they want to slow the speeds,(they've said as much), then just reduce the engine size to 5 liters(302-305 ci.), the big three and Toyota have engines that size or smaller and that would tighten the pack up as well.
My 2¢
There is a very simple answer to this one.
The cost to develop a completely new engine for NASCAR, such as a 5.0L V8 as you suggest, will cost teams (not NASCAR, not GM, not the TV advertisers, the TEAMS) millions and millions of dollars.
The cost of a restrictor plate is about 5 bucks.
The net effect is the same. If you were a NASCAR team owner, which would you choose?
Keep in mind that to be competitive in Cup, you'll need to pony up around $20 million annually. Still excited about the multi-million dollar "investment" just to slow down the cars a bit?
There is nothing radical about the Dodge V8 block. It is 360 Magnum truck block with P7 heads.
Chevrolet uses their small block and Ford the old windsor block. I lost the link to it, but there was a good article back in 2001 on the Dodge devlopment of their engine at the time. Block had to be a stock pushrod V8. Article had quotes from Petty, Evernham and Bill Elliot. I'll have to look in my stack of Mopar Performance magazines, it had a couple issues on it and it is a stock Block!
Chevrolet uses their small block and Ford the old windsor block. I lost the link to it, but there was a good article back in 2001 on the Dodge devlopment of their engine at the time. Block had to be a stock pushrod V8. Article had quotes from Petty, Evernham and Bill Elliot. I'll have to look in my stack of Mopar Performance magazines, it had a couple issues on it and it is a stock Block!
Whole new forms of cheating were invented by the Nascar guys. That's why there are so many rules currently. Things like 7/8th scale cars that just so happen to fit the templates and gas tanks that are dented only to be popped out later with compressed air.
Much of the Nascar lore centers around the best cheaters...
I agree, NASCAR and F1 are 2 different sports. As an engineer, technological advancements fascinate me. However, as a spectator, the F1 races have gotten just plain boring. NASCAR rules and it's presentation just makes watching the sport more exciting for me. Nothing like watching Tony Stewart bang someone in the door for crowding him, only to have the following retaliation ensue. And if you want to attend a live event (highly recommended if you really want to have your senses tweeked), there's a much greater chance of one being able to attend an event here in the states.
What was the response when NASCAR reduced the engine size from 7 liters to 5.7?
Given advance notice( three years from now-5 liters, guys!), the teams would have plenty of time to develop their engines. Wouldn't cost much more that testing and proving the engines they run now. Many may be using the smaller engine already in other races, or as street H.O. units.
Any major change costs some development money, change still comes, eventually.
Given advance notice( three years from now-5 liters, guys!), the teams would have plenty of time to develop their engines. Wouldn't cost much more that testing and proving the engines they run now. Many may be using the smaller engine already in other races, or as street H.O. units.
Any major change costs some development money, change still comes, eventually.
But then you need two engines, the small one for Super speedways to keep the speed down, a bigger one for the other tracks where you need the power to accelerate...otherwise it'd be like watching VW bugs race.
When did the engine downsizing rule come into effect? 1972? Something like that.
Obviously engine development costs have increased exponentially since then. And what would be the net benefit of going to something like a 5.0 Liter formula?
Back in tha day, one of the main reasons NASCAR changed their engine formula was because the big blocks could not be developed more than they were and the factories were not spending money on newer technologies to keep the big blocks state of the art. Even powerhouse teams like the Wood Brothers had a difficult time finding high quality engine blocks to build race engines with. Ford had stopped developing their big block family and the availability of top quality castings was drying up with no sign of replacement. Ford had moved on with their small block engine development program and NASCAR teams needed to follow.
Clearly we're not in the same situation, what with Toyota and DCM spending tons of $$ to develop new engines strictly for NASCAR competition. So we're back to, what's the benefit to downsizing the engine formula beyond ust slowing down the cars?
The problem right now is that the drivers don't have to lift for the corners at the big tracks. It takes 3-4 laps for them to get up to speed and they run the tracks flat out. That bunches the cars up terribly and takes the driver out of it to a large degree. It also makes accidents more likely and guarantees there will be more cars involved. No matter how good you are you can still get caught in "the big one."
Back when the cars had no plates, or even farther back when they had big motors the field got spread out much more quickly. No way could they run the corners at 220+ and the good drivers and cars went to the front right away. The problem was, the straightaway speeds were so high, more than a few cars ended up in the catch fence.
Nascar responded with plates to slow them down but in the process brought us huge multicar wrecks and all the other **** that goes with plate races.
What's needed is cars with less mechanical traction and less aero dependency so they can't corner flat out and can run in traffic as well as they run outside of it. Not too easy to do apparently although that's their stated aim with the whole "car of the future" program.
The real way to fix it is to make the tracks flatter. I don't see that happening ever though.
One other thing - Put my vote in with Al Unser and the other guys who say that aerodynamics has ruined racing. Look at how hard it is to pass in F1, or Nascar, or anywhere with high speeds. A car needs to be much faster to pass because when you're right behind someone you lose much of your aerodynamic traction...
- Status
