NASCAR, not like the good old days?

[Adam43]

There will probably be a lot of F1 fans checking out NASCAR for the first time. Can any established NASCAR fans be nice to them, they are harmless. Welcome them in and take the opportunity to fill them in on the intricacies of NASCAR.

However I thought I'd start a thread to make the F1 guys feel at home - A thread moaning about the lack of overtaking! Not NASCAR v F1 (clearly an easy discussion and one that will be pointless), but NASCAR 2006 v NASCAR good old days!

Can you help the newbies understand a little more about NASCAR, can they feel at home by whinging about the same things

Is NASCAR racing not what it used to be? Was it better in the old days, or is that a myth?

Is it just at the restrictor races were the overtaking has been reduced? What is the issue here? Is it the lack of throttle response makes it harder to punish another's mistake? Are there less mistakes because the cars are pegged back? What is it?

Is there more overtaking in Busch or Craftsman than in Nextel?

And most importantly, is rubbin' racin'?

BTW most F1 fans won't know the ways to overtake in NASCAR, because the only demonstration they have seen was played out on Nicole Kidman's leg. Their minds were elsewhere.

[rustyfan]

It's no secret overtaking has become harder on the intermediate tracks - the race at ChicagoLand just this weekend was an excellent example of the dreaded "aero push" that has plagued NASCAR since the late 90's (yes, not even "low-tech" NASCAR has been able to escape the problems with modern aerodynamics that are messing up the racing in numerous racing championships worldwide).

This is also one of the major reasons NASCAR is working on the "Car of Tomorrow", to "roughen" up the aerodynamics a bit and decrease the negative effects, making it easier to race close to another car once again.

[Adam43]

Isn't there a lot of resistence to the "Car of Tomorrow"? Why is this? Is it just fear of change, the expense of change, or are there fears this will make things worse?

[rustyfan]

Depends on who you ask - the car owners complain about the cost of building a new fleet of cars, while quite a number of fans (and others) complain about the look of the car.

Personally I can agree, to a certain extent, with those who dislike the look of it, but if the racing overall gets better I'm all for it.

[thebear]

An interesting explanation of the effects of aerodynamics during overtaking in NA$CAR can be found in Ed Hinton's book, "Daytona, from the Birth of Speed to the Death of the Man in Black".

Ed is the syndicated writer of a newspaper motorsports column originating at the Chicago Tribune. His research, insights and personal recollections are definitely worth `the read', even for non-fans or casual observers of NA$CAR.

Ask your local librarian for it or BUY ISBN 0-446-52677-0.

If you have any doubts, read the reviews on the linked page.

[kingfloopy]

There is a lot of changes since the old days. It's hard to list them all. In the old days you had fewer drivers capable of winning races, NASCAR has changed the rules a lot to make the playing field more equal. I don't know if this makes the racing better or not. You also used to have a lot more interesting people before sponsorship became huge, today the drivers are more likely to avoid rocking the boat. Smokey Yunick is one good example of a guy in the past who wasn't afraid to tell like it is (read his autobiography, its amazing).

J.D.

[the.cosmic.pope]

Originally Posted by rustyfan

It's no secret overtaking has become harder on the intermediate tracks - the race at ChicagoLand just this weekend was an excellent example of the dreaded "aero push" that has plagued NASCAR since the late 90's (yes, not even "low-tech" NASCAR has been able to escape the problems with modern aerodynamics that are messing up the racing in numerous racing championships worldwide).

I belive the problem of aero push is massivly exagerated. They (commentators) and some fans talking about it like it makes passing almost impossible, like F1 at Monaco or something. But watching any races, its just not true. Sure it makes passing harder, but its still happening quite alot. It happened all the way through the Chicagoland race right through the grid.

Whilst it is something that hampers overtaking, i dont think its made it overly difficult. But thats just opinion.

[rustyfan]

Originally Posted by the.cosmic.pope

I belive the problem of aero push is massivly exagerated. They (commentators) and some fans talking about it like it makes passing almost impossible, like F1 at Monaco or something. But watching any races, its just not true. Sure it makes passing harder, but its still happening quite alot. It happened all the way through the Chicagoland race right through the grid.

Whilst it is something that hampers overtaking, i dont think its made it overly difficult. But thats just opinion.

Obviously it's not a problem in every race, but in some select races - like at ChicagoLand - it is, on the other hand, very noticable. There were long stretches of green flag racing when Gordon simply could not close an inch on Kenseth because he reached a certain point where the turbulence created by Kenseth's car made Gordon loose grip in the front end - despite being 8-10 car lengths back!

Hopefully the CoT will remedy that, however, and allow for proper slipstreaming on tracks like ChicagoLand as well once it's introduced.

[StuiE]

Yep, it made that race a tad boring, that was still alot of overtaking compared to an F1 race, but that's nothing for a Nascar race :P

[muggle not]

Originally Posted by kingfloopy

There is a lot of changes since the old days. It's hard to list them all. In the old days you had fewer drivers capable of winning races, NASCAR has changed the rules a lot to make the playing field more equal. I don't know if this makes the racing better or not. You also used to have a lot more interesting people before sponsorship became huge, today the drivers are more likely to avoid rocking the boat. Smokey Yunick is one good example of a guy in the past who wasn't afraid to tell like it is (read his autobiography, its amazing).

J.D.

Better yet. Find a book discussing Curtis Turner, no one in nascar was more iinteresting than him.

[rustyfan]

Just thought of something that most definitely wasn't better in the "good old days": the safety, and the way NASCAR approaches it.

[muggle not]

On another forum I started a topic titled: Nascar - Fireside chat
We told stories of Nascar, mostly of the olden days. If there are 3 or 4 people interested I will start a topic here and we can tell some of the stories and I will re-tell mine. Some of the things that happened are unbelievable.

[rustyfan]

I'd be interested. For obvious reasons I won't have any personal experiences to share from the old days, but I have tons of books and magazines (some dating as far back as to the 50's and 60's) that contain some rather neat stories.

[muggle not]

actually, most of my stories are really not from personal experiences but from reading and following Nascar for many years. Although there was one time when I lived in Charlotte and was aware of the Cannonball Run that Rusty Wallace did across Charlotte in rush hour traffic. I saved the newspaper clipping article and it is typical of some of the drivers years back.

[the.cosmic.pope]

I cant contribute to that but would love to read it.