How would you change NASCAR?

[FIRE]

Independent and a fresh look from outside the NASCAR world.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

It could be possible... unlikely I would say, but the hopeful part of me says with Brian France gone then just maybe the folks running the show will try to do better.

An independent firm offering consulting advice don't seem a bad idea. Could give NASCAR and the current manufacturers some food for thought?

It's a great idea, but it's something NASCAR is historically known to avoid, even before Brian France.

I'd like to hope that with Brian out some smarter heads will prevail as well, but given NASCAR's history I will consider it excessively optimistic until the moment it actually happens.

As an aside, while joking about BMW consulting on the new aero with a friend, we thought up a potentially great idea for the next-gen cars - sadly, we require the assistance of a photoshop artist to help us create a visual representation of it in order to adequately explain it, and I know none personally nor have the cash to hire a professional. Without a visual aid, I fear it will be horrendously misinterpreted.

[broadrun96]

I'll just drop this news here to allow it to sink in, and sink with the rest of NASCAR:

“We’re looking at everything,” said incoming NASCAR president Steve Phelps.

New venues, mid-week racing and even doubleheaders have been among the ideas tossed around for NASCAR officials to consider. Conversation has ramped up in recent years that the sport needs a boost by shaking up its look.

From Racer.com's interview with him yesterday, https://racer.com/2018/09/26/everyth...edule-changes/

[fieldodreams79]

Sounds like they might be trying to get back to the roots. I'm not sure how I think about trying to avoid the NFL, but maybe that's for the best?

Allz I know is what is NOT going to help things out is a roval race in the Queen City...

[Alfisti]

I'm going to watch it with interest, but I am suspecting it won't work well. If the cars are setup to handle well on the road section they'll be compromised on the oval. And vice versa. I think, hopefully I'll be proven wrong.

Formula 1's Indy experiment produced a dull procession - I don't have any positive memories at all other than relief at seeing Ralf Schumacher escape in one piece after a terrible crash.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

I'm going to watch it with interest, but I am suspecting it won't work well. If the cars are setup to handle well on the road section they'll be compromised on the oval. And vice versa. I think, hopefully I'll be proven wrong.

Formula 1's Indy experiment produced a dull procession - I don't have any positive memories at all other than relief at seeing Ralf Schumacher escape in one piece after a terrible crash.

You're probably correct, but that's what is likely to make it exciting. This isn't like F1 where they're specialized to such an insane degree that they just can't be adapted - a road racing NASCAR Cup car still has all the oval DNA within it, it's just not optimized for the oval running, so it's not likely to be as badly compromised at a roval as an F1 car it.


NASCAR's annual visit to the Glen is consistently one of their best races(far better than anything F1 did on the Indy roval), and it's easy to see how despite the guaranteed need to compromise they could still put on an exciting race. As an aside, bear in mind what I just said about the NASCAR Glen races and imagine how much better the series could be overall if the next-gen car were more carefully designed to be easily adapted to both. IndyCar's certainly shown it's possible - and since 2012 they have also consistently shown how much better it is to have a car designed explicitly for both rather than adapting an oval car.

[Alfisti]

Hopefully it will all be very interesting. I wonder if the teams will all end up down a similar path on setup or if some cars will be real good on the slower twisty bits and others hoping speed on the oval segment will be the answer? Wait and see I guess.

Genuinely no idea who's going to come out on top; I imagine Truex will run well, and can see Elliot being amongst the top runners.

I do like the road courses a lot, it's what I grew up watching here in Europe... a different challenge to the ovals but equally exciting.

Might stick a few notes on Kyle Busch, seeing as he is into the next round of the playoff he can afford to be quite aggressive in strategy and driving... and of course it's the only current track he hasn't won at which will certainly be an incentive - not that he'll need an incentive.

[FormulaFox]

You know, when you really think about it, NASCAR doesn't need to change too many venues to make the schedules more interesting.


If this weekend is well-received, they can always use some other rovals on second visits to certain tracks. Even if that's not viable, there are two other options to make the cookie-cutters more interesting: Add a Trenton-style dogleg to the backstretch(not always possible - infield layout at some tracks doesn't leave enough room), or run them clockwise. (I'm sure driver will be rather resistant to clockwise racing on an oval)

[Alfisti]

Indy for one, but I would like to see the layout of the infield changing from the F1 days: could be a relatively inexpensive way to add some variety if Charlotte is well received.

[Akrapovic]

My opinions on this matter don't mean much as I'm not the primary audience...but I'd make the races shorter and have more on a day. They're already kinda trying that with weird heat systems and what not, that I've completely lost touch with. But why not just make that a simple system, like BTCC?

Have 3x1 hour races in a day. Half an hour turn around in between. Proper full points races, not playoffs or heats or whatever it's called. I'd prefer to watch that.

Obviously, you don't want that format every weekend, and you should still run the full unbroken Daytona 500 and what not, but I think that'd suit the cookier cutter circuits more. I'd also prefer more road courses, although I'd shorten the races a little.

I imagine nobody will agree with me, and my opinions really not worth much given target demographics and what not.

[TheMightyM]

Speaking of making changes to a race, NASCAR will (finally) be running the Carousel again at Sonoma. About time!

[FormulaFox]

Well, in light of the Charlotte roval being a big success I have decided to go ahead and detail the idea my friend and I had for a next-gen NASCAR despite not having a photoshop artist's assistance to help express the idea. I am certain will someone will misconstrue the idea based solely on the starting point, but I'm gonna try anyway...

So, why so worried about the concept being misconstrued? Because we're starting the explanation not with a Cup car, but with this:


Yup. We're starting with a DTM car. I actually picked the Audi because the front end is actually somewhat similar to recent NASCAR Fords, which may help with visualization.

Now, in order to try and minimize the ignoring of the explanation in favor of bashing on the notion, I definitely need to make a disclaimer in the most eye-catchingly shouty way possible:

I AM NOT ADVOCATING THE USE OF CLASS ONE IN IT'S ENTIRETY OR EVEN JUST USING THE TUB AS A BASIS FOR A NEW NASCAR CUP CAR. THE USE OF DTM MACHINERY IS TO HELP ILLUSTRATE THE AESTHETIC SIDE OF THE MATTER ONLY. Are we clear on that? Okay, let's move on to the idea itself.

NASCAR obviously isn't supposed to be super aero-heavy. So to start with let's take the car pictured above, throw it's rear wing, massive front splitter, rear diffuser, dive planes, and all the extra aero bits into the garbage. Save only the fender flares and hood vents for now.

In place of the front splitter, we're going back to the pre-CoT days and using a fully enclosed front valence with just the radiator opening and a couple small vents that can be used to adjust the small amount of front downforce the car will have - the hood vents will be redesigned for this purpose, and the downforce vents will serve as auxiliary cooling in case of debris blocking the main radiator opening.

The rear wing will be replaced by the common blade spoiler NASCAR has used for decades, with the rear decklid being widened relative to the fender flares to fit one of sufficient size. For maximum use of their small levels of downforce, the spoilers would have actual endplates on them.

Contrary to common belief, the flared fenders and strips along the bottom of the doors on DTM cars are not in and of themselves downforce-generating components, though they can and often are be shaped to be. In their most basic form, they actually SMOOTH the airflow over the car - and these parts would be designed to optimize EXACTLY that, with the strips being completely filled in and smooth, and the fender flares being shaped for maximum aerodynamic smoothness and carrying no downforce-generating components whatsoever.

Most importantly, instead of building a new car, this new exterior treatment would be applied to the existing machinery. All that needs to change on the chassis side is to lower the center of gravity. This can be achieved by simply reducing the dimensions of the cockpits - lowering and narrowing them by just a few inches would have a MASSIVE impact on this, and will also create the flared fender look without having the widen the cars from where they are.

The side impact safety that NASCAR is so proud of would be easily addressed, as I doubt anyone would complain about moving the driver a couple inches further in if the cockpit is going to be narrowed, so there'll still be plenty of room for enough of that impact foam in the doors, and smart design could turn the fender flares and door strips into yet more side-impact protection.

So that's idea. In short, you're taking cues from aero-heavy cars, but transforming the design's purpose into aero-smoothing instead of downforce-inducing and fitting the results over the existing chassis with some small changes to the chassis' cog.

Questions, comments, reactions?

[fieldodreams79]

How do we know the Roval Charlotte 400 was a success? And for once, I'm not f-ing w/ you, FF. I'm curious. Were ratings up? The crowd sure didn't look it but maybe they were scattered through the infield.

[Nick Woodbury]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

How do we know the Roval Charlotte 400 was a success? And for once, I'm not f-ing w/ you, FF. I'm curious. Were ratings up? The crowd sure didn't look it but maybe they were scattered through the infield.

Recent ratings article from Racer Magazine - https://racer.com/2018/10/02/tv-rati...r-roval-a-hit/

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

How do we know the Roval Charlotte 400 was a success? And for once, I'm not f-ing w/ you, FF. I'm curious. Were ratings up? The crowd sure didn't look it but maybe they were scattered through the infield.

Ratings went up by quite a bit - almost by the amount of the total viewership of an IndyCar race at a non-Indy oval; From 2.9 million to 3.2 million viewers(this despite being up against the NFL and TWO playoff-clinching MLB games). People I've talked to who were at the track said on-site attendance felt higher as well, though probably not by as big a jump as the TV viewership.

The critical response to the race has been extremely positive, which should create a lot of buzz for it next year.

[Alfisti]

Well I enjoyed it. All of it. Looked a decent crowd in, but how it compares to the 600 I don't know. Would definitely like it to continue.

New rules for '19 sound interesting; haven't taken it all in and I frankly don't understand the cars enough to know how they'll shake things up. Bye bye restrictor plates sounds good to me, I hate those huge wrecks when the entire field fits under a blanket.

[fieldodreams79]

Comparing to the 600 isn't quite the way to do it. Fall Charlotte race or another Chase race comparison would be more appropriate.

Glad to hear it was well recieved. I was and still am skeptical of its longevity but I enjoyed the little bits I did watch from just the unique standpoint and nuttiness of stockcars on a road course.

[broadrun96]

The new finalized rules package was released this afternoon, I didn't know the plates are finally done after Daytona in favor of spacers depending on track length, 750 hp at road and short tracks with a 1.17" spacer and 500 hp at tracks over 1 mile with a .922" spacer. Some aero mods as well including ducting at the 1 mile plus tracks.

https://racer.com/2018/10/02/nascar-...kage-for-2019/

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

Comparing to the 600 isn't quite the way to do it. Fall Charlotte race or another Chase race comparison would be more appropriate.

That was only for attendance, though - TV Ratings were compared to the second Charlotte race last year.


I missed it while watching, but apparently during the broadcast it was claimed that more people had come through the gate than any of the last TEN Charlotte races. Definitely would love to get some confirmation on that from somewhere.

[NaBUru38]

Nascar bodywork should resemble Australian V8 Supercars.

[fieldodreams79]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

The new finalized rules package was released this afternoon, I didn't know the plates are finally done after Daytona in favor of spacers depending on track length, 750 hp at road and short tracks with a 1.17" spacer and 500 hp at tracks over 1 mile with a .922" spacer. Some aero mods as well including ducting at the 1 mile plus tracks.

https://racer.com/2018/10/02/nascar-...kage-for-2019/

That all looks like positive change but specifically mentioned the desire to keep "pack racing" at 'dega. I get it. But I hate it.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

Nascar bodywork should resemble Australian V8 Supercars.

I would agree were it not for the types of tracks NASCAR races on. A lot of the Supercars styling is actually the result of the fact that they don't have to pack in safety equipment sufficient take an oval impact, or achieve aero parity on much higher speed tracks. The defining characteristics of Supercars is that the car as are close as possible to the road versions - the changes are kept a minimum, and as they race exclusively on road courses they don't need to change as much to achieve a somewhat level playing field(and they're nowhere near as concerned about level ground and NASCAR is, either).

If NASCAR went for the Supercars aesthetic, it's highly likely that there'd be parity at tracks like Martinsville, Bristol, and the road courses, but one manufacturer or the other would run away with the big ovals.

The design my friend and I came up with may not be the way forward, but at least it's design can be easily adjusted to account for this issue - by making the cars look like MODIFIED versions of the road car, rather than just the road car with wings and splitter, you have a lot more room to work with.

[TheMightyM]

Here's an interesting video on the subject “What Killed Nascar.”

[S griffin]

Very interesting video. It seems NASCAR was a victim of it’s own success and tried too hard to keep the viewers up when they didn’t need to

[Nick Woodbury]

Originally Posted by TheMightyM

Here's an interesting video on the subject “What Killed Nascar.”

This one is my favorite - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2BILMQHZ6A