[LSC9901]

That ws an interesting article. I enjoy reading info like that because it gives a little more insight about the good/bad effects of these new and improved NA$CAR mobiles. It'll be interesting to see what the announcers have for comments about passing. I'm sure the drivers will have a word or two.

[trollmc08]

I liked the article. Assuming all of it is true then what is the point of the cot?

[Quality88]

That article pointed out some interesting info.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by trollmc08

I liked the article. Assuming all of it is true then what is the point of the cot?

A REALLY great question, troll. There probably isn't just one answer IF there is a realistic answer at all.

My personal take on it is that NASCAR is much like our Imperial Federal Government; bloated with bureaucracy and administrated by people who feel unfulfilled if they aren't making decisions that drastically affect everyone in their chain of command. NA$CAR is an organization which never considers the Law of Unintended Consequences, and has never seen a problem that it couldn't make worse.

NASCAR got involved in the race car re-design business back in 1983 when it assisted GM to reconfigure its deck area to attain "parity" with Ford. That fiasco gave NASCAR such a "warm & fuzzy" that they went whole hog and made an entire department and built a research facility to re-design cars even more drastically.

The story the media gives us is that the NA$CARmobile is supposed to make the cars safer and increase side-by-side racing. Maybe it will do all this and maybe it won't. My personal feeling is that someone powerful within NA$CAR has adopted this project as his/her personal legacy and will push it down the throats of the car owners and the fans, whatever the cost. To do otherwise, at this stage of the game, would be for that schlemiel, whomever he/she may be, to be mistaken. With the ego's involved, they would ruin the sport entirely to keep that eventuality from coming to pass.

Have you noticed that no single NA$CAR person is trying to accept responsibility for this COT thing? The one person who actually admitted to having a major hand in the development was Gary Nelson and he pulled out of NASCAR early last year. Now NA$CAR seems to be utilizing Brett Bodine as spokesman for the thing. If there was ever anyone in NASCAR who was expendable, It's got to be Brett. I predict that IF the NA$CARmobile actually works kinda like it is advertised, someone in the corporate structure will step up and take a bow. IF it flops, then my bet is Brett is the first one they toss off the island.

That's my idea of the purpose of the NA$CARmobile, anyway.

[trollmc08]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

A REALLY great question, troll. There probably isn't just one answer IF there is a realistic answer at all.

My personal take on it is that NASCAR is much like our Imperial Federal Government; bloated with bureaucracy and administrated by people who feel unfulfilled if they aren't making decisions that drastically affect everyone in their chain of command. NA$CAR is an organization which never considers the Law of Unintended Consequences, and has never seen a problem that it couldn't make worse.

NASCAR got involved in the race car re-design business back in 1983 when it assisted GM to reconfigure its deck area to attain "parity" with Ford. That fiasco gave NASCAR such a "warm & fuzzy" that they went whole hog and made an entire department and built a research facility to re-design cars even more drastically.

The story the media gives us is that the NA$CARmobile is supposed to make the cars safer and increase side-by-side racing. Maybe it will do all this and maybe it won't. My personal feeling is that someone powerful within NA$CAR has adopted this project as his/her personal legacy and will push it down the throats of the car owners and the fans, whatever the cost. To do otherwise, at this stage of the game, would be for that schlemiel, whomever he/she may be, to be mistaken. With the ego's involved, they would ruin the sport entirely to keep that eventuality from coming to pass.

Have you noticed that no single NA$CAR person is trying to accept responsibility for this COT thing? The one person who actually admitted to having a major hand in the development was Gary Nelson and he pulled out of NASCAR early last year. Now NA$CAR seems to be utilizing Brett Bodine as spokesman for the thing. If there was ever anyone in NASCAR who was expendable, It's got to be Brett. I predict that IF the NA$CARmobile actually works kinda like it is advertised, someone in the corporate structure will step up and take a bow. IF it flops, then my bet is Brett is the first one they toss off the island.

That's my idea of the purpose of the NA$CARmobile, anyway.

Well thats just stupid on NASCAR's part. If they want a legacy then they should git in a car. O'yea those who can't, manage

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by trollmc08

Well thats just stupid on NASCAR's part. If they want a legacy then they should git in a car. O'yea those who can't, manage

Two bits of wisdom I have learned over the years apply to your above, troll:

(a) The Peter Principle is valid.
(Peter Principle: People ultimately rise to their own level of incompetence)

(b) Leadership wins wars; management causes them.

[Quality88]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

My personal take on it is that NASCAR is much like our Imperial Federal Government.....

Does that mean Jeff Gordon would be Darth Vader and Dale Jr would be Luke Skywalker? HAHAHAHAHA sorry couldn't resist Bob.

[trollmc08]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Two bits of wisdom I have learned over the years apply to your above, troll:

(a) The Peter Principle is valid.
(Peter Principle: People ultimately rise to their own level of incompetence)

(b) Leadership wins wars; management causes them.

How right you are.

[clutch]

No new revelations in there, he just sounds like another person who doesnt want to see any change

The fact is COT is coming, I'll be watching with interest all of the races, and then I shall form an opinion

it the logical thing to do

[trollmc08]

Originally Posted by clutch

No new revelations in there, he just sounds like another person who doesnt want to see any change

The fact is COT is coming, I'll be watching with interest all of the races, and then I shall form an opinion

it the logical thing to do

yea but it is so much fun talking about it and I ant never been logical.

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by trollmc08

yea but it is so much fun talking about it and I ain't never been logical.

Very true. Clutch is correct in that none of us can make a true judgement yet, but with the NASCAR info out there and the media side of the info out there it is impossible to think about it logically. Half the fun of the off season is just trying to get an idea of what the new season will be like. Another issue is many do not like change and posting messages against change is our only outlet.

[wingkey1]

Clueless? Knowlegeable? On the NA$CAR payroll? Hmmmm -----


"[It has] gotten so aerodynamic that you can't draft," said Benny Parsons, who competed full time from 1970 to 1988. "You can't slingshot by like they did 25 years ago. NASCAR realizes they have a problem. We believe that these cars can race side-by-side, lap after lap. The Car of Tomorrow is the way to go."

"I just feel strongly that opening up a wider space of air will help the competition, help the drivers be able to pass better than they are able to now," said Ned Jarrett, who won two titles in 1961 and 1965.

"They can't race anymore. We used to change our line and make a difference," said 19-time winner Buddy Baker, who stopped driving full time in 1985. "If a driver is in a little bit of trouble or has an aero push, they are out of business.""[With the Car of Tomorrow], the driver is going to be back in the seat instead of wondering about what he is going to do that night as far as PR is concerned," Baker said.

The car will debut at Bristol in spring 2007, but car owner Richard Petty wishes NASCAR would just go ahead and make the car mandatory for the 2007 Daytona 500. "[Owners] build new cars all the same and it don't make no difference if they got square cars coming, cars that they got today because they still got a year or two," Petty said. "So it's a dumb way of doing things. They should cut it straight. It is going to be cheaper."


"The car of the future will be fine if they make a set of rules and stick to them," said Donnie Allison, who scored eight of his 10 wins in the 1970s. "Give it back to the teams and get back to racing."

[Quality88]

Here's my question and it kinda falls along the lines of what Petty is wanting. If this Holy Cow(the COT) is supposed to put it back in the drivers hands and not an aerodynamics... than why in the sam hell is it being debuted at tracks where areodynamics mean absolutely squat, like Bristol. For pete's sake Dale Jr had a top 5 at Richmond or Darlington with a busted fender. Why didn't they mandate it for DEGA or Daytona, or atlanta, california?

[wingkey1]

Originally Posted by Quality88

Here's my question and it kinda falls along the lines of what Petty is wanting. If this Holy Cow(the COT) is supposed to put it back in the drivers hands and not an aerodynamics... than why in the sam hell is it being debuted at tracks where areodynamics mean absolutely squat, like Bristol. For pete's sake Dale Jr had a top 5 at Richmond or Darlington with a busted fender. Why didn't they mandate it for DEGA or Daytona, or atlanta, california?

Saw (but for the life of me cannot find again) logic from NASCAR rep (likely Nelson or Helton) that the intent was to help the lesser teams (budget, technology, time in sport, etc.) to have time to learn a bit more about the vehicle in situations where aero is not "king". Feeling was these teams would get absolutely buried if for instance "opening day" (Daytona of course) required COT. Having to a very limited extent "been there", I found/find this very hard to argue. Aren't a whole bunch of tracks where aero doesn't play in to some extent any more.

I do remember the E Jr. race referred to. Don't recall if this was one of those where afterwards the team (with a chuckle) indicated the car ran better after they applied a "fix" to the damage. Seems body shaping after damage can get quite creative and still be acceptable. Me thinks COT ain't gonna fix this particular situation.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by clutch

No new revelations in there, he just sounds like another person who doesnt want to see any change

The fact is COT is coming, I'll be watching with interest all of the races, and then I shall form an opinion

it the logical thing to do

I watched the Aussie V8's on SPEED Friday night, Mate. They put on a great show. Ironically, that race pointed out the exact reason why I believe you misunderstand my position.

Everyone of those cars were basically stock-appearing. The bodies were similiar, but not indentical, because the manufacturers designed them that way.

The NASCARmobile has, OTOH, had its body almost entirely redesigned by NASCAR. Then these almost identical plans (noses and rear deck configuration excepted) were given to the teams with instructions to "Make it happen."

That's what sticks in my craw, not change, per se. Change is evolution and evolution is a fact of life. It's great that NASCAR has changed things so that the drivers, team members and spectators are all safer. Even though it orchestrated, the closer finishes that NASCAR has these days, and the infernal playoff finish to the season sin't all bad. I've even written in this forum some positives about the Rice-Burners coming to NASCAR. (Tongue-in-cheek I'll admit, but factual nonetheless)

But, to me, this NASCARmobile goes against the founding principle of NASCAR, i.e.; S-T-O-C-K C-A-R-S. I realize that it is impossible today to safely race a "stock car." But, darn it, they could at least make them appear "Stock," as you Aussies do in your V8 Series.

Besides, should NASCAR be in the race car design business? Shouldn't that be left up to the car makers and let NASCAR concern itself with race administration?

I'll be honest with you, Clutch. I didn't recognize but one or two driver's names but the Aussie race I watched Friday night was a lot more action-filled, exciting, less 'orchestrated" by the sanctioning body, and untimately much more entertaining than 90% of the Cup races I watched last season. And it was on a street course and I'm not a big fan of road/street courses!

No, in the case of the NASCARmobile, the change doesn't especially bother me. It's the "meddling" by the sanctioning body in areas I feel they have no real business in, that spins me out into orbit.