[vincesanity82]

Some NASCAR executives are finally showing signs of "getting it," with this winged race car that drivers -- and apparently many fans too -- don't like: They've proposed wide-open testing for 2009.It's about time that NASCAR opened that door again. And NASCAR should make an open-testing rule immediately effective: starting with a two-day test at Indianapolis Motor Speedway the Monday and Tuesday after the July 12th race at Chicagoland. The way that NASCAR has had it the past several years has given the big-money teams an unfair edge against the smaller budget teams. Changing the rules now, though, may be too late to save some struggling stock-car teams. -- Winston-Salem Journal



DOWNER: NASCAR needs to change its approach to avoid rain problems

[wingkey1]

The writer/reporter appears to favor the well funded that barely blink an eye at the cost associated with "wide open" testing.

May well be the buss of death to the non-mega's / have nots / (favorite description here).

I ("We" for those in need of target) am not quite sure whether this is ultimately baaaaaaa --- d (Starting to feel sheepish about this malady) or not so.

Will be interesting to see owners thoughts/feelings/response and final decision on this floated idea.

[Phils20]

I think it's a bad idea. The smaller teams will just fall that much further behind. I do think there should be more testing, at NASCARS expense. And all the teams should be invited, or at least privy to all the results.

The bigger teams getting to test as much as they want to will be the death knell of the little man, as Alan Jackson call em!

[wingkey1]

Originally Posted by Phils20

I think it's a bad idea. The smaller teams will just fall that much further behind. I do think there should be more testing, at NASCARS expense. And all the teams should be invited, or at least privy to all the results.

The bigger teams getting to test as much as they want to will be the death knell of the little man, as Alan Jackson call em!

"at NASCARS expense" - writing that definition/decision for the universaly accepted fair and equitable distribution of funds/subsidy would test the true mettle of near anyone. Avoiding perceived or actual breaks for the haves, and equally so avoiding the perceived or actual bestowments to the undeserving would be -- monumental.

Not sure turning more over to the "big talking head" is ever a path towards encouraging and/or allowing success to the driven/motivated/inspired/dedicated. But it is indicative of the "support me" attitude that increasingly prevails in all aspects of life today.

Would be interesting to see (any/every)ones "Nascar should" and "NASCAR shouldn't" list, then watch to see if the one fully and perpetually, leaving no possible doubt or question, lives and defends it.

[LSC9901]

Gracious NO ... don't allow the governing body to dole out fairness. It just can't be done. Look at the rule book and its interpretations. Since many of the tracks are of the same type (not exactly) just leave things the way they are now. If someone wants to test outside of the allowable testing limits then they choose to do it at a "similar" track. The big guns already have to much of an advantage.

[Quality88]

Let the little teams go wide-open on their testin to give them every opportunity to catch up to the big teams. The big teams already have a wealth of knowledge.

[bob101]

Teams can already test as many days as they want. They are only currently restricted to the number of days on tracks that have a NASCAR race.

That's how smaller tracks that host other races or say nationwide series stay in business. Interesting to see what happens to some of these tracks that see cup teams in there every day of the week now.

[Phils20]

My point is just being that if you allow wide open testing, the big teams will go back to utter domination. This car was supposed to be a way to help offset cost, once the initial transition happened.

It is not teams asking for a handout.

I've got a better idea, how about we limit testing at any track at any time, and stop letting the big teams skirt the rules??

I too doubt NASCARS ability to be fair, but I'm not ready to give up. when I lose faith that they can ever regain our trust, that is when I'll wash my hands of the sport.

[Bob Tanner]

Generally speaking I see this as NA__AR throwing yet another bone to the mega-teams. BUT,,,

There may be a plus for the small teams?

As it is now, the mega-team can afford to travel about anywhere with their dedicated test teams and drivers. Teams like Robby Gordon, Wood Brothers, HOF and Front Row have to settle for a track within 150 miles of their home base then go back to their shops and try to translate what they learn from a non-Cup track to how their car will function on a Cup track. All this WITHOUT benefit of a battalion of engineers, 7-post rigs and the like.

Unlimited testing might mean a team could go to a Cup track, at their choice of time, and get input as to how their car will work on THAT track. This also might mean that this will put the performance of the car back in the hands of mechanics and drivers and less in the hands of people with sophisticated computer programs and slide rules (kids, ask an adult to explain what one of those is <G>).

I'm probably dreaming but, hey! A guy can dream, can't he?

[Bob Tanner]

To append my above post, I just clipped this from jayski, regarding the Wood Bros. testing the cup car at Nashville:
Driver Marcos Ambrose stated that after such a fantastic run at Infineon, not making the race was disheartening. He said, “It’s really disappointing. I just feel bad for the Wood Brothers. I’ve had limited experience in the COT and we just didn’t roll off the truck that great and I haven’t had enough experience to really give them direction to tune on it. I tried as hard as I could there, but it just wasn’t to be.”
Taking a proactive stance, the team and Bill Elliott will be testing a new car at Nashville. Ford Racing Engineer, Dave Cimba, commented on the team’s goals for the test, “It was time to put that [New Hampshire] chassis away and start from scratch. We believed that we had fixed previous issues, but it wasn’t the case, new issues would develop, so it’s time to cut it down and start over. The goal of this test is to make things better on the cars week in and week out and to try new ideas that will make performance and handling better overall

How much time, money, effort and disappointment might have the Brother Wood saved if they had been able to test the new car at cup tracks?

We'll never know, will we?

[jks812]

I liked Biffle's idea. Give each team 5 or 6 test days and then let them pick out which track they wanted to test at. That way they'll get to test at the tracks they need help with.

[BiscuitMan]

David Caraviello has a good summary of the issued raised to the proposal by NASCAR to allow "unlimited" testing by race team. His piece is on NASCAR.com.

He explores all the issues that has arisen. One idea that popped out at me to make this proposal work is:

The smaller teams in the Sprint Cup garage are understandably edgy about what kind of testing policy they're going to get. Unlimited testing would clearly place them further behind, something the sanctioning body cannot let happen. Even a more limited policy would hurt if NASCAR restricted testing by car and not by organization, allowing a team like Hendrick Motorsports to test four times for every Bill Davis Racing's one. Mike Brown of Bill Davis racing has an idea: one team, one test. If Jeff Gordon goes to Talladega, that counts for Dale Earnhardt and Jimmie Johnson, too -- anything more than that could swamp his sponsor-strapped organization.

See NASCAR.COM - For Sprint Cup teams, a testing decision looms - Jul 2, 2008

[LSC9901]

Obviously there are a lot of reasonable ideas out there. question becomes will NASCAR consider any of them or just do what they've done in the past .... squash the little teams.

[BiscuitMan]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

Obviously there are a lot of reasonable ideas out there. question becomes will NASCAR consider any of them or just do what they've done in the past .... squash the little teams.

NASCAR is the one that made the proposal for unlimited testing, not the drivers or teams.

John Darby posed the question at a pre-race meeting at New Hampshire last weekend. Darby said:

"In the past, it's just been a matter of here, select your racetracks and here we go. This year, I felt it was time we sat down with everybody and talked: We're open to any suggestions you may have, from leaving our testing policy exactly like it was in '08, to going all the way to what I call wide-open testing. No limits. Any track any time, as many times as you want to go. We're prepared for either way. It doesn't matter to us, we'll listen to what all the teams come back with as suggestions, formulate a test plan and go forward."

____________

[jks812]

I'm not sure I agree with Mike Brown's idea of one team one test. I do think each car should get the same amount of testing. If Davis has 1 car and gets 5 test days then HMS should get 5 days for each of his cars. I don't know how Nascar should handle it. Everybody is saying they shouldn't have open testing cause it'll put the small teams farther behind since they can't afford to do it. And I agree that it would. But is it fair to tell, say, HMS, you know Davis hasn't been as lucky as you so we're giving him 5 days for his 1 car and you get 5 days for your 4 to share? Isn't that kinda like punishing some for being successful? .