# Sort of O/T: NASCAR Car of Tomorrow



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

Looks like NASCAR is honing in on the final design of the C.O.T. 

http://www.jayski.com/schemes/2006/COT.htm

Very interesting - almost reminds me of .... big winged tuners!

I like it!

Who will be the first HO slot car manufacturer to bring Big Winged Tunas to a slot car track near you??? Time to invest in a dustpan and brush to clean all the little wings from the floor of the race room.


----------



## noddaz (Aug 6, 1999)

So what is the point of those anyway...
They look even less like real cars.... (If that was possible...)


----------



## roadrner (Jul 21, 1999)

Looks like the the Fast and Furious have made it to NASCAR. Would have to agree with you Scott. I'd like to see one weekend where they tell the teams to go get a real car from the dealer, you can put $15K extra into it for "stuff", then bring it on over this weekend and we'll all race. Winner takes all.  rr


----------



## ParkRNDL (Mar 20, 2002)

I keep squinting at them and wondering if I'm seeing right...

Are they all the same car with different noses and side window shapes?

Whatever they are, they're foooooogly...

--rick


----------



## PD2 (Feb 27, 2003)

Yeah, the terms "stock car" and "NASCAR" need to be removed from the Cup Series. They need to call it Template Racing cause all the cars are similar and DEFINITELY not what you would find "stock" on the showroom floor of any dealership.

Whatever happened to those days where Stock Car racing was taking a stock car from the show room and showing off all the high performance race tuned features? I mean, that is where engines like the Hemi and 442 were born! They specifically would make them to perform on the circuits!

OK - off my soapbox now......

PD2:thumbsup:


----------



## RMMseven (Oct 22, 2004)

What NASCAR is doing is trying to make the cars race like the Craftsman trucks. The trucks provide great racing and can run close together while the cars can be a pain when running close.


----------



## T-Jet Man (Jul 28, 2006)

I am a Nascar junky. Soooo needless to say I like it. Thanks for the link, it has all the color scemes for the cars and will help in decal placement on model cars. I must say they can do away with the wings but the rest looks hot. I am sure you have all heard Toyota is joining the clan. With that they are intruding on an American tradition. Yeah I know, they make Toyota over here now. Man what's the world coming too.


----------



## PD2 (Feb 27, 2003)

First, I'll say that I love NASCAR racing too! With that said, of course Toyota is joining the NASCAR circuit - its template racing and their car will look exactly like the other cars regardless of Chevy, Ford, or Dodge. Only difference will be the front nose clip. Which brings up a question......which car will they use for the nose clip? Civic? Camary? Avalon? Scion? Oh, wait, I know! The old style Supra! It's going to be interesting!

PD2:thumbsup:


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

I love NASCAR racing too. I wish there was more emphasis on the technology and the hardware and less celebrity fluff. But I'm a gearhead car nut and NASCAR needs to adapt to the times. I'd imagine a large proportion of their audience doesn't know an alternator from a carburator. That's okay, it's still a blast to follow the sport and every race has a few breathtaking moments. When I see the positive influence NASCAR has on fans young and old, and how well they relate to their fan base, you can't help but admire everything they are doing. But the cars themselves have moved down on the list of what makes NASCAR exciting. That's okay.


----------



## oldraceral (Dec 1, 2005)

AfxToo said:


> But the cars themselves have moved down on the list of what makes NASCAR exciting. That's okay.


I agree. It really doesn't make much difference to me if a Chevy or a Ford or a Dodge is the winning car, I want to see close racing. I'm more interested in the drivers and how well the team performs and handles race strategy. Some of the tracks they race on is more my complaint. I mean, 2 races at Pocono??


----------



## noddaz (Aug 6, 1999)

*Man what's the world coming too.*



> Man what's the world coming too.


Todays Big Three...
1)GM
2)Toyota
3)Ford

Ok, what is it coming too? :lol:


----------



## tjd241 (Jan 25, 2004)

*Bring this flavor back....*

.... and I'll follow NASCAR.


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

It may soon be a courtesy and homage to US stock car racing tradition to even include the "Big 3" Detroit automakers in the list. Sure GM still leads in worldwide sales volume, but not for very much longer. By the end of this year or early next year it will be Toyota. Where it really counts however, market value, the Detroit Big 3 are waaaayyyyy... behind Toyota. Toyota's market value today is nearly 3 times the combined market values of GM, Ford, and Chrysler.

As it stands today Toyota outsells Ford in the US while Honda outsells Chrysler. If NASCAR were to have the top 5 selling brands in the US it would be (in order) GM, Toyota, Honda, Ford, and Chrysler. Can anyone guess which company will be the next one to knock on NASCAR's door looking for an invitation? Hmmm???.

And what's around the corner? China. Could a Chery Oriental Son or a Geely 7151 CK be the next hot ride in NASCAR? Do you see Dale Jr. getting strapped into a Zhongxing, Hafei, or Great Wall race car?


----------



## 1976Cordoba (Sep 20, 2000)

oldraceral said:


> I mean, 2 races at Pocono??


 Sure as hell beats two races at California, Gateway, Kansas or any of the other cookie-cutter tracks that have been spawned in the last 10 years. At least Pocono has some varied, challenging turns.

NASCAR has boring template cars so they might as well have boring template tracks too.

My $.02 worth.

'doba


----------



## noddaz (Aug 6, 1999)

*Pocono?*



oldraceral said:


> *snip*I'm more interested in the drivers and how well the team performs and handles race strategy. Some of the tracks they race on is more my complaint. I mean, 2 races at Pocono??


Umm...
What's wrong with Pocono? NASCAR seems to mix it up there pretty well...

Scott


----------



## oldraceral (Dec 1, 2005)

noddaz said:


> Umm...
> What's wrong with Pocono? NASCAR seems to mix it up there pretty well...
> 
> Scott


Yeah, I kinda forgot about Tony Stewart there for a minute. I guess it just seemed like they had just run there and then they were back. Maybe if the 2 races were seperated by more than 6 weeks. I'd have to agree about the cookie cutters, too. I prefer watching the short tracks, but you don't see them building many of those.


----------



## sethndaddy (Dec 4, 2004)

I use to work the Pocono races years ago, and I'm not really a big follower of Nascar, nore do I watch it, theres nothing like seeing a race in person. Cameras and tv do nothing for the sport, to see and hear cars doing 180mph down the front stretch is breath taking.
If you ever have a chance to go to any Nascar race, anywhere, GO........its quite an experience.


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

The same can be said for any form of racing. TV just doesn't do motorsports justice. Drag racing is another prime example of a sport where the live experience is infinitely better than what you see on TV. When you are there you are not just watching a drag race, you are seeing it, feeling it, smelling it, and breathing in the whole experience along with the rest of the live crowd. If you are a car nut you'll probably be pulling for one of the two cars lined up to do battle or making little side bets with your friends. From the cars rolling up, doing their burnouts, and creeping up to the line for the launch, the action just keeps coming at you - in pairs. Very exciting stuff to say the very least. 

In my mind about the only sport that does play well on TV is baseball because the action is almost always focused on an isolated part of the field and at the game you are pretty far away from the action. But it's still better to see a long ball sail over the fence live than to see a camera tracking it on TV. Even football is much better in person because it's usually the five or six things the camera isn't showing you that really determine the outcome of a play. The camera misses the complex orchestration involved in every play.


----------



## roadrner (Jul 21, 1999)

AfxToo said:


> Even football is much better in person because it's usually the five or six things the camera isn't showing you that really determine the outcome of a play. The camera misses the complex orchestration involved in every play.


So true. I didn't realize how much you didn't see until I went to a game in person.  rr


----------



## okracer (Mar 11, 2002)

yeah theres nothing like haveing a top fuel dragster at well over 300 mph fly past you and it feels like someone took a sledge hammer and hit you square in the chest its awsome baby lol and i went to texas for the nascar race once and was in the infield and when those 42 cars came off that banking out or turn four to take the green i was right there and i thought for a min they were gonna come right down off the banking and run right over me and the sound was fantastic the ground shook with vingence as they ran to take the green theres not a thing in the world that can compare everyone should do those two things in there life


----------

