Why do you think NASCAR has declined?

[John_S_in_Penna]

I've been reading various opinions on the internet,

and wondered what any race fans think:

WHY HAS NASCAR DECLINED SO NOTICEABLY IN RECENT YEARS?

 

Tracks are removing up to a third of their seats;

television viewership has declined by almost half;

some sponsors are finding it no longer worthwhile;

attendance is down so much that NASCAR doesn't even quote attendance any more.

 

Several opinions have been put forth:

Younger men have less interest in cars and speed, and therefore in NASCAR;

The sport got too big and haughty--it's no longer local guys with truly stock cars,

     but millionaires who arrive in helicopters and flashy motorhomes;

The rules keep changing;

The sport is boring, with 4-hour races and the cars being more uniform today;  etc.

 

I never followed NASCAR--it's especially popular in rural Southeastern U. S.--

but when I read about 1950's races in truly stock cars, THAT sounds more interesting.

 

Your thoughts?

Edited March 26, 2017 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[keiser31]

Can't answer....I am watching a NASCAR race....

[Guest]

I go to the NASCAR race every year here in Riverside, CA. I can't pin down the exact cause for the reduction in seating/turnout, but I believe there is a direct correlation between that loss of interest and the introduction of this hairdo.

[Frantz]

I don't watch. I did go to a race though once and it was quite a bit of fun in person. But it is far too homogenized to interest me and modern stock vehicles leave a bit to be desired for racing. Perhaps it's just a sport that has outlived its place in history.

[Guest]

A lot of fans soured on NASCAR when they let Toyota in.

[John_S_in_Penna]

Another opinion I read was that every change NASCAR

made in recent years was to try to increase its "popularity,"

instead of increasing the quality of the races. 

[F&J]

Coincidence this was asked...

 

I have not had a TV in many years.  Just yesterday, while waiting for customer to show up, I tried watching a Nascar race on youtube...

 

I tuned in as there was a caution with one lap to go.  The commentators went on-and-on-and on about who should pit for fresh tires etc...  something about winning "stages" of a multiple race???...............Then it went to what had to be 10 minutes of MIND Numbing commercials...  I turned it off.   I can't recall seeing this many commercials when I did have a TV, and am glad I don't own one now.

[F&J]

...oh, and one more obnoxious noisy thing I saw, since being away for years,,,,, The stupid camera buried in the pavement with cars ROARING over it to "add spectator interest".   It seemed like they are trying anything to make up for the lack of old time racing and passing.  Those days are gone.

[TerryB]

There is no real distinction between the cars, you have three brands racing: Ford, Chevy and Toyota and they all look the same.  And none really resemble cars that you can buy.  It used to be the manufacturers touted the engine size, horsepower and the driver's name prominently, now the sponsors logos are everywhere and you have to look close to see the brand of car it is.  It became a promotion business with tons of money spent on making sure the sponsor gets recognition and airtime not really a race between auto manufacturers products.

 

i always watched it in the 60s and 70s.  With corporate interests taking over it seemed to loose its soul and it lost my interest.  I'm not sure how to fix it.  Get more auto makes involved, shorter races like 250 milers so you don't have to wait for hours to see the best efforts that seem to happen in the last ten laps, a return to cars that look like cars or something like that might work.  Maybe more insight on the cars and how they are built and tested would be of interest to me.  

 

Whatever they do, it better be soon.

Terry

[Guest]

Agreed, WAY too many regulations these days.

[joe_padavano]

I lost interest in NASCAR when they finally gave up all semblance of being "stock".  When was the last time you saw a two-door Taurus?  How about a production Toyota or Ford with a pushrod V8? Cars with identical frames, suspensions, and body shells whose only difference is the painted-on headlight and grille?

 

The last time I cared at all about NASCAR was in the 1980s when they were still racing cars that had bodies and engines that were at least traceable to ones in the showroom.  When was the last time a manufacturer had to sell a car like the Monte SS or Pontiac 2+2 to qualify it for racing?

[39BuickEight]

The rules have become overly pedantic and complicated.  Like everything else is our society, the fun is taken out of favor of micro management of the competition.

[Bhigdog]

BOOOORRRRING!...................Bob

[John_S_in_Penna]

13 minutes ago, TerryB said:

There is no real distinction between the cars, you have three brands racing: Ford, Chevy and Toyota and they all look the same.  And none really resemble cars that you can buy.  ...

 

Good points, Terry.

I read that there are at least 10 makes of cars that 

no longer participate:  Chrysler, Dodge, Mercury, Oldsmobile, Buick...

 

It could be interesting if they got back to their roots:

actual STOCK cars that you could buy in the showroom.

Then you could watch to see a real proof of the power,

handling, and endurance of products that you might want to buy.

 

Today, I think there's almost nothing "stock" about the

National Association of Stock Car Auto Racing--and I don't know

if they even use the full title of their association anymore, anyway. 

Edited March 26, 2017 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[John_S_in_Penna]

9 minutes ago, 39BuickEight said:

The rules have become overly pedantic and complicated. ...

 

Billy, can you give some examples of how they changed for the worse?

Are they totally different from when NASCAR had actual stock cars in the 1950's?

[vermontboy]

It used to be the best combination of car and driver won. Today it is all about fuel mileage, pit strategy, race strategy (stages), ,etc. And then the post race inspections at the end of a race and because the height of the car is an eighth of an inch off ....... and etc. etc. etc. Nothing to do with the best driver winning anymore.......

 

I remember an interview with Linn St. James once. She had won (I think - doesn't matter) a race with a car that had lost second gear, lost it's brakes, was down a cylinder now and then {misfire) and they commented on how could she win with all those things wrong. She reminded them that in spite of all those things wrong the lap times were right up there with qualifying speeds.

 

It takes a lot of talent to drive cars. The rules have taken a lot of the "Talent" aspect out of the equation. It's more of a luck thing now ....... racing all bunched up because of restrictor plates leads to accidents. Good drivers used to be able to "drive out" of accidents - not possible today. It is ...... boring.

 

Just my two cents - used to watch every race I could - now I could care less.

 

 

[Phillip Cole]

Young adults and upcoming generation are not all that interested in cars period. 

Many younger drivers are not as popular as the ones coming to retirement 

Prices got too high for much of the fan base. Although they are letting kids under 12 in for free now. But if their parents aren't interested... 

The Southern fan base started declining  years ago!

And all that has already been said above....

[jeff_a]

The last time I watched one on tv they had a driver ramming another car into the wall, and they said it was a good move instead of kicking him out. Demolition derby. I read that in the old days you had some local yokels drive their cars to the track to race. On a road.

 

Maybe I would go see a Nascar event if the race crews had to yank their cars out of a dealer lot. They could install safety equipment and competition tires...and tune things up a bit, but no ground-pounding engines. No Maclarens, Lamborghinis, or Bentleys, either. Then maybe I'd buy a $25 ticket.

 

 

 

[carbking]

(1) "cookie cutter" cars

(2) "cookie cutter" tracks

 

Have followed/watched NASCAR for more than 50 years. So far this year, less than an hour total.

 

Basically IROC races with more contestants.

 

Jon.

[Guest Skyking]

I stopped watching it when Toyota got involved and can't for the life of me see how NASCAR let that happen?  Certain things in this country need to be left alone......that was one of them.  Just more advertising for a greedy auto company.

[Peter J.Heizmann]

1 hour ago, John_S_in_Penna said:

 

1 hour ago, John_S_in_Penna said:

 

Your thoughts?

My thoughts, John?  What has anything going on with NASCAR have to do with 25 year old vehicles and older on this AACA Forum?

 

Peter J.

[TerryB]

Watching 1960s NASCAR got me interested in cars, the big 427ci emblem on the hood, the drivers fighting to take control of high speed street machines on the track all are part of making a young car nut "nuttier".  That carried over to interest in all cars and their evolution of them which in turn gave me an appreciation for old cars.  I think that's how it fits in discussion on this forum.  Seeing the old race cars at Hershey on Friday was a big part of my desire to go to the fall meet each year.

 

Terry

[Bhigdog]

12 minutes ago, Peter J.Heizmann said:

 

 

 

 

13 minutes ago, Peter J.Heizmann said:

My thoughts, John?  What has anything going on with NASCAR have to do with 25 year old vehicles and older on this AACA Forum?

 

 

ACHTUNG! Schtraying frum der rules ist verboten. If dat vas allowed derr members vould be sprecking abut tings dat did not conform to der edicts dat der commandant hass derected. Soon der troops will be enchoying demselves. Dis vill not be permitted. Remember. Ve haf vays uf dealing mit you..........Herr Beck

[cheezestaak2000]

 in the past, the lower series were the same cars, only with v6 engines, and later, since they became so popular, the truck races were added. maybe it's time for them to add a "heritage series" . limit them to pre-1975 body styles, and maybe 300 cubic inch engines. i'd pay to see that, dover is only 20 miles away

 

[Guest GT52]

What, everybody doesn't enjoy watching no-door Toyota Camrys (at least that's what the headlight and taillight decals look like) going around in circles for 4 hours?  Who would have ever guessed?  Isn't it fun to watch manufacturers "compete", with cars and engines that don't exist?  Have the Japanese manufacturers ever entered a racing series without ruining it by throwing money at it until they dominate?

 

Add to that:

     A few mega-teams control the majority of the cars, either directly or by engine programs, because they get the majority of the sponsor money. 

 

     Every year or two the teams shuffle which "car" they run...brand loyalty/association is non-existent.

 

     Every month or two Nascar gives whatever brand is "down" a rules concession, or take away something from whatever brand is "up".

 

     The difficulty of watching the Nascar awards ceremony at the end of the season without having to throw up...as they all play Hollywood.

 

Is that enough?

[joe_padavano]

5 minutes ago, GT52 said:

Have the Japanese manufacturers ever entered a racing series without ruining it by throwing money at it until they dominate?

 

You mean like Ford at LeMans?

 

(I was talking about 1966 - 69, but last year works too...)

[mike6024]

They close to sell out the seats when they come to our Northern California track, but there's not that much seating really.

 

Sonoma Raceway has a permanent seating capacity of 47,000. This includes the grandstands and terraces around the track. During major races, hospitality tents and other stages are erected around the track, which brings the total capacity up to 102,000 seats.

 

Here's a short clip of last year's finish, not your typical oval

 

 

[Guest Skyking]

20 minutes ago, GT52 said:

What, everybody doesn't enjoy watching no-door Toyota Camrys (at least that's what the headlight and taillight decals look like) going around in circles for 4 hours?  Who would have ever guessed?  Isn't it fun to watch manufacturers "compete", with cars and engines that don't exist?  Have the Japanese manufacturers ever entered a racing series without ruining it by throwing money at it until they dominate?

 

Add to that:

     A few mega-teams control the majority of the cars, either directly or by engine programs, because they get the majority of the sponsor money. 

 

     Every year or two the teams shuffle which "car" they run...brand loyalty/association is non-existent.

 

     Every month or two Nascar gives whatever brand is "down" a rules concession, or take away something from whatever brand is "up".

 

     The difficulty of watching the Nascar awards ceremony at the end of the season without having to throw up...as they all play Hollywood.

 

Is that enough?

 

Very well said!

[John_S_in_Penna]

1 hour ago, Peter J.Heizmann said:

What has anything going on with NASCAR have to do with 25 year old vehicles and older on this AACA Forum?

 

Those that read automotive history--in Automobile Quarterly,

Special Interest Autos, etc.-- see that auto racing is 

inextricably linked to automotive development.  Henry Ford

himself made a name for his car in racing.  The Mexican Road

Race proved Lincolns in the early 1950's.  NASCAR results

were quoted by noted author Tom McCahill, and in the 1960's,

NASCAR was responsible for even the development of certain

sports models that a person could buy at a dealership.

 

And with 29 postings in 3 hours, anyone can see how popular

this topic is with our car buffs!

 

 

Edited March 27, 2017 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[mtnchev]

How about a new start? Such as a racing body with rules such as:

   only cars of the current model year, and can be purchased from a licensed dealer can be used;

   that the sticker price be less than a certain amount to keep out the "money advantage";

   using only same kind of tires that came with the car;

   only allowing changes that enhance safety;

  making all races "claiming races" where any of the competitors can buy the winner's car for the manufacturer's sticker price plus a fair amount for the safety                      modifications.  

 

Would anyone go to watch such a race?    I think that I would if the tickets weren't too high.  

 

Larry

[Paul Dobbin]

I especially like the reply in #21. plus it's B O R I N G !!!!!  Watching paint dry is more interesting than most of those races.

[John_S_in_Penna]

1 hour ago, Peter J.Heizmann said:

What has anything going on with NASCAR have to do with 25 year old vehicles and older on this AACA Forum?

 

AND our own A.A.C.A. region is headquartered

at a racing museum.  Some of our most dedicated

members work there.  AND A.A.C.A. even has a 

show class for race cars!

[Doug Novak]

The NASCAR races are too long, they don't race in the rain, the cars are not stock, Restricter Plates to slow things down, (there shouldn't be limits)  and the crashes seem to be rigged or set up as some sort of strategy and if not then its just poor sportsman ship in action. Around here People love local Dirt Track Racing and there are at least 5 Race Tracks close enough to take the Family to on a Saturday night that doesn't cost a fortune to go to.

 

There are popular weekly TV Series, such as Street Out Laws, that hit closer to home and are easily understood and interesting in how the preparations, racing and planning are done. Lots of People get it, talk about it and it's fun.

 

F1, Cart, Indy, SCCA, IMSA Racing series are closer to being what Professional Factory Sponsored racing should look like and more technologically main stream that have a big following. Many of the new cars people are buying from the dealers incorporate features that were developed from this sort of racing.  There's a new open wheel Racing now for Electric Cars that look like Formula One cars. Can't imagine racing cars that don't need mufflers.

 

But all that being said the best racing is the Vintage Cars and Motor Cycles. Historic Race Cars and Bikes 

on Road Courses.

 

Edited March 27, 2017 by Doug Novak (see edit history)

[39BuickEight]

3 hours ago, John_S_in_Penna said:

 

Billy, can you give some examples of how they changed for the worse?

Are they totally different from when NASCAR had actual stock cars in the 1950's?

Here are a few that take away from racing, in my opinion-- free pass for the last car on the lead lap, dividing the race in to segments with pre-planned pit stops, restrictor plates (the big one),  making winning a race less valuable than it used to be, and the "playoff" as they call it (last 10 races only those who made it can still compete for the title).  It's like NASCAR is trying to manage the race and season instead of just letting racers race.

 

Lastly, the one that has never made any sense to me, and not a new thing by any means, is not racing in the rain.  Every other motor sport  races in the rain, even motorcycles.  That's when you really find out who can drive.  Put some tread tires on and go for it.

 

College football is also having trouble.  The ever-enhanced TV experience is also hurting live attendance.

 

There is another social discussion to be had in the lessening of general American pride and that also hurts truly American enterprises, like NASCAR. 

Edited March 27, 2017 by 39BuickEight (see edit history)

[Eric Wahlberg]

I am not a big fan of oval track racing though I appreciate the skills required to drive any racecar  at speeds approaching 200 mph.  I believe NASCAR long ago stopped being about STOCK cars and became SPEC cars.  Other than the decals used to emulated production vehicle front and rear designs, the current cars racing in NASCAR have the same body silhouettes and drive train layouts.  How stock is a V8 powered, front engine, rear drive layout in 2017?  Does Ford, Chevrolet or Toyota offer such sedan based production cars today?  Let's face it, NASCAR is about entertainment, pure and simple.  Speed is entertaining, noise is entertaining and unfortunately, crashes are about entertainment.  

 

The only NASCAR races I look forward to viewing each year are those on the road courses at Sonoma and Watkins Glen.  Racecars going around in circles just is not as enjoyable to watch in my opinion.

[John_S_in_Penna]

When truly stock vehicles were raced in NASCAR

in the 1950's, what modifications (if any) were allowed?

[Bob Hill]

Very little, if any, correlation between the cars that race on Sunday and the cars sitting in the showrooms on Monday.  They have moved so far away from "stock cars" that they are almost not recognizable.  Combine that with the antics of the driver's and the restrictions on engines, etc and you lose fans.  Personally I wouldn't walk across the street and watch a NASCAR race even if it were free.  

 

Around here, NASCAR fans and rednecks are synonymous terms LOL

 

Bob

Edited March 27, 2017 by Bob Hill (see edit history)

[padgett]

+1 on boring. No fun to watch convoys. Need some faster in corners and others on the straight, then it is interesting.

[cahartley]

I was at one 200 mile stock car race in Milwaukee, WI, and one BIG car race at Elkhart Lake, WI.

Never again....... 

[Mike36]

7 hours ago, John_S_in_Penna said:

 

Good points, Terry.

I read that there are at least 10 makes of cars that 

no longer participate:  Chrysler, Dodge, Mercury, Oldsmobile, Buick...

 

It could be interesting if they got back to their roots:

actual STOCK cars that you could buy in the showroom.

Then you could watch to see a real proof of the power,

handling, and endurance of products that you might want to buy.

 

Today, I think there's almost nothing "stock" about the

National Association of Stock Car Auto Racing--and I don't know

if they even use the full title of their association anymore, anyway. 

John, you do know why Mercury and Oldsmobile are not competing, right?