Car Of The Future: Dream Machine Or Nightmare?
Written by George Katinger · November 1, 2005
With further testing of NASCAR’s proposed car of the future at Atlanta Motor Speedway yesterday, there appears to be different opinions on the cars performance. I guess we’ll just have to decide for ourselves.
speedtv.com: NASCAR’s “Car of Tomorrow” Hits the Track in Atlanta
thestate.com: ‘Car of tomorrow’ gets rave reviews
NASCAR.com: Car of Tomorrow hits track at Atlanta test
If only we could turn a few hot laps in both cars, we might have the ability to tell the difference between the two. Lacking the opportunity (and no doubt the skill) we’ll just have to content ourselves with what we read.
And there’s the rub. Two people can interview the same sources and come away with totally different stories and conclusions.
When reading The State article, the car of the future comes off as the best thing since sliced bread. The story never mentions the problems in traffic or the spins suffered by the testers. I guess they thought of them as minor difficulties that could be tweaked out in chassis setups. Right!
The speedtv version paints a more factual picture by pointing out the handling problems, and the conditions under which they were experienced. In traffic. Great, that’ll make all the driver’s bottoms pucker a little more when they’re at Daytona and ‘Dega! Just what the sport needs, a slower, albeit safer car, that’s twitchier in traffic.
And while both stories point out the cost to the teams, not enough attention is payed in that direction. Mother NASCAR has dictated that we WILL be racing with the new car in 2007, with a few races next year, and that’s it. Adapt or die.
With four to go in the Chase, this is far from the most pressing story in NASCAR, but it will be. Just as soon as Tony Stewart wins it all, watch the car of the future become the car we all can’t afford.
Comments
8 Responses to “Car Of The Future: Dream Machine Or Nightmare?”
Got something to say?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Yep it’s amazing how most of the media has been in lockstep with NASCAR over the COF.
I don’t but the peaches and cream nonsense for a NY minute.
The biggest line of bull is the cost factor, on two counts. First is the cost of total fleet replacement and virtually nowhere to sell off the old inventory.
Secondly is this hidden cost. Picture this for a moment:
Remember the time of your “Father’s Oldsmobile?” They had real bumpers and real frames. After thousands of NHTSB crash tests and millions of film footage of thoses crashes we have todays safer street car.
BUT the cost of repairing that “Oldsmobile” (adjusted for inflation) is a small fraction of what todays accident damage costs. That cost is due to extensive use of “crush zones” front and rear to absorb the energy so your pumpkin head doesn’t have to!
Now for two points and a free paid vacation at NHTSB HQ what is one of the key safety features on NASCAR’s COF?
Opps, sorry times up…
Front clip “crush zones!”
So what is a slam into a SAFER barrier now causing crumpled fenders, torn out brake cooling hoses and a few more items in many cases can be “racers taped” together and sent back out, becomes a COF pile of junk in many more cases than present due to “crush zones” that have crushed clear to the firewall.
But other than that.. well what can you say? It’s a NASCAR idea.
Oh in case you missed the tone, I think the COF is a load of horse hockey.
And I didn’t have time to introduce the concept of the impact on the tires. If the car is that much more squirelly, how about the added stress and wear to the tires? Not too cool!
I don’t care how ugly they look, the safest professional racing series in the world is NASCAR.
Stock car racing & manufacturer involvement is built on the premise that the car buying public see the product “win on Sunday buy on Monday”. I curious will the manufacturer supplied grill & rear bumper, matched with the generic COF still be recognisable with the road going product? I don’t know enough about the existing NASCAR & the COF to make a judgement but the existing NASCAR seems primitive in safety in comparison to a DTM or Australian Super V8, even more so when you consider the speeds reached on some of the ovals, or have I got this wrong, eg. The DTM driver’s legs are in a carbon fibre “single seater” tub.
What happened to Winsten Cup Racing, all I see now is a bunch of identical eggs running in circles. Neither the CoF or the current cars look a thing like the cars on the street. Go back to making the cars look like the ones in the showrooms
The only thing that is “stock” on a stock car are the decals. These are racecars not street cars. Honda uses the IRL to sell cars, Chevy uses NASCAR to sell cars, etc. Racecars shouldn’t have to model the street cars they are trying to sell.
I’m going to disagree with you on that one DJ.Call it Stockcar, Sedan or Tourer, Production car racing is all about looking like the ones in the show rooms.
Why can’t we go back to the way it was when they took a car out of the show room, slapped a number and some decals on it and drove it 500 miles? If we can put a man on the moon and bring him back, we surely can use a more realistic stock car. And using sedan models should be illegal, 4 doors are for grandma’s, not 200 MPH speedways.