Nascar and Indycar are equals both series run 30 races with 22 Ovals and 6 road courses. Need help this is my first thread.
Nascar and Indycar are equals
- Thread starter Screvier20
- Start date
Both the old Ontario motor speedway and riverside international raceway are still around and nascar and indycar race at.
POD I believe is 1972 when nascar reduced the number of races from 48 to 31 but in timeline nascar would reduced the number of races to one race a track leaving 16 races.
Last edited:
1994 would be Historic for both Indycar and Nascar with Indycar racing the Daytona road course for the first time and nascar running at Indianapolis Robby Gordon would beat Emerson Fittipaldi and Michael Andertti for win at Daytona. While Geoff Bodine wins the Brickyard 400 over Kyle Petty and Bill Elliott.
I no their are not many motorsports threads and this my first thread. Really need help on indycar only been watching it about year. Need no help with nascar because I been watching since I was 5 years old.
The 6 road courses nascar racing at are Riverside, Watkins Glen, Road America, Infineon, Road Atlanta, and Laguna Seca. While indycar racing at Riverside, Watkins Glen, Road America, Infineon,Portland , and Barber. Indycar also runs 3 street courses and a roval. The street courses are Long Beach, Saint Peterburg, and Sebring. The roval race is at Daytona.
Indycar as six engine supplies Ford, Chevrolet, Honda, Buick, Mercedes Benz, and Dodge. While nascar runs Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge, Pontiac, and Toyota.
Indycar as six engine supplies Ford, Chevrolet, Honda, Buick, Mercedes Benz, and Dodge. While nascar runs Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge, Pontiac, and Toyota.
The future for both nascar and indycar is blight with ferrari joining indycar in 2012 and volkswagen joining nascar in 2012. Along with volkswagen big changes coming nascar in 2012 with Traction control and fuel injection.
The demographics both series are indycar 60% American 40% mostly former f1 drivers. While nascar is 95% American and 5% from mostly former v8 supercar, Stock Car Brasil, and Turismo Carretera series from Argentina. Nascar also as small number of 2nd tier former f1 driver. Most top former f1 driver move to indycar when they finishes their f1 careers.
The key to this thread is NACSAR and IndyCar reatining an equivalent prestige and fan base. Trying to matching up the numbers of races and types of venues is ASB because of 2 key points: 1)IndyCar will alwaus run fewer races than NASCAR given the greater fragility of open wheel racers and the time dedicated to the Indy 500. 2) Open wheel racers as they have evolved since the 1960's are equally adaptable for oval and road racing (although oval racing is always a superior show) while road racing has always been and remains somewhat of a sideshow for NASCAR. A healthy balance would be 20 IndyCar races, 15 on ovals and 5 on road or street courses and 32 NASCAR, 30 on ovals and 2 on road courses.
The real question is to find a POD that would have prevented the eclipse of IndyCar racing, to the benefit of NASCAR, over the past 20 years. The real problem with IndyCar over this entire time has been the influx of ride-buying foreign drivers with no American racing background and no existing fan base. While some of these drivers, through skill and winning personalities, like Tony Kaanan, have become quite popular, overall the de-racination of IndyCar racing through its rejection of its short-track oval racing roots is the core of IndyCar's decline.
The most obvious POD would be the rejection of Jeff Gordon by the IndyCar teams when he sought a ride after dominating the USAC short-track divisions. In the ear when talent earned rides at Indy he would have been on the fast track to a quality ride. In the ride-buying era, since he could not produce several million dollars in personal or sponsorship money, the owners told him to take a hike. Hence he becomes a star in NASCAR. Although not the first open-wheel refugee from ride buying (see Ken Schrader), and clearly not popular with the die-hard southern partisans of Dale Earnhardt, Gordon is the wedge for the expansion of NASCAR popularity into the midwest and other non-southern regions and the leader of the short-traack open wheel exodus into NASCAR.
The real POD would be in the late '70's. AT that time IndyCar had a recognizable stable of star drivers and was still maintaining links with the USAC short track programs to develop new drivers. Unfortunately a cabal of owners, lead by the real villian of this story, Roger Penske, staged a coup against the oval-track centered leadership of USAC and brought forth, after a brief Civil War, CART. The owners now controlled IndyCar racing and this group of owners, led by Penske, broke the links to short-track racing and, except for the established stars, offered their rides largely to rich but untalented Americans. A few talented road-racers (Rahal, Sullivan) were able to slip in, but again these drivers, as talented as they were, lacked the pre-existing open-wheel fan base that short-track drivers had developed, since no watched amatuer and lower level road racing. By the late 1980's foreign drivers began to occupy the ride-buying slots and there was no room at the Inn for Jeff Gordon. When the last of ther heroic generation finally retired in the early 1990's, there were few recognizable stars left in IndyCar and by 1995 only 14 of the 33 Indy starters were American. I will nopt go into the bugled split between CART and IRL that followed. The die was cast in the 1970's.
My POD is that a stronger USAC, not weakened by the loss of most if its leadership in 1978 plane crash, retains control of IndyCar racing. In doing so it maintains a reasonable ration of oval to road racing, with oval tracks in preponderance (another thing CART reversed) and maintains the traditional 'Road to Indy' through USAC sprints and dirt track big cars (Silver Crown). This opens the road for Ken Schrader, Jeff Gordon, Tony Stewart, Kasey Kahne and others to star in IndyCar and with this new star base rising i the 1990's IndyCar and NASCAR remain in a relative parity of prestige and fan support. And American racing is far stronger from top to bottom.
The real question is to find a POD that would have prevented the eclipse of IndyCar racing, to the benefit of NASCAR, over the past 20 years. The real problem with IndyCar over this entire time has been the influx of ride-buying foreign drivers with no American racing background and no existing fan base. While some of these drivers, through skill and winning personalities, like Tony Kaanan, have become quite popular, overall the de-racination of IndyCar racing through its rejection of its short-track oval racing roots is the core of IndyCar's decline.
The most obvious POD would be the rejection of Jeff Gordon by the IndyCar teams when he sought a ride after dominating the USAC short-track divisions. In the ear when talent earned rides at Indy he would have been on the fast track to a quality ride. In the ride-buying era, since he could not produce several million dollars in personal or sponsorship money, the owners told him to take a hike. Hence he becomes a star in NASCAR. Although not the first open-wheel refugee from ride buying (see Ken Schrader), and clearly not popular with the die-hard southern partisans of Dale Earnhardt, Gordon is the wedge for the expansion of NASCAR popularity into the midwest and other non-southern regions and the leader of the short-traack open wheel exodus into NASCAR.
The real POD would be in the late '70's. AT that time IndyCar had a recognizable stable of star drivers and was still maintaining links with the USAC short track programs to develop new drivers. Unfortunately a cabal of owners, lead by the real villian of this story, Roger Penske, staged a coup against the oval-track centered leadership of USAC and brought forth, after a brief Civil War, CART. The owners now controlled IndyCar racing and this group of owners, led by Penske, broke the links to short-track racing and, except for the established stars, offered their rides largely to rich but untalented Americans. A few talented road-racers (Rahal, Sullivan) were able to slip in, but again these drivers, as talented as they were, lacked the pre-existing open-wheel fan base that short-track drivers had developed, since no watched amatuer and lower level road racing. By the late 1980's foreign drivers began to occupy the ride-buying slots and there was no room at the Inn for Jeff Gordon. When the last of ther heroic generation finally retired in the early 1990's, there were few recognizable stars left in IndyCar and by 1995 only 14 of the 33 Indy starters were American. I will nopt go into the bugled split between CART and IRL that followed. The die was cast in the 1970's.
My POD is that a stronger USAC, not weakened by the loss of most if its leadership in 1978 plane crash, retains control of IndyCar racing. In doing so it maintains a reasonable ration of oval to road racing, with oval tracks in preponderance (another thing CART reversed) and maintains the traditional 'Road to Indy' through USAC sprints and dirt track big cars (Silver Crown). This opens the road for Ken Schrader, Jeff Gordon, Tony Stewart, Kasey Kahne and others to star in IndyCar and with this new star base rising i the 1990's IndyCar and NASCAR remain in a relative parity of prestige and fan support. And American racing is far stronger from top to bottom.
^ Comte de Geneve, your TL of USAC hanging on is a bad idea, simply because USAC wasn't taking the sport anywhere. CART was not originally planning to destroy USAC's Indycar series, they wanted to work together, effectively with CART as the promotional body and USAC sanctioning and running the races, similar to the Relationship between Formula One Management and the FIA. That civil war was not started by Penske, it was started by the guys at Indianapolis Motor Speedway. CART and USAC came to an agreement, which resulted in the Championship Racing Association being set up by the both of them for 1980. Indianapolis Motor Speedway immediately told USAC to kill it or they would find somebody else to be the sanctioner for the Indy 500. USAC killed the league as a result. (Rick Mears was the only champ of the CRA, FYI.) USAC simply didn't have the personnel or knowledge to promote the series as CART did, and as a result its Indycar series folded in July 1981.
If you keep USAC on board, all you do is add to owner frustration and add to the perception that the only race that matters is the Indy 500. Even the IRL, which Tony George founded specifically to wrest control of the series from CART, now knows well that you cannot make a series where only one race counts. If that is the case, why do the others? Indy would be a lot smaller without the series, if it still existed at all.
The best POD for an equal Indycar and NASCAR series I think is 1993. Tony George's first attempt to get influence with CART was best described as foolish, but CART's ignorant, self-absorbed response added to the problem. What Tony George should have done is used his wealth and influence to beat the CART owners at their own game. The perception that the CART owners all hired foreigners is BS - the 1990 Indy 500 had 24 Americans from 33 starters, and Arie Lyeundyk was only the second non-American Indy 500 winner since the 1960s. The names were all there - Mario and Michael Andretti, Bobby Rahal, Rick Mears, both Big Al and Little Al Unser, AJ Foyt, Danny Sullivan - and the sport was still huge. There was a raft of talent from the US that arrived in open wheel racing in the early and mid 1990s - Jimmy Vasser, Robby Gordon, Bryan Herta, Tony Stewart, Scott Pruett, Buddy Lazier - and as Emerson Fittipaldi proved, it is possible for a foreign-born star to exist. Paul Tracy and Mauricio Gugelmin were proving that point in 1995. The best POD I think would have been for George to get into the game as a player in 1993 or 1994, bring in his buddies (John Menard, John Barnes and Gary Pedigo, Tom Kelley, Jack and Allan Pagan) into the Indycar Series as owners. This would undoubtedly give him considerably influence within CART. Yes, Jeff Gordon came and didn't get a ride. That was because he was jumping from sprint cars directly into Indycars. That is a massive jump, and one team owner (Bruce McCaw, owner of PacWest Racing) DID offer him a ride if he proved himself in Indy Lights first. He got a better offer from NASCAR and went there. His choice, don't have any hate for him as a result, but going from Silver Crown cars to Indycars is changing from brute force, front-engine, steel frame, sideways-sliding dirt track racers to highly-sophisticated, mid-engine, carbonfiber monocoque pavement racers that tend to not work well when driven sideways. There is a reason why lots of dirt-trackers tried Indy during the IRL days and most flopped. Tony Stewart could have been kept as an open wheel racer if John Menard was willing to pay him what he was worth. As far as nobody watching open wheel road racing, I know from a lot of experience (race fan going back to first watching race cars at the 1984 Canadian GP, first Indycar race was Toronto's debut in CART in 1986) that the fan base for short trackers isn't much bigger. In both cases, its guys doing it because they love to race.
As far as oval racing always being the better show, that also depends on the rules and the tracks. No two tracks are alike - Nazareth and Dover were poor races, but Milwaukee and New Hampshire have put on incredible shows. Likewise, Kansas City, Atlanta and Fontana were frequently duds, Kentucky was just average....but Chicagoland, which is almost identical to Kentucky, was usually awesome. Likewise, Mid-Ohio is not suited for Indycars because its too twisty. Road America and Watkins Glen were usually excellent. It's too simplistic to simply say ovals are better. That also somewhat applies to street circuits - Belle Isle and the Meadowlands were never much good, Toronto and Vancouver average, Long Beach and Cleveland usually very good indeed.
If you keep USAC on board, all you do is add to owner frustration and add to the perception that the only race that matters is the Indy 500. Even the IRL, which Tony George founded specifically to wrest control of the series from CART, now knows well that you cannot make a series where only one race counts. If that is the case, why do the others? Indy would be a lot smaller without the series, if it still existed at all.
The best POD for an equal Indycar and NASCAR series I think is 1993. Tony George's first attempt to get influence with CART was best described as foolish, but CART's ignorant, self-absorbed response added to the problem. What Tony George should have done is used his wealth and influence to beat the CART owners at their own game. The perception that the CART owners all hired foreigners is BS - the 1990 Indy 500 had 24 Americans from 33 starters, and Arie Lyeundyk was only the second non-American Indy 500 winner since the 1960s. The names were all there - Mario and Michael Andretti, Bobby Rahal, Rick Mears, both Big Al and Little Al Unser, AJ Foyt, Danny Sullivan - and the sport was still huge. There was a raft of talent from the US that arrived in open wheel racing in the early and mid 1990s - Jimmy Vasser, Robby Gordon, Bryan Herta, Tony Stewart, Scott Pruett, Buddy Lazier - and as Emerson Fittipaldi proved, it is possible for a foreign-born star to exist. Paul Tracy and Mauricio Gugelmin were proving that point in 1995. The best POD I think would have been for George to get into the game as a player in 1993 or 1994, bring in his buddies (John Menard, John Barnes and Gary Pedigo, Tom Kelley, Jack and Allan Pagan) into the Indycar Series as owners. This would undoubtedly give him considerably influence within CART. Yes, Jeff Gordon came and didn't get a ride. That was because he was jumping from sprint cars directly into Indycars. That is a massive jump, and one team owner (Bruce McCaw, owner of PacWest Racing) DID offer him a ride if he proved himself in Indy Lights first. He got a better offer from NASCAR and went there. His choice, don't have any hate for him as a result, but going from Silver Crown cars to Indycars is changing from brute force, front-engine, steel frame, sideways-sliding dirt track racers to highly-sophisticated, mid-engine, carbonfiber monocoque pavement racers that tend to not work well when driven sideways. There is a reason why lots of dirt-trackers tried Indy during the IRL days and most flopped. Tony Stewart could have been kept as an open wheel racer if John Menard was willing to pay him what he was worth. As far as nobody watching open wheel road racing, I know from a lot of experience (race fan going back to first watching race cars at the 1984 Canadian GP, first Indycar race was Toronto's debut in CART in 1986) that the fan base for short trackers isn't much bigger. In both cases, its guys doing it because they love to race.
As far as oval racing always being the better show, that also depends on the rules and the tracks. No two tracks are alike - Nazareth and Dover were poor races, but Milwaukee and New Hampshire have put on incredible shows. Likewise, Kansas City, Atlanta and Fontana were frequently duds, Kentucky was just average....but Chicagoland, which is almost identical to Kentucky, was usually awesome. Likewise, Mid-Ohio is not suited for Indycars because its too twisty. Road America and Watkins Glen were usually excellent. It's too simplistic to simply say ovals are better. That also somewhat applies to street circuits - Belle Isle and the Meadowlands were never much good, Toronto and Vancouver average, Long Beach and Cleveland usually very good indeed.
Without the drivers from the USAC short-track divisions going nascar you may see more drivers coming out of nascar's Modified series like Jimmy Spencer, Geoff Bodine and Steve Park did. This would nascar very diffident feel with drivers from the northeast where modifieds are popular.
It would be nice if nascar four road courses like Road America or Laguna Seca it would see nascar cars on the Corkscrew. And see indycars running at the Daytona road course.
It would be nice if nascar four road courses like Road America or Laguna Seca it would see nascar cars on the Corkscrew. And see indycars running at the Daytona road course.
Possibly. Its worth pointing out though that NASCAR's pool is not being drawn so much from its own lower classes anymore either, owing to the number of Cup drivers running in the series now. The current crop of NASCAR up and comers starting in karts, just as is the case with the open wheelers.
Indycars on the Daytona Road course would be difficult, simply owing to the transfer on and off the banking. NASCAR could easily enough work at Road America and Laguna Seca, though they better improve the brakes for Road America or else the high-speed sections where they have to brake hard would eat their brakes quite quickly.
usertron2020
Donor
Forgive a relative neophyte
like myself for interjecting, but is it a symbol of Indy Car's troubles or a cause for their troubles that there seems to be a public perception that only Team Penske and Team Target are relative favorites to win every single race?
like myself for interjecting, but is it a symbol of Indy Car's troubles or a cause for their troubles that there seems to be a public perception that only Team Penske and Team Target are relative favorites to win every single race?NothingNow
Banned
Forgive a relative neophyte
It's just public perception, although Indycar's been having some issues trying to reincorporate both the IRL and CART teams into a single league. That, and Penske and Target get the most funding and have some of the most skilled drivers.
An obvious way to split the US motorsport fanbase more equally would be to have NASCAR confined mostly to its original Southern US heartland, whilst the USAC/Indycar/CART series is the North US, Canada and (perhaps) a few flyaway races beyond, with North vs South rivalry discouraging the fanbase from crossing over too much. You basically have to wish away the entire AOWR Split of the mid-90s since a huge number of open wheel fans got thoroughly sick of the nonsense that followed and either switched to NASCAR or gave up on the sport entirely
As said though, I think having the exact same number of races and the same ratio of ovals to road/street courses is unlikely
As said though, I think having the exact same number of races and the same ratio of ovals to road/street courses is unlikely
I know that indycars had a compatibility test at the Daytona road course in both 2006 and 2007. But the track was too bump at the time how with repave it may possible for the indycar to run at Daytona. Question when repave the oval did also pave the road course
Would like to find way to save both Ontario Motor Speedway and riverside same how. Maybe by adding f1 race at Ontario would help or was Ontario's debt problems too severe ever be save by add a f1 race or ever if united states would get second f1 race at time Ontario opened.
Riverside is so sad that the track remove and replace by a mall that close.
Riverside is so sad that the track remove and replace by a mall that close.
Forgive a relative neophyte
On ovals, NothingNow's explanation is right, the Penske and Ganassi (the Target Team is owned by Chip Ganassi) teams have the most cash and the best engineers. This, with the Indycar series' speeds on ovals tends to cause the races to be decided more by aerodynamic setup than driver skill. On road courses, however, the game tends to favor driver skill a lot more, which is why small and mid-budget teams with great drivers (Tagliani, Conway, de Silvestro, Wilson, Kanaan) tend to be able to hunt the bucks-up boys on the twisty courses.