Toyota gets first Nascar win

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by member12

Is there any difference between a Toyota or a Chevy nascar?

I don't follow the sport....

Basically no, and that is one of the big problems. One major difference is Toyota did not have an engine block to start with so Dodge was forced to give them theirs, Ford, Chevy, and of course Dodge all designed their own. Well at least that's the anti-toyota spin I have for it, a fanboy might have a different one.

[unkillsam]

Originally Posted by SwampFoxZ71

NASCAR now officially blows.

First, they change to the Chase format which has robbed Jeff of 2 championships in 6 years. Second, they messed w/ the restrictor plate racing which forced cars to run together at Daytona, possibly costing senior his life. Third, they've allowed Toyota to come in and run races w/o their own engine, as they've been using Dodge blocks from the get-go since they didn't have anything of their own. Fourth, they now use "Car of Tomorrow" and will eventually use a 'common engine'.

I told my wife, after the first Toyota win in the main cup series, I officially withdraw support from watching every race (like we used to).

Put a fork in me, I'm done...

Great post.

As good as he was at it, Big E was on the record as saying that he hated the superspeedway "pack racing" as he knew it was dangerous.

[Hudson]

Okay, so the concensus opinion here is that TOYOTA is the worst thing to happen to NASCAR since it founding? Not the fact that GM has been running front-drive "stock cars" since 1989....or the "Car of Tomorrow" which makes the only difference between the four brands the decals on the body...or the fact that the Camry is the only one of these "race cars" that's actually built in the US?

[ksr]

Originally Posted by SwampFoxZ71

NASCAR now officially blows.

First, they change to the Chase format which has robbed Jeff of 2 championships in 6 years. Second, they messed w/ the restrictor plate racing which forced cars to run together at Daytona, possibly costing senior his life. Third, they've allowed Toyota to come in and run races w/o their own engine, as they've been using Dodge blocks from the get-go since they didn't have anything of their own. Fourth, they now use "Car of Tomorrow" and will eventually use a 'common engine'.

I told my wife, after the first Toyota win in the main cup series, I officially withdraw support from watching every race (like we used to).

Put a fork in me, I'm done...

I'm not a fan and I just know the basics stuff from SportsCenter. Who wins and who loses.

I've always thought the scoring system for the Winston/Nextel/Sprint cup was ridiculous.

Years ago, Terry Labonte won the cup. He won two races. That same season, Jeff Gordon won eleven times (a third of the schedule I think). That's ridiculous. I understand valuing consistent performance, but a high value should be placed on actually winning a race. When the season champion won nine fewer races than another guy, the scoring is just wrong.

Why does winning a pole give you any points?

Why does leading laps of a race matter if you don't win the race? You don't get credit for leading a football game at halftime. Or for leading a golf tournament though 54 holes.

Winning should be what matters.

Now they have this new "chase" system which is ridiculous. You race for months. You can have a close, two or three man race to that point, with those couple of guys blowing everyone else away, and then they throw out all the previous results and start the top ten points guys on even ground. How does that reward consistency, which they seem to value, by bringing in some also-ran 9th or 10th place guys and putting them back into the mix?

But then, I'm not a fan. Just some observations. It probably makes sense to a lot of the diehards. I think it's wrong to talk about racing teams and how guys are competing against each other in individual cars but at the same time are helping each other out. There's just something bogus about the "competition" there (sounds like the Tour de France).

Maybe someone can explain it.

[sonjaab]

Sure is a SAD day for America!

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Hudson

Okay, so the concensus opinion here is that TOYOTA is the worst thing to happen to NASCAR since it founding? Not the fact that GM has been running front-drive "stock cars" since 1989....or the "Car of Tomorrow" which makes the only difference between the four brands the decals on the body...or the fact that the Camry is the only one of these "race cars" that's actually built in the US?

I listed about 4 other reasons why nascar now sucks. Toyota was final blow.

[roteague]

Originally Posted by Hudson

or the fact that the Camry is the only one of these "race cars" that's actually built in the US?

The Crapry may be assembled in the US, but that doesn't mean it was MADE in the US. It was made in Japan, that is where all the engineering for it came from, and that is where the majority of the car gets its value from. Assembly means very little.

[PhishPhood]

Originally Posted by roteague

The Crapry may be assembled in the US, but that doesn't mean it was MADE in the US. It was made in Japan, that is where all the engineering for it came from, and that is where the majority of the car gets its value from. Assembly means very little.

It's impossible that someone still holds onto this goofy belief. Ah well the Information Age may not have dawned on all heads.

Continue on..Wow.

( Sorry I forgot in which Japanese prefecture is US Steel located again? And when did they move? Alcoa? Delphi ? Lear Seating? Goodyear? )

[Family Man]

Originally Posted by ksr

I'm not a fan and I just know the basics stuff from SportsCenter. Who wins and who loses.

I've always thought the scoring system for the Winston/Nextel/Sprint cup was ridiculous.

Years ago, Terry Labonte won the cup. He won two races. That same season, Jeff Gordon won eleven times (a third of the schedule I think). That's ridiculous. I understand valuing consistent performance, but a high value should be placed on actually winning a race. When the season champion won nine fewer races than another guy, the scoring is just wrong.

Why does winning a pole give you any points?

Why does leading laps of a race matter if you don't win the race? You don't get credit for leading a football game at halftime. Or for leading a golf tournament though 54 holes.

Winning should be what matters.

Now they have this new "chase" system which is ridiculous. You race for months. You can have a close, two or three man race to that point, with those couple of guys blowing everyone else away, and then they throw out all the previous results and start the top ten points guys on even ground. How does that reward consistency, which they seem to value, by bringing in some also-ran 9th or 10th place guys and putting them back into the mix?

But then, I'm not a fan. Just some observations. It probably makes sense to a lot of the diehards. I think it's wrong to talk about racing teams and how guys are competing against each other in individual cars but at the same time are helping each other out. There's just something bogus about the "competition" there (sounds like the Tour de France).

Maybe someone can explain it.

I'll agree that the chase thing is a little nuts, but it was put into place after Kenseth won the championship in 2002 after winning just one race while Ryan Newman, who finished 6th in the Championship, won 6 times. So much for rewarding consistency, but the Chase system reflects what happens in most pro sports. Just look at the Super Bowl: the best team in the regular season did not win the champion.

As for rewarding all of those bonus points, NASCAR wants drivers to race hard all week-end, which is why points are awarded for winning the pole (NASCAR wants drivers fighting for pole and not just work on race set-up), for leading a lap, as well as the most laps. What NASCAR doesn't want are a bunch of drivers coasting around the track trying to conserve fuel and end up winning races on fuel mileage (although it still happens).

[marinerbc]

Originally Posted by Hudson

Okay, so the concensus opinion here is that TOYOTA is the worst thing to happen to NASCAR since it founding? Not the fact that GM has been running front-drive "stock cars" since 1989....or the "Car of Tomorrow" which makes the only difference between the four brands the decals on the body...or the fact that the Camry is the only one of these "race cars" that's actually built in the US?

You know, you really should try to keep up. This ground was covered, paved over, dug up and had condos built on it years ago.

I'm sure there are other nits you can pick. Or go wash your Sequoia.

[327]

Originally Posted by member12

Can someone in the know explain to me the difference between a Camry stock car and a Charger or Impala stock car?

Are the engines different?


Who's up for seeing real Montes, G8s, Camrys, and Chargers on the race track for 500 laps? I sure am. Hell, I'd like to see the Craftsman truck series with the Tundra, Silverado, and Ram.

Besides some indentions for stickers, the sidewindows shape, and the engines. Theyre all the exact same car.

Id be up for seeing the real cars racing, but those Chevys,Fords and Toyotas should go RWD. I doubt it would make the fan base get bigger by alot though.

[ksr]

Originally Posted by Family Man

I'll agree that the chase thing is a little nuts, but it was put into place after Kenseth won the championship in 2002 after winning just one race while Ryan Newman, who finished 6th in the Championship, won 6 times. So much for rewarding consistency, but the Chase system reflects what happens in most pro sports. Just look at the Super Bowl: the best team in the regular season did not win the champion.

As for rewarding all of those bonus points, NASCAR wants drivers to race hard all week-end, which is why points are awarded for winning the pole (NASCAR wants drivers fighting for pole and not just work on race set-up), for leading a lap, as well as the most laps. What NASCAR doesn't want are a bunch of drivers coasting around the track trying to conserve fuel and end up winning races on fuel mileage (although it still happens).

I can understand points for winning the pole I guess. But I think it should be about winning the race, not leading it for a short time.

Like I said, I'm not a fan. I've always had these questions about that points system. It just doesn't seem to put a high enough premium on actually winning the race.

My problem with the Chase system is that they're trying to make it like other sports. Same with the ridiculous Fedex Cup in golf. I don't think racing or golf should try to be like the other sports with some phony end-of-season series.

[Zigmeister]

Just over a year ago, you guys were mouthing off about how Toyota would never win nuthin' and would soon be going home with their tail between their legs. It flared up again last year when they announced they had signed a team with a real possibility to win races.

Now they've had their first win, and you're full of conspiracy theories and being cry-babies saying you won't watch any more, just because you've been beaten at your own game.

Grow up. You're meant to be adults.

Remember also your fearless predictions about Tony Stewart deserting Toyota when his current contract expires. We'll be discussing that too when the time comes...