[ThePurple73]

Originally Posted by team3521 And that is THE reason why pavement racing is going to die. Just like the Midgets have suffered, a slow and painful to watch death. Nail on the head Don. I put 98% of the blame on the purple tire company. Someone should have seen this coming years ago and there's the other 2% of the blame. If the tire manuf. don't want to alter their compounds to last longer (which they could do) and lower the costs, then go elsewhere for the tires of the sanctioning body. ie: American Racer, Goodyear, etc There are other companies that could make our tires for us with a lot less greed IMO. Yes, they have the right to make as much profit as possible from us, This is the USA (last I checked) but not at the expense of killing series'. We have the right as a customer to look elsewhere for the products that we are consuming. They do not have a monopoly on this market!

Why not have a tire sponsor that would actually be advertising to the fans and supplying tires to competitors at a very very reasonable rate or actually supply competitor tires for the advertising.
The benefit to the tire company is direct access to the fans.

[Need For Speed]

Originally Posted by 1121 I hate to disappoint you all, but the problem is not with the tire companies. The problem is not with the sanctioning bodies. The problem is not even with chassis manufacturers or the engine builders. The problem is with the car owners! (Remember I am one) As long as the various owners out there are willing to spend $2000 to make $1000, then this problem will persist in some fashion. The mentality of the car owners have changed over the years, as well as the drivers. Very few drivers are actually running for money any more. Most of the pavement cars (and many dirt cars also) are either father – son teams or buy-a –rides. The fathers will spend outrages amounts of money because they think their son is the next big thing. And the drivers that buy their rides make the car go to the highest bidder rather than who can wheel it the best. Then when they are the highest bidder, they seem shocked when to car owner goes with someone else because they brought more money. We don’t need rule changes; we need car owners with a brain! If every car owner refused to put on more than two tires, guess what? Then we wouldn’t use as many tires. Now I know this has absolutely no chance of happening. I understand that there will always be that car owner (s) that will spend whatever amount it takes to win a race. But don’t blame the tire companies for wanting to sell tires. Nobody makes us buy those tires. It is our own fault. And it will be our fault when pavement racing goes away and doesn’t come back. We have met the enemy and he is us. Tom Paterson HOSS Sprint #11

This man speaks the truth!!

The way things are now..................
A guy could get a pick-up truck and an open trailer, and a 20 year old car, and run his sprinter on old or used tires. TT last, run last in the heat, still make the feature, and once again run last. At the end of the day, he made the most money//lost the least amount of money, of anyone else!!

Nobody is forcing the car owners to buy a new RR 2+ times per race, nobody forced them to 'test', nobody forced them to buy specialized pavement only cars, and nobody is forcing them to keep them parked in the garage/shop.

Car owners are in charge of funding their race cars....spending money like drunken sailors is of their own doing.

The tire companies, engine builders, chassis builders, etc, saw that many car owners wanted a way to 'spend their way' into victory lane.

[SC90]

Originally Posted by Need For Speed This man speaks the truth!! The way things are now.................. A guy could get a pick-up truck and an open trailer, and a 20 year old car, and run his sprinter on old or used tires. TT last, run last in the heat, still make the feature, and once again run last. At the end of the day, he made the most money//lost the least amount of money, of anyone else!! Nobody is forcing the car owners to buy a new RR 2+ times per race, nobody forced them to 'test', nobody forced them to buy specialized pavement only cars, and nobody is forcing them to keep them parked in the garage/shop. Car owners are in charge of funding their race cars....spending money like drunken sailors is of their own doing. The tire companies, engine builders, chassis builders, etc, saw that many car owners wanted a way to 'spend their way' into victory lane.

The last time I looked, racing was a competition sport. The teams and drivers are competitive; it's what makes it a race. I don't care how good a driver is, if his car is crap he isn't going to win a race or be competitive.

Would you pay money to attend a race where the competitors really didn't care if they won or lost? Envision a bunch of guys just tooling around with crap equipment just for the fun of it. I can get on the interstate for that.

A for-profit sanctioning body can do anything they damn well please. For the fans' sake, hopefully they will make money so they can continue to host races that we all enjoy. In contrast, non-profit sanctioning bodies are supposed to represent the members. That's right. Read it again. Unfortunately, this isn't what is happening.

It is VERY easy for a sanctioning body to limit the amount teams spend on racing by instituting rules that everyone must follow. Tire rules, weights, etc. All they have to do is make the RULES. That is, after all, what a sanctioning body is supposed to do.

As long as there aren't any limits on what a team can spend, the good, competitive ones WILL spend money! They are competitive! They are racers! They want to win for crying out loud. The will to win will drive them to do WHATEVER THEY CAN, including spending money if that's what it takes. Until the rules change, the racers won't cut their own nose off to spite their face.

[Need For Speed]

SC90: Yeah, I know how the game is played. I've been around racing for 38+ years.

Spending money like there is no bottom to your pockets only goes on for so long.

NASCAR used to be highly competitive. There used to be a multitude of top 1 and maybe 2 car teams. Now, with the drunken sailor approach to spending money, testing and throwing new tires on at every chance they can, they are down to a handful of multiple car teams, and a bunch of guys with a snowball's chance in hell of making the top 20....and thus, the racing is boring/predictable.

WoO also used to be competitive. Then, here comes the crazy money spending spree syndrome, and most of the guys who fielded cars for years were squeezed out. Now, you have a handful of guys with a chance to win, and a bunch of field fillers, along with some locals that want to be able to say 'Hey, I ran an a World of Outlaws show'....even though then run dead last or didn't even make the show.

USAC has gone the same way.

Last time I went to Winchester, I saw TSR show up with 2 complete semi rigs for the 2 cars...geez, you mean they both wouldn't have fit in one 53' long trailer??, along with the KKR team's semi rigs. Is there a need for that? If they have the money for that, what kind of money do they have in the cars and engines....not to mention the spare chassis' and engines. Plus, when those are junked and blown up, we'll just buy some more new ones! Along with the open account at the Hoosier truck. How many teams/owners can keep up that kind of constant spending spree?

What happened to the days of getting a couple of shows out of a RR tire? What happened to the days of USAC stamping the RR, and you qualified and ran the feature on that very same RR? Why are today's RR tires for dirt and pavement junk or almost junk, after just 1 show? What happened to the days of the sprint car chassis that ran on dirt and pavement? Why did USAC eventually allow the 'pavement only' cars then, but they banned the roadsters back when they were getting too tough to beat with an upright?

I'm guessing it was because the high dollar owners of the day asked for it...and the costs have went uphill while the car count has went downhill, from there.

[SC90]

Originally Posted by Need For Speed SC90: Yeah, I know how the game is played. I've been around racing for 38+ years. Spending money like there is no bottom to your pockets only goes on for so long. NASCAR used to be highly competitive. There used to be a multitude of top 1 and maybe 2 car teams. Now, with the drunken sailor approach to spending money, testing and throwing new tires on at every chance they can, they are down to a handful of multiple car teams, and a bunch of guys with a snowball's chance in hell of making the top 20....and thus, the racing is boring/predictable. WoO also used to be competitive. Then, here comes the crazy money spending spree syndrome, and most of the guys who fielded cars for years were squeezed out. Now, you have a handful of guys with a chance to win, and a bunch of field fillers, along with some locals that want to be able to say 'Hey, I ran an a World of Outlaws show'....even though then run dead last or didn't even make the show. USAC has gone the same way. Last time I went to Winchester, I saw TSR show up with 2 complete semi rigs for the 2 cars...geez, you mean they both wouldn't have fit in one 53' long trailer??, along with the KKR team's semi rigs. Is there a need for that? If they have the money for that, what kind of money do they have in the cars and engines....not to mention the spare chassis' and engines. Plus, when those are junked and blown up, we'll just buy some more new ones! Along with the open account at the Hoosier truck. How many teams/owners can keep up that kind of constant spending spree? What happened to the days of getting a couple of shows out of a RR tire? What happened to the days of USAC stamping the RR, and you qualified and ran the feature on that very same RR? Why are today's RR tires for dirt and pavement junk or almost junk, after just 1 show? What happened to the days of the sprint car chassis that ran on dirt and pavement? Why did USAC eventually allow the 'pavement only' cars then, but they banned the roadsters back when they were getting too tough to beat with an upright? I'm guessing it was because the high dollar owners of the day asked for it...and the costs have went uphill while the car count has went downhill, from there.

I too understand the problem, but politely asking the teams not to be competitive for the sake of everyone saving money isn't going to work.

1. What happened to the days of getting a couple of shows out of a RR tire?

Answer: When a team realized they weren't competitive because the competition was tacking on new RR's at every opportunity. The rules didn't stop them from doing it, so they do what they can to win!

2. What happened to the days of USAC stamping the RR, and you qualified and ran the feature on that very same RR?

Answer: Good question. Why doesn't USAC stamp the RR anymore? It would be a way to save money, and ALL teams would have to abide by the rule.

3. Why are today's RR tires for dirt and pavement junk or almost junk, after just 1 show?

Answer: Good question. Why not ask Hoosier? The teams don't make the tires. I imagine Hoosier sells more tires if they are junk after 1 show.

4. What happened to the days of the sprint car chassis that ran on dirt and pavement?

Answer: It wasn't competitive on either surface as a pavement-only chassis is on pavement and a dirt-only chassis is on dirt. Racers want to win. That's why they are there, and that's why the fans show up. The sanctioning body doesn't have a rule that limits chassis to combo cars only. Until the sanctioning body sets the rules, the teams will do whatever they can to win, win, win.

Please understand that I'm not picking on you, but the drivers/teams are competitive and will do whatever they can to win. If they don't really care if they win or not, then they shouldn't be there.

When I first started to get into racing, I got some good advice from the principal of one of the winningest teams in open wheel:

"It is very expensive to run at the back."

No team is making money coming in last. The purse for last place usually doesn't even cover the cost of pit passes or the fuel to get to the track.

Changing the rules is easy. It takes about 5 seconds to write a rule limiting the number of tires a team can use during 1 race. The sanctioning body should write the rule that all teams must follow. Simple.

[Need For Speed]

Originally Posted by SC90 I too understand the problem, but politely asking the teams not to be competitive for the sake of everyone saving money isn't going to work. 1. What happened to the days of getting a couple of shows out of a RR tire? Answer: When a team realized they weren't competitive because the competition was tacking on new RR's at every opportunity. The rules didn't stop them from doing it, so they do what they can to win! 2. What happened to the days of USAC stamping the RR, and you qualified and ran the feature on that very same RR? Answer: Good question. Why doesn't USAC stamp the RR anymore? It would be a way to save money, and ALL teams would have to abide by the rule. 3. Why are today's RR tires for dirt and pavement junk or almost junk, after just 1 show? Answer: Good question. Why not ask Hoosier? The teams don't make the tires. I imagine Hoosier sells more tires if they are junk after 1 show. 4. What happened to the days of the sprint car chassis that ran on dirt and pavement? Answer: It wasn't competitive on either surface as a pavement-only chassis is on pavement and a dirt-only chassis is on dirt. Racers want to win. That's why they are there, and that's why the fans show up. The sanctioning body doesn't have a rule that limits chassis to combo cars only. Until the sanctioning body sets the rules, the teams will do whatever they can to win, win, win. Please understand that I'm not picking on you, but the drivers/teams are competitive and will do whatever they can to win. If they don't really care if they win or not, then they shouldn't be there. When I first started to get into racing, I got some good advice from the principal of one of the winningest teams in open wheel: "It is very expensive to run at the back." No team is making money coming in last. The purse for last place usually doesn't even cover the cost of pit passes or the fuel to get to the track. Changing the rules is easy. It takes about 5 seconds to write a rule limiting the number of tires a team can use during 1 race. The sanctioning body should write the rule that all teams must follow. Simple.

Answer to #1- The tire companies figured out that some car owners would buy more tires if they figured they could get a couple of tenths a lap from a new tire....then other car owners said, hey, those guys are a couple of tenths faster than us. So now they all buy new tires.

Answer to #2- The answer to #1. Guys wanted that extra couple of tenths a lap. Plus, the tire compounds had changed, and wouldn't hold up anymore.

Answer to #3- check out the answer to #2.

Answer to #4- The owners had to have asked USAC to allow the specialized cars. Up into the mid-late 70's, most teams used the exact same chassis for dirt and pavement (and several of those chassis were a few years old, not new every year, or a couple of times a year) Then the roadster showed up. When the upright chassis struggled to beat the roadster, the roadster was banned. Then at some point the pavement only chassis showed up again, but it was an upright....why that was allowed, only the owners from that time and USAC, knows.

I fully understand the competitive deal...trust me. I never went on the track 'hoping to run 10th'. But with what we spent, when we ran 3rd, we 'made more' than the guy that won, by the time you take into account all of the tires they were buying, the new chassis they had each year, etc, etc.

Racing never has been 'cheap', but how does constantly spending more than you could win, just to win, make sense??

It is expensive to run in the back. But apparently several car owners have decided it has gotten too expensive, to even run at all...........

I'm thinking the exact same problem is killing the pavement midget deal too.

[K-Dawg30]

Don't the USAC Ford Focus Midgets run a combo car....same car for dirt and pavement? Seems like they have ability to implement these rules but they choose not to on the big level

[Honest-Sam]

Maybe the idea is that the pavement sprint deal is so screwed up, that the best fix is to kill it, temporarily, and then "re-invent" it later on with some of ideas mentioned previously.

[Need For Speed]

Originally Posted by Honest-Sam Maybe the idea is that the pavement sprint deal is so screwed up, that the best fix is to kill it, temporarily, and then "re-invent" it later on with some of ideas mentioned previously.

You just might be on to something there!

[#1jackhewittfan]

tracks barely want races now killing them off for a couple years the usac dates will be filled by winged sprint dates. it would be the end for sure
Posted via Mobile Device