Honda says no to NASCAR.

[CaptnKirk]

Why should they waste their time with NASCAR's Redneck Bubbas?

Every single car in the Indy 500 this year had a Honda V-8 motor

International cubic dollars of exotic power.

More money in the exotic international circuit, more TV advertising in NASCAR.

You couldn't field a car on the International circuit, like F1, for even one race for the budget that Nascar teams have for the whole year.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Why should they waste their time with NASCAR's Redneck Bubbas?

Every single car in the Indy 500 this year had a Honda V-8 motor

International cubic dollars of exotic power.

More money in the exotic international circuit, more TV advertising in NASCAR.

You couldn't field a car on the International circuit, like F1, for even one race for the budget that Nascar teams have for the whole year.

Do you have a cost breakdown?

 

[CaptnKirk]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Do you have a cost breakdown?[/quote]

Used to, back in the days when I was with NHRA as a Tech Inspector.

Chrysler looked at fielding a derivative of their successful racing engines on a roadrace circuit and found that their entire
$ 10 Million proposed annual budget wouldn't even place one car in to the international series for a single race.
So they looked elsewhere, stayed with Dragracing and worked out their budget constraints there.
Realistically - who in overseas markets would consider buying an American Street vheicle in today's markets?

Cadillac's NorthStar LMP project was somewhat sucessful, performance wise

 

[kevinthenerd]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Why should they waste their time with NASCAR's Redneck Bubbas?

Every single car in the Indy 500 this year had a Honda V-8 motor

International cubic dollars of exotic power.

More money in the exotic international circuit, more TV advertising in NASCAR.

You couldn't field a car on the International circuit, like F1, for even one race for the budget that Nascar teams have for the whole year.

Do you have a cost breakdown?

I subscribe to Racecar Engineering. I'll have to find one of my issues that describes the breakdown for F1. It's uber expensive. Maybe someone else can provide NASCAR info.

 

[kevinthenerd]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Do you have a cost breakdown?

Used to, back in the days when I was with NHRA as a Tech Inspector.

Chrysler looked at fielding a derivative of their successful racing engines on a roadrace circuit and found that their entire
$ 10 Million proposed annual budget wouldn't even place one car in to the international series for a single race.
So they looked elsewhere, stayed with Dragracing and worked out their budget constraints there.
Realistically - who in overseas markets would consider buying an American Street vheicle in today's markets?

Cadillac's NorthStar LMP project was somewhat sucessful, performance wise
[/quote]

I saw that car up close at a car show. I love racecars.

 

[sao123]

Originally posted by: SampSon
Does honda even know how to make a pushrod V8?

Nope. I think its against their religion or something.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Why should they waste their time with NASCAR's Redneck Bubbas?

Every single car in the Indy 500 this year had a Honda V-8 motor

International cubic dollars of exotic power.

More money in the exotic international circuit, more TV advertising in NASCAR.

You couldn't field a car on the International circuit, like F1, for even one race for the budget that Nascar teams have for the whole year.

1. The top teams in Nascar spend more per season than the lower echelon F1 teams.

2. Every Indy car using a Honda isn't impressive to me. Winning against your competition is impressive, not buying the rights to not have any competition.

3. Do you know what engine supplier has the most wins in F1 ? It isn't Honda. It isn't even your high dollar exotic Ferrari. It's FORD, you know, the redneck American company.

btw, redneck Ford also has won the overall at the 24 hours of Lemans, has Honda ? Ferrari ?

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: kevinthenerd

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Why should they waste their time with NASCAR's Redneck Bubbas?

Every single car in the Indy 500 this year had a Honda V-8 motor

International cubic dollars of exotic power.

More money in the exotic international circuit, more TV advertising in NASCAR.

You couldn't field a car on the International circuit, like F1, for even one race for the budget that Nascar teams have for the whole year.

Do you have a cost breakdown?

I subscribe to Racecar Engineering. I'll have to find one of my issues that describes the breakdown for F1. It's uber expensive. Maybe someone else can provide NASCAR info.

No one is saying what a good NASCAR driver's sponsors pay, but I think I read that the estimates are $10-20 million from that one company, plus whatever the secondary sponsors pay.

 

[RallyMaster]

I say no to NASCAR.

 

[walkur]

According to This the average Nascar budget is about $20 million a year

This indicates the average F1 Budget to be around $350 million

 

[Nyati13]

Originally posted by: Tom

3. Do you know what engine supplier has the most wins in F1 ? It isn't Honda. It isn't even your high dollar exotic Ferrari. It's FORD, you know, the redneck American company.

Wrong! 😀 It's Ford Cosworth, a British company. That has nothing to do with Redneck America.

You should at least know something before you spout off.

 

[Nyati13]

Originally posted by: Tom

And I don't know what your point about NASCAR is ? I am talking about cars, not chassis, and not engines. The whole car. Dodge, GM, ford, and Toyota all field cars in NASCAR.

The whole car huh? You do realize that the individual teams build their own chassis, and assemble their own engines (or buy them from a third party ) and Ford, GM, and Dodge don't build, support, or tune any of the cars. Toyota is building/supporting their car because they are trying to break into the market, so Toyota is the ONLY manufacturer supported team in NASCAR.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Nyati13

Originally posted by: Tom

3. Do you know what engine supplier has the most wins in F1 ? It isn't Honda. It isn't even your high dollar exotic Ferrari. It's FORD, you know, the redneck American company.

Wrong! 😀 It's Ford Cosworth, a British company. That has nothing to do with Redneck America.

You should at least know something before you spout off.

I am not wrong. Cosworth was owned by Ford, it was a Ford engine. As far as which company did what part of the design and engineering, they both did, but it doesn't matter which, because they were both Ford.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Nyati13

Originally posted by: Tom

And I don't know what your point about NASCAR is ? I am talking about cars, not chassis, and not engines. The whole car. Dodge, GM, ford, and Toyota all field cars in NASCAR.

The whole car huh? You do realize that the individual teams build their own chassis, and assemble their own engines (or buy them from a third party ) and Ford, GM, and Dodge don't build, support, or tune any of the cars. Toyota is building/supporting their car because they are trying to break into the market, so Toyota is the ONLY manufacturer supported team in NASCAR.

The specifics are hard to follow, but you're basically wrong. Ford works very closely with their teams, so does GM and Dodge. The parts that make up the cars, which have to be approved by Nascar, are submitted for approval by the manufacturers, not the individual teams. Toyota will not be involved any more than the other manufacturers, the only difference might be how public the involvement is.

Jeff Gordon drives a Chevy Monte Carlo, assembled by Hendrick Motorsports, using Chevy parts and templates, with a Chevy motor, built with Chevy parts, assembled by Hendrick Motorsports. It isn't a Hendrick Monte Carlo.

 

[Pacemaker]

Originally posted by: Nyati13

Originally posted by: Tom

And I don't know what your point about NASCAR is ? I am talking about cars, not chassis, and not engines. The whole car. Dodge, GM, ford, and Toyota all field cars in NASCAR.

The whole car huh? You do realize that the individual teams build their own chassis, and assemble their own engines (or buy them from a third party ) and Ford, GM, and Dodge don't build, support, or tune any of the cars. Toyota is building/supporting their car because they are trying to break into the market, so Toyota is the ONLY manufacturer supported team in NASCAR.

Not sure if this is true or not, but what I do know is they use the SAME chassis Guides to tell if it is legal. This means that all of the chassis are the SAME (only difference being the front grill is made to look like your car). The chassis are also made by the teams by hand (not the manufacturer). Also the engines are basically built by the teams (some even make their own parts). So basically when it says "Ford" or "Toyota" on the car, it means about as much as if it says "Tide: Now with even more bleaching action"

Basically to quote Days of Thunder, "There ain't nothin' Stock about a Stock car."

 

[Nyati13]

Originally posted by: Tom

Originally posted by: Nyati13

Originally posted by: Tom

3. Do you know what engine supplier has the most wins in F1 ? It isn't Honda. It isn't even your high dollar exotic Ferrari. It's FORD, you know, the redneck American company.

Wrong! 😀 It's Ford Cosworth, a British company. That has nothing to do with Redneck America.

You should at least know something before you spout off.

I am not wrong. Cosworth was owned by Ford, it was a Ford engine. As far as which company did what part of the design and engineering, they both did, but it doesn't matter which, because they were both Ford.

And it's still a British company, not the "redneck America", so yes, you are wrong.

 

[Nyati13]

Originally posted by: Tom

Jeff Gordon drives a Chevy Monte Carlo, assembled by Hendrick Motorsports, using Chevy parts and templates, with a Chevy motor, built with Chevy parts, assembled by Hendrick Motorsports. It isn't a Hendrick Monte Carlo.

😀 You prove my point for me, that the entire chassis and engine are built by the racing team, and not by GM, and you think that it somehow shows that you are the one who is right?

😛

Thanks for backing up my side.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Pacemaker

Originally posted by: Nyati13

Originally posted by: Tom

And I don't know what your point about NASCAR is ? I am talking about cars, not chassis, and not engines. The whole car. Dodge, GM, ford, and Toyota all field cars in NASCAR.

The whole car huh? You do realize that the individual teams build their own chassis, and assemble their own engines (or buy them from a third party ) and Ford, GM, and Dodge don't build, support, or tune any of the cars. Toyota is building/supporting their car because they are trying to break into the market, so Toyota is the ONLY manufacturer supported team in NASCAR.

Not sure if this is true or not, but what I do know is they use the SAME chassis Guides to tell if it is legal. This means that all of the chassis are the SAME. The chassis are also made by the teams by hand (not the manufacturer). Also the engines are basically built by the teams (some even make there own parts). So basically when it says "Ford" or "Toyota" on the car, it means about as much as if it says "Tide: Now with even more bleaching action"

Basically to quote Days of Thunder, "There ain't nothin' Stock about a Stock car."

It's true the cars aren't stock, and Nascar rules mandate a good deal of the design. But that doesn't change the fact that a Ford running in Nascar is a Ford, designed by Ford, with a motor made out of Ford parts, a body designed by Ford, with a great deal of tuning and massaging done by individual teams, in collaboration with Ford.

Which is exactly the same thing Toyota will do, because they have the balls to compete, and what Honda would do if they had the same cajones.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Up until the early 1960's the Indy 500 was dominated by the Offenhauser 4 cylinder as built by Meyer-Drake

In the 1960's, Cosworth (Costin & Duckworth) collaborated to build a 3 litre motor based on the small Ford V-8.

Cosworth

This motor was from evolutionary from the 221 CID that Ford introduced for the Fairlaine 500 auto in 1962.
It quickly was upsized to the 260 for use in the Falcons and again to the 289 for the Mustangs.
Over the counter Ford Speed Shop Equipment part numbers allowed the savy enthusist to obtain stock & legal parts
that when put together would provide in excess of 400 HP in streetable (?) performance.

The introduction of this motor combination in a rear-seat chassis, like the F1's of the day, marked ther doom of the
Indy Dinosaurs and their ill handling front engine roadsters.

Indy 500 - year by year
check the mid-60's.

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: Naustica

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
That's pretty much another way of saying "we could not hack it in that arena, we'd rather not get involved there and stay with what we know best".

You're crazy if you think Honda couldn't compete in Nascar. There is a saying whatever Honda enters, Honda wins. They might not dominate in the beginning but given number of years Honda would dominate just like they've done in pretty much everything they've entered.

I Googled your "saying" and did not find one result. Are you sure that's a common thought or is it just you?

 

[m2kewl]

honda does not need to get into nascar! and i hope they never do.

their philosophy is about building great engine technology, honda does not need to sink R&D $$$ into 1960's pushrod engine designs with carburetors. if toyboat wants to enter the nascar series, that's their issue.

i want see honda build direct injection, diesel hybrids, homogeneous charge compression ignition, and camless engines thru their F1, IRL, LeMans, MotoGP series then waste money on nascar.

 

[B00ne]

Originally posted by: SampSon
Does honda even know how to make a pushrod V8?

mybe if they can dig up some blueprints from the fifties 😉

 

[dawheat]

Originally posted by: Tom

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Why should they waste their time with NASCAR's Redneck Bubbas?

Every single car in the Indy 500 this year had a Honda V-8 motor

International cubic dollars of exotic power.

More money in the exotic international circuit, more TV advertising in NASCAR.

You couldn't field a car on the International circuit, like F1, for even one race for the budget that Nascar teams have for the whole year.

1. The top teams in Nascar spend more per season than the lower echelon F1 teams.

2. Every Indy car using a Honda isn't impressive to me. Winning against your competition is impressive, not buying the rights to not have any competition.

3. Do you know what engine supplier has the most wins in F1 ? It isn't Honda. It isn't even your high dollar exotic Ferrari. It's FORD, you know, the redneck American company.

btw, redneck Ford also has won the overall at the 24 hours of Lemans, has Honda ? Ferrari ?

1. I'm not familiar with Nascar budgets, but even the backmarker teams in F1 (Super Aguri, Midland) are spending north of 75 million, with the top teams coming close to 400 million. Can you confirm that Nascar budgets are on that level?

2. Honda dominated CART from 96' for several years, followed Toyota to the IRL where they dominated the last 3 seasons, eventually resulting in Toyota to quit the sport. Honda has been very very impressive in American open wheeled racing for the last decade. Dominating may be too strong, but definitely being the most impressive engine supplier by a FAR margin.

3. Ford has a very impressive history in Formula 1 no question, but sadly the Ford Motor Company of today is a shadow of their racing might in the past. However, that doesn't diminish Honda's accomplishments, much less Ferrari. For nearly a decade from 83-92, Honda won 6 WCC and 5 WDC before leaving the sport - winning 71 grand prixs at a torrid pace.

Ford has won 175 grand prixs, an incredible achievement, but this is stretching back to the 60s-90s over 56 teams.

IMO without question, Honda has the strongest racing DNA of any Japanese company - now whether that compares to other icons like Ford Cosworth is a different discussion, in fairness we're only talking about 20 years of history compared to 3-4X the history.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Nyati13

Originally posted by: Tom

Originally posted by: Nyati13

Originally posted by: Tom

3. Do you know what engine supplier has the most wins in F1 ? It isn't Honda. It isn't even your high dollar exotic Ferrari. It's FORD, you know, the redneck American company.

Wrong! 😀 It's Ford Cosworth, a British company. That has nothing to do with Redneck America.

You should at least know something before you spout off.

I am not wrong. Cosworth was owned by Ford, it was a Ford engine. As far as which company did what part of the design and engineering, they both did, but it doesn't matter which, because they were both Ford.

And it's still a British company, not the "redneck America", so yes, you are wrong.

If you are a fan of British motorsports, you should be more appreciative of Ford, which is more or less responsible for the growth of Britain's prominence in that field. Cosworth was nothing without Ford. The entire basis for their company was modifying Ford engines, but a modified Ford engine is still a Ford engine. And since they were actually part of Ford motor company, it's pretty crazy to say that they engines they made for and with Ford, based on Ford designs, aren't Ford engines.

Which is why if you look at any official results, Ford is properly credited for their role as the most succesful F1 engine supplier in history.

 

[Red Dawn]

400 to 650 Million per year to field a team? They better use this for R&D because there is no way they will make it up by selling tickets to events or any other revenue based on the races.