Tweet
Posting this on the tech section simply because I'll get answers from people that understand the sport.
With more rule changes all the time in the name of “saving†racers money, it seems we are back to this age-old argument of how to save late model racing from itself. And everybody has their own opinion on what changes need to be made to fix everything. If we’re talking open late models (which is obviously where the most expense is), you have to START with the cost of a competitive power plant. I see many other items brought up in discussions like shocks, tires, fuel, etc. But to even list those next to the cost of obtaining and maintaining an 800-950 HP motor is pretty ridiculous in my humble opinion.
Most of you know that I race crates and we have good stuff on our car. The ONLY thing that I simply can’t pay the bill for to go open motor racing is the motor (I should say a competitive open motor). The shocks on an open don’t cost any more than good shocks on a crate. The tires on an open cost more (because of the motor mostly) and your drivetrain cost goes way up due to wear and tear. Now I’ll stop right now and say that I am NOT saying that crate racing is the solution. Crate racing was and still is a stop gap for guys that have late model stuff and really want to run their stuff without going broke on motors and rebuilds.
So, I’ll just come out and say that, in my opinion, the open motor cost went completely out of control as soon as they started allowing the spread bore blocks. The old school late model rules for “open†or “super†late models used to say something like “a block based on a production American small blockâ€. Some still have rules with some similar verbiage but it doesn’t really mean anything. Today’s open motors make horsepower that most tracks can’t hold past qualifying. I hear people say all the time that if you change the body rules to cut down on aero, you’ll eliminate the need for the HP. I disagree. I think if you change the rules on the engine you’ll cut down the need for all that aero to hold the thing to the track. There is obviously some chicken and egg argument here but what would be better, going back to the bodies of the early 80s and guys still having 900HP engines to qualify fast, or going back to the engines of the 80s and guys saving 10s of thousands on motors yet keep the aero package.
So what’s the solution? I don’t know. Crate racing isn’t the answer. Fans will tell you that it’s boring. I think on larger tracks that’s true but our local ¼ miles puts on some pretty good races in the crate division. Should the “open†late models as we know them today just be for national and regional series? Should we revisit the CT525 thing for a local/weekly class that could prosper and give the fans of some of the larger tracks something to go watch where the 604 crates just don’t cut the mustard? I just don’t know.
I’ll end with this on the crate classes (or any other limited class for that matter). Much of what is ruining crate racing as a whole are the places (including UMP country) that are trying to make it something other than a late model car (well…what it became) with a crate motor in it. Meaning, they are dumbing down other rules (like shocks and tires) to turn it into a glorified street stock. They do all this (as most rules do) in the name of saving racers money and it never works. Let ALL forms of late model racing have a uniform rules package on the chassis and suspension. As I said at the beginning, the BIG difference in cost is the power plants and the associated things that all that HP tears up under the car. Let’s keep that as the delimiter between the “classes†of late models and let the cars be the cars that we love.
Interested to get other opinions and thoughts on this.
With more rule changes all the time in the name of “saving†racers money, it seems we are back to this age-old argument of how to save late model racing from itself. And everybody has their own opinion on what changes need to be made to fix everything. If we’re talking open late models (which is obviously where the most expense is), you have to START with the cost of a competitive power plant. I see many other items brought up in discussions like shocks, tires, fuel, etc. But to even list those next to the cost of obtaining and maintaining an 800-950 HP motor is pretty ridiculous in my humble opinion.
Most of you know that I race crates and we have good stuff on our car. The ONLY thing that I simply can’t pay the bill for to go open motor racing is the motor (I should say a competitive open motor). The shocks on an open don’t cost any more than good shocks on a crate. The tires on an open cost more (because of the motor mostly) and your drivetrain cost goes way up due to wear and tear. Now I’ll stop right now and say that I am NOT saying that crate racing is the solution. Crate racing was and still is a stop gap for guys that have late model stuff and really want to run their stuff without going broke on motors and rebuilds.
So, I’ll just come out and say that, in my opinion, the open motor cost went completely out of control as soon as they started allowing the spread bore blocks. The old school late model rules for “open†or “super†late models used to say something like “a block based on a production American small blockâ€. Some still have rules with some similar verbiage but it doesn’t really mean anything. Today’s open motors make horsepower that most tracks can’t hold past qualifying. I hear people say all the time that if you change the body rules to cut down on aero, you’ll eliminate the need for the HP. I disagree. I think if you change the rules on the engine you’ll cut down the need for all that aero to hold the thing to the track. There is obviously some chicken and egg argument here but what would be better, going back to the bodies of the early 80s and guys still having 900HP engines to qualify fast, or going back to the engines of the 80s and guys saving 10s of thousands on motors yet keep the aero package.
So what’s the solution? I don’t know. Crate racing isn’t the answer. Fans will tell you that it’s boring. I think on larger tracks that’s true but our local ¼ miles puts on some pretty good races in the crate division. Should the “open†late models as we know them today just be for national and regional series? Should we revisit the CT525 thing for a local/weekly class that could prosper and give the fans of some of the larger tracks something to go watch where the 604 crates just don’t cut the mustard? I just don’t know.
I’ll end with this on the crate classes (or any other limited class for that matter). Much of what is ruining crate racing as a whole are the places (including UMP country) that are trying to make it something other than a late model car (well…what it became) with a crate motor in it. Meaning, they are dumbing down other rules (like shocks and tires) to turn it into a glorified street stock. They do all this (as most rules do) in the name of saving racers money and it never works. Let ALL forms of late model racing have a uniform rules package on the chassis and suspension. As I said at the beginning, the BIG difference in cost is the power plants and the associated things that all that HP tears up under the car. Let’s keep that as the delimiter between the “classes†of late models and let the cars be the cars that we love.
Interested to get other opinions and thoughts on this.
Comment