On NASCAR....
Throughout my life, I've been an occasional fan of stock car racing, now more appropriately labeled NASCAR as the vehicles have absolutely nothing to do with anything "stock". When I was a kid, the first race my Dad ever took me to was at Riverside where we watched Buddy Baker make an amazing comeback. I still remember being annoyed by Richard Petty's refusal to drive the chicane, instead plowing straight ahead through the dirt, an effective if inelegant way of shaving lap times. But hey, if you aren't cheating, you aren't trying.
And so it would seem at least that aspect of the sport has not changed. Adding to the controversy over NASCAR's decision to allow Toyota to enter the series, Darryl Waltrip's crew chief thought it might be an excellent PR move if he were to get his team kick off the grid after qualifying for it's first Daytona 500. No matter how widespread the practice, I'd be willing to guess that as a strategy to become "one o' the boys", this was ill conceived. But hey, this rocket scientist thinking comes from a culture in which the Fox announcer explained the new fuel tank size for the Car of Tomorrow (COT) is not based on volume, but rather on gallons. Huh? Perhaps Fox star Homer Simpson serves as technical consultant for the NASCAR booth. For all of you kids watching at home, if you'd like to make science class fun as well as accurate, catch an F1 race on SpeedTV this season.
So what's the rhubarb about Toyota competing in NASCAR? The list of arguments (or rationalization) is long. Most obvious is the visceral response from the stereotypical NASCAR fan for whom the thought of allowing foreigners to compete in the only all American racing series is akin to kicking Uncle Sam right in the fuzzy dice. Yeah, fine, let's not waste time on that one. Not wanting to sound like simple minded jackasses, some owners have attempted to take their argument up-market by arguing that Toyota's superior economic position as a company will allow them to outspend American teams and thereby gain an unfair advantage. First, let me point out that this strategy has been pursued by Toyota for quite a few seasons now in Formula 1. The Toyota budget exceeds $200MM annually, but for that investment they have received very little in return if one uses success in racing as the only yardstick. They shell out $20MM annually to Michael Schumacher's less talented sibling, Ralph, only to have him finish mid-pack, DNF, or crash. Renault, spending far less has managed to run away with the title for 2 years running. Money is a factor, but not the most important one. In the world's toughest series, World Rally Championship (WRC), Sebastian Loeb (arguably the best driver on the planet) managed to win the 2006 championship using his 2005 car and without factory support. He did this against the fully factory backed effort of Ford and Marcus Gronholm, who while not the best, is certainly one of the top WRC drivers. Secondly, if Chevy, Dodge, or Ford HAD the money, they'd spend it in a minute to consistently win the Nextel Cup. Why don't they have the money? This is a subject of some debate. The Big 3 will argue that they are the victims of over regulation, Unions, and runaway health care costs. GM estimates that they have to add $1500 to the price of every car they sell in order to meet the burden placed on them by health care costs. That position lacks introspection and imagination. The bottom line is that none of the Big 3 is building products that the American public wants to buy. All of them have been feeding at the trough of SUV. Despite their popularity, SUV's are some of the most poorly engineered vehicles on the road. The basic architecture was developed in the 1950's. Relying on the public's ignorance of such details, the Big 3 enjoyed enormous profits during SUV boom times but the days of artificially low gas prices are at an end and that's something that Joe Consumer does understand. Perhaps the SUV could have served to provide baseline revenue and profit strength but as the core of a long term strategy it's predictably a loser. So instead of reinvesting in new technologies and forward looking design, the Big 3 decided to ride the wave into the ground, investing instead in more production capacity for SUVs, production capacity being steadily scaled back and shut down these days. Fossil fuels are not renewable, their supply is limited and will run out some day. As the global supply trends downward, prices will trend upward. A quick lesson for anyone in Detroit reading. Instead of leading, Detroit finds itself constantly chasing. The focus should be on reversal of this reality, build me a car worth buying, and I'll buy it even if it does cost $1500 more than the foreign equivalent. GM shows occasion signs of life having stolen industry genius Bob Lutz from Chrysler. As soon as I have the jack, I for one will purchase a Corvette Z06. At about $70K the Z06 outperforms almost any car at any price. Add in price performance and it's not even a contest. Sure the styling still goes best with a mullet, but the engineer in my will not allow me to pay more for less. More recently GM has turned to it's foreign subsidiaries, namely Holden, to provide the company with fresh styling and performance. In 2008, Pontiac will launch the all new G8. Rear wheel drive and a 368 hp V8, available with a 6 speed automatic or a 6 speed manual, performance will be on par with the last generation BMW M5, and at an unbelievable price. If the fit and finish is of sufficient quality, this car could easily compete with the 3 series, 5 series, Audi A and S6, etc. Pontiac is also showing off a new concept, the Demon, designed to compete with the Miata directly. The Solstice kind of does that, but not really, it's a bigger, heavier car. I'm not holding my breathe though, over the past 10 years Pontiac has produced 3 VERY cool roadsters and has never built any of them. Actually, I would argue that of the 4 designs put forward, the latest is the least interesting (the Pronto was way cooler). The design direction at Chrysler is nowhere and when they do manage to come up with something really cool, like the Hornet, they don't build it or designate it for the European market. They have been relegated to last place with the departure of Lutz. Then there's Ford which builds exactly one cool car, but how many different versions of the Mustang can we be expected to tolerate? Ford Europe is in much better shape, but the super cool Mondeo isn't headed here, we're stuck with the Fusion. And while we're on the subject, I'd say that while Toyota is making all the right moves with the Prius, they're getting ready to make a huge mistake in it's Scion product line ditching all of the edgy style in favor of platform homologation.
The cars in the Nextel cup stopped having any connection to anything on the road years ago. The chassis are tubular steel, the engines are carburated pushrod V8's, the bodies are cut from templates to a standard shape. Remove the decals and you'd be hard pressed to differentiate between a Monte Carlo and a Taurus, certainly not the case with the production vehicles. The resemblance becomes even more distant with the Car of Tomorrow (COT), a new design which will see limited action this year to be phased in fully by 2009. The COT situates the driver close to the centerline, incorporates a rear wing, and uses a standardized body. The cars basically resemble those run in IMSA or TransAm series. So, what's the real reason for the protest over Toyota? Well, there probably isn't just one, but in my view those protesting come across as unwilling to put their money where their mouths are. Have Americans developed the most competitive package for this series? If so, then bring 'em all on and let's demonstrate some leadership to the rest of the world. If not, well, competition breeds innovation. It can only improve the sport and the series. At least Toyota can argue that all of the money they invest in motorsports eventually ends up in consumer products. When do you think we'll see a Ford with a seven speed sequential gearbox?
So, c'mon boys, invite Toyota in and beat them down if you can. The Big 3 need this because the same isn't going to happen on showroom floor for quite some time.
Throughout my life, I've been an occasional fan of stock car racing, now more appropriately labeled NASCAR as the vehicles have absolutely nothing to do with anything "stock". When I was a kid, the first race my Dad ever took me to was at Riverside where we watched Buddy Baker make an amazing comeback. I still remember being annoyed by Richard Petty's refusal to drive the chicane, instead plowing straight ahead through the dirt, an effective if inelegant way of shaving lap times. But hey, if you aren't cheating, you aren't trying.
And so it would seem at least that aspect of the sport has not changed. Adding to the controversy over NASCAR's decision to allow Toyota to enter the series, Darryl Waltrip's crew chief thought it might be an excellent PR move if he were to get his team kick off the grid after qualifying for it's first Daytona 500. No matter how widespread the practice, I'd be willing to guess that as a strategy to become "one o' the boys", this was ill conceived. But hey, this rocket scientist thinking comes from a culture in which the Fox announcer explained the new fuel tank size for the Car of Tomorrow (COT) is not based on volume, but rather on gallons. Huh? Perhaps Fox star Homer Simpson serves as technical consultant for the NASCAR booth. For all of you kids watching at home, if you'd like to make science class fun as well as accurate, catch an F1 race on SpeedTV this season.
So what's the rhubarb about Toyota competing in NASCAR? The list of arguments (or rationalization) is long. Most obvious is the visceral response from the stereotypical NASCAR fan for whom the thought of allowing foreigners to compete in the only all American racing series is akin to kicking Uncle Sam right in the fuzzy dice. Yeah, fine, let's not waste time on that one. Not wanting to sound like simple minded jackasses, some owners have attempted to take their argument up-market by arguing that Toyota's superior economic position as a company will allow them to outspend American teams and thereby gain an unfair advantage. First, let me point out that this strategy has been pursued by Toyota for quite a few seasons now in Formula 1. The Toyota budget exceeds $200MM annually, but for that investment they have received very little in return if one uses success in racing as the only yardstick. They shell out $20MM annually to Michael Schumacher's less talented sibling, Ralph, only to have him finish mid-pack, DNF, or crash. Renault, spending far less has managed to run away with the title for 2 years running. Money is a factor, but not the most important one. In the world's toughest series, World Rally Championship (WRC), Sebastian Loeb (arguably the best driver on the planet) managed to win the 2006 championship using his 2005 car and without factory support. He did this against the fully factory backed effort of Ford and Marcus Gronholm, who while not the best, is certainly one of the top WRC drivers. Secondly, if Chevy, Dodge, or Ford HAD the money, they'd spend it in a minute to consistently win the Nextel Cup. Why don't they have the money? This is a subject of some debate. The Big 3 will argue that they are the victims of over regulation, Unions, and runaway health care costs. GM estimates that they have to add $1500 to the price of every car they sell in order to meet the burden placed on them by health care costs. That position lacks introspection and imagination. The bottom line is that none of the Big 3 is building products that the American public wants to buy. All of them have been feeding at the trough of SUV. Despite their popularity, SUV's are some of the most poorly engineered vehicles on the road. The basic architecture was developed in the 1950's. Relying on the public's ignorance of such details, the Big 3 enjoyed enormous profits during SUV boom times but the days of artificially low gas prices are at an end and that's something that Joe Consumer does understand. Perhaps the SUV could have served to provide baseline revenue and profit strength but as the core of a long term strategy it's predictably a loser. So instead of reinvesting in new technologies and forward looking design, the Big 3 decided to ride the wave into the ground, investing instead in more production capacity for SUVs, production capacity being steadily scaled back and shut down these days. Fossil fuels are not renewable, their supply is limited and will run out some day. As the global supply trends downward, prices will trend upward. A quick lesson for anyone in Detroit reading. Instead of leading, Detroit finds itself constantly chasing. The focus should be on reversal of this reality, build me a car worth buying, and I'll buy it even if it does cost $1500 more than the foreign equivalent. GM shows occasion signs of life having stolen industry genius Bob Lutz from Chrysler. As soon as I have the jack, I for one will purchase a Corvette Z06. At about $70K the Z06 outperforms almost any car at any price. Add in price performance and it's not even a contest. Sure the styling still goes best with a mullet, but the engineer in my will not allow me to pay more for less. More recently GM has turned to it's foreign subsidiaries, namely Holden, to provide the company with fresh styling and performance. In 2008, Pontiac will launch the all new G8. Rear wheel drive and a 368 hp V8, available with a 6 speed automatic or a 6 speed manual, performance will be on par with the last generation BMW M5, and at an unbelievable price. If the fit and finish is of sufficient quality, this car could easily compete with the 3 series, 5 series, Audi A and S6, etc. Pontiac is also showing off a new concept, the Demon, designed to compete with the Miata directly. The Solstice kind of does that, but not really, it's a bigger, heavier car. I'm not holding my breathe though, over the past 10 years Pontiac has produced 3 VERY cool roadsters and has never built any of them. Actually, I would argue that of the 4 designs put forward, the latest is the least interesting (the Pronto was way cooler). The design direction at Chrysler is nowhere and when they do manage to come up with something really cool, like the Hornet, they don't build it or designate it for the European market. They have been relegated to last place with the departure of Lutz. Then there's Ford which builds exactly one cool car, but how many different versions of the Mustang can we be expected to tolerate? Ford Europe is in much better shape, but the super cool Mondeo isn't headed here, we're stuck with the Fusion. And while we're on the subject, I'd say that while Toyota is making all the right moves with the Prius, they're getting ready to make a huge mistake in it's Scion product line ditching all of the edgy style in favor of platform homologation.
The cars in the Nextel cup stopped having any connection to anything on the road years ago. The chassis are tubular steel, the engines are carburated pushrod V8's, the bodies are cut from templates to a standard shape. Remove the decals and you'd be hard pressed to differentiate between a Monte Carlo and a Taurus, certainly not the case with the production vehicles. The resemblance becomes even more distant with the Car of Tomorrow (COT), a new design which will see limited action this year to be phased in fully by 2009. The COT situates the driver close to the centerline, incorporates a rear wing, and uses a standardized body. The cars basically resemble those run in IMSA or TransAm series. So, what's the real reason for the protest over Toyota? Well, there probably isn't just one, but in my view those protesting come across as unwilling to put their money where their mouths are. Have Americans developed the most competitive package for this series? If so, then bring 'em all on and let's demonstrate some leadership to the rest of the world. If not, well, competition breeds innovation. It can only improve the sport and the series. At least Toyota can argue that all of the money they invest in motorsports eventually ends up in consumer products. When do you think we'll see a Ford with a seven speed sequential gearbox?
So, c'mon boys, invite Toyota in and beat them down if you can. The Big 3 need this because the same isn't going to happen on showroom floor for quite some time.
posted by Jaybeau at
11:51 PM
0 Comments
