Home  |  Forums  |  914 Info  |  Blogs
 
914World.com - The fastest growing online 914 community!
 
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG. This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way.
Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> OT: racing budgets, history
lapuwali
post Mar 15 2005, 07:49 PM
Post #1


Not another one!
****

Group: Benefactors
Posts: 4,526
Joined: 1-March 04
From: San Mateo, CA
Member No.: 1,743



While discussing a topic on another board, I recalled a dramatic comparison done in a car mag 20 years ago.

It was possible to build a championship winning NASCAR stock car for only $25,000 in 1985. This car, unfettered by the restrictor plate rules introduced shortly after, could do 240mph on a really big oval.

A competitive sports racer with full Le Mans bodywork (a 962, in fact), cost around $250,000 then, and could only do 220mph on the same big oval.

Some proof that cubic inches really do win in the end, and those brick-like stock cars weren't actually so brick-like, after all.

A wag at the time stated that the $25K car would get $250K for a race win, while the $250K car would only get $25K for a race win. This test also prompted the snide comment that "A race car is just like the family car, only it doesn't go as fast."

All that aside, the difference in budgets over the years really has been startling. Many of the NASCAR types are just now making the same "money has ruined the sport" noises the F1 types started to make 20 years ago. And back then, F1 budgets were still far from the $300-400M a season they are now. I have no numbers, but I'd not be at all surprised if NASCAR team budgets aren't 20-30x what they were in 1985.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies
lapuwali
post Mar 15 2005, 08:08 PM
Post #2


Not another one!
****

Group: Benefactors
Posts: 4,526
Joined: 1-March 04
From: San Mateo, CA
Member No.: 1,743



QUOTE (URY914 @ Mar 15 2005, 06:04 PM)
I think it was Motor Trend but it doesn't matter. It was Al Hobert's 962 because he was running IMSA and NASCAR back then. It was a little one sided. They should have done at the Glen. The 962 boys would have been laughing then. Or let Porsche design a car to ONLY run around a superspeed way.

(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/wink.gif) Paul

The oval was so big that turns were basically non-existant (like 7 miles around), so this was strictly a top speed test. If Porsche had been allowed to build a car just for that test, I'll bet it either would have cost a LOT more than $25K, or it would have looked exactly like a stock car. That's the part that's so hard to swallow. $25K, almost no setup, and they produce a car that would blow right by the 10x as expensive 962 on Mulsanne (pre-chicanes).



User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
lapuwali   OT: racing budgets   Mar 15 2005, 07:49 PM
TimT   It was either Road&Track, or Car&Driver, but they ...   Mar 15 2005, 07:58 PM
xitspd     Mar 15 2005, 08:04 PM
URY914   I think it was Motor Trend but it doesn't matt...   Mar 15 2005, 08:04 PM
lapuwali     Mar 15 2005, 08:04 PM
lapuwali     Mar 15 2005, 08:08 PM
URY914   Slowing down and turning corners is very expensive...   Mar 15 2005, 08:13 PM
TimT     Mar 15 2005, 08:17 PM
xitspd   Sorry boyz my facts were slightly off. Mark Donah...   Mar 15 2005, 08:20 PM
914forme   That Track in Ohio would be the TRC It is a 7.5 M...   Mar 15 2005, 08:23 PM
TimT  
  Mar 15 2005, 08:25 PM
914forme   And here it is, more than a big oval.   Mar 15 2005, 08:32 PM


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 6th July 2025 - 10:30 AM