Could fuel injection inject fewer good NASCAR finishes?

September 20, 2011 8 Comments »

The COT report card is a mixed bag: On safety improvements a definite A, on cost savings a disappointing D.

The irony is that one of the changes made for safety is one of main reasons we had such a dramatic finish at Chicago in the Chase opener . The fuel cell is about four gallons smaller than it used to be. The idea was to have less gas in the car should a fire erupt. But the byproduct is that the fuel window is much tighter than it used to be.

And that has made for some unpredictable finishes. While some complain that the sport has become more about conservation than “flooring it,” the truth is that very seldomly do we get four or five cars just as good as each other coming off the hauler on Friday. It’s a cyclical sport where almost every week one car shows up markedly better. A variable like fuel mileage becoming more of a premium guarantees that we get some head-scratchers with 30 laps to go that otherwise would become blowouts.

I can’t help but look at the current fuel cell and compare it to Alexander Cartwright deciding arbitrarily that bases should be 90 feet apart when he invented baseball. Cartwright, pretty much accidentally, got it just right. Even on a routine play, fielders usually beat out runners by little more than a step and a half, making for quite a bit of drama should anything go wrong.

The current fuel cell is modern-day base paths. It seems to be a perfect formula to create excitement.

And, of course, that perfect storm is about to get thrown out the window.

Nobody’s blaming NASCAR for going to fuel-injection in 2012. The other problem with the COT is that it didn’t address brand identity, a motivation for already-hurting car manufacturers to be tight with their NASCAR spending. Just as the shape of NASCAR machines have no relationship to their dealership brethren, carburetors are dinosaurs compared to what we see on the street.

Only thing is, some folks in the garage have been a lot more creative than others about turning that dinosaur into a thoroughbred. With fuel injection and increased mileage for everybody, is that variable going to more or less become an occasional issue?

If so, how many people are going to pay $125 for a race ticket or spend a gorgeous Sunday afternoon chained to their couch so they can see somebody drive away the last 25 laps, their only potential foil being a hot dog wrapper on his grill?

Progress just about always has unintended consequences. But this one should have race fans pretty worried.

  • http://suerarick.us Sue Rarick

    Josh, you should have been around in the late 1950′s, early 1960′s. They had this really cool thing called the Mobile Economy Run. Or if you want real excitement there was the mid 1970′s when you could sit across the street from almost any gas station and watch as people tried to push thier out of gas cars to the pumps before another car did.
    Seriously, I would rather watch a driver race to a 2 lap win than watch people trying to save gas. That’s not racing, its an EVENT. As for being chained to a couch; I will be spending my Sundays enjoying the Fall colors during my Sunday drives.

  • dawg

    Sign my up as a fan who HATES fuel milage races.
    Sue, I was also thinking of the Mobil Gas Economy run.
    If running out of gas is the best NASCAR can do to generate, “excitment.” Thanks but no thanks, I’ll watch the Food Channel.

  • Anne-Marie

    I think Nascar should institute a mandatory caution with 25 laps to go. All cars must come in and get gas. After that, let’s try something different, RACE for the win.

  • Gary

    Nascar has just about ruined racing in my view. If you add it up I would bet their have been wrecked cars since restrictor plates than ever before. I understand you need to be safe, but this is racing. They { Nascar} might as well build all the cars like the old IROC series. Why not let the engine builders build power put the fuelcells back to the old size get out of the way and let them race. I love racing but not the way it is heading. Alot of my friends have quit watching because what Nascar has done to it. Throw the Plates in the trash can because that ain’t racing. I live 15 miles from Talladega super speedway. I haven’t beed to a race their in 20 years. I only watch a little ever now and then. I would rather be fishing these days. Plate racing sucks, well it would if it could breath. Just my thoughs. Have a great day!

  • David Johnson

    After doing a little Internet searching I can’t agree with your statement “Alexander Cartwright decid(ed) arbitrarily that bases should be 90 feet apart when he invented baseball. Cartwright, pretty much accidentally, got it just right.” Setting aside the claim Cartwright invented baseball, it seems that distance was arrived at through trial and error and not “arbitrarily”. Tinkering with something like that distance to arrive at a balanced, fair and entertaining game seems more plausible than just dumb luck.

    Getting back to NASCAR, I believe it is the the size and shape of a particular track rather than the size of a fuel cell which dictates whether or not a fuel mileage finish will occur. Where do fuel mileage finishes usually happen? Michigan, California, Chicagoland, Kansas, etc. All the so-called “cookie cutter” tracks. Each 1.5 miles to 2 miles in length and generally considered to have wide racing surfaces. There are usually few cautions as car seldom collide and cars become strung out. Also, you can include Indy and Pocono as tracks that produce relatively few (real) caution flags.

    One or two fuel milage-dictated races per year would be fine but too many is not good for the sport. For me, I want balance and entertainment in the NASCAR schedule: a few fuel mileage races (because, yes, they can be exciting), a few beating and banging races, the Dayonta and Talladega races….before this pushing business, and yes, even a run-away now and then. Of course, those classic side-by-side finishes come along only so often. But so long as the heart of the race has storylines (risers and fallers, comers and goers, frustrations and celebrations, failures and success, etc), I’m generally contented.

    NASCAR fans should worry about uniform tracks, restrictive rules and tire compounds that don’t allow for “fall-off”. The recent Atlanta race was terrific in part because the tires seemed to wear and that allowed for different drivers to shine at different parts of a segment.

    • admin

      My statement was correct. The point is that Cartwright didn’t use market research and/or complex mathematical equations in coming up with that distance. From a scientific perspective, getting a perfect distance between base paths was accidental.

  • Chris Fiegler

    Do you think that the Sylvania 300 at Loudon will be a fuel milage race?

  • emsdad

    It seems to me that we have been more of these fuel mileage races for two reasons, the smaller tank for one, (but if you were getting 4 miles a gallon with a 15 gallon tank you would still get 4 mpg with a 11 gallon tank) and ethanol for the other. I don’t think the mpg is as good with ethanol and it seems like ever since they switched we have seen more of these type of races.