mettech Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 (edited) Edmunds story on Toyota in NASCAR. :reading: ".....In nine of the past 10 years, the Toyota Camry has been America's best-selling car. Some 400,000 Camrys each year come from Toyota Motor Manufacturing Kentucky (TMMK), a 7.5-million-square-foot plant that lies in Georgetown, just north of Lexington. In place since 1988, TMMK has been the template for the six other Toyota plants in the U.S. — seven, when the $1.3-billion plant is completed in Tupelo, Mississippi, the birthplace of Elvis Presley. Twenty-five states fought for that plant....." "...."I think it's high time for an American-made car to compete in Nextel Cup," says Steve St. Angelo, the cheerful president of TMMK D'oh! St. Angelo, a 30-year General Motors employee before moving to Toyota in April 2005, is referring to one of Toyota's most popular talking points. The civilian versions of the three cars that compete in the NASCAR Nextel Cup series — the Chevrolet Monte Carlo, Dodge Charger and Ford Fusion — are built either in Canada (the Charger and the Monte Carlo) or Mexico (the Fusion). Meanwhile more than 75 percent of the parts used here by Toyota (and 98 percent of the steel) comes from U.S. suppliers....." ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? More questions than answers. :shades: Edited March 17, 2007 by mettech Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebritt Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Dude, find one part on a NACAR acr that came off of a real Camry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Dude, find one part on a NACAR acr that came off of a real Camry. Or a Fusion, Monte Carlo or Charger. The fact is that All NASCAR cars are American Made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted March 17, 2007 Author Share Posted March 17, 2007 Dude, find one part on a NACAR acr that came off of a real Camry. You didn't read the article did you. The article notes were the NASCAR (not NACAR) parts are made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebritt Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 You didn't read the article did you. The article notes were the NASCAR (not NACAR) parts are made. You didn't read the title of the topic did you? " Toyota is the only American made Car in NASCAR? " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DearbornDerek Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Read your own post again. It talks about the "civilian" version. Nothing at all about the content in the actual NASCAR cars. The civilian versions of the three cars that compete in the NASCAR Nextel Cup series — the Chevrolet Monte Carlo, Dodge Charger and Ford Fusion — are built either in Canada (the Charger and the Monte Carlo) or Mexico (the Fusion). Meanwhile more than 75 percent of the parts used here by Toyota (and 98 percent of the steel) comes from U.S. suppliers....." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 C'mon guys, is the Camry really "IN" Nascar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebritt Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 C'mon guys, is the Camry really "IN" Nascar? It's like comic releife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 (edited) I have to come down on the side of Toyota on this one. Look everyone knows that an actual NASCAR race car has nothing in common with the production car it represents. But that's just it isn't it? It represents a particular car, be it the Monte Carlo, or Fusion or Charger or Camry. Now it could be argued that since the NA in NASCAR stands for North American then a car made in Canada counts because it's technically made in North America. I say damn that. NASCAR was not invented by Canadians in Canada and for the most part Canadians couldn't give crap about the entire NASCAR racing series. This is an "American" sport. I agree that the cars on the track should represent cars made in America, by Americans for an American sport that prides itself on being a very patriotic affiliated group. This notion that it doesn't count because the "actual" NASCAR race cars are made in America is a veiled and weak attempt to substitute the prime rib with salisbury steak and convince me it's the same thing. Following that logic, why even bother to have NASCAR race cars represent the Fusion or the Monte Carlo at all? Heck why don't they just drive "NASCAR Spec Racing Car, brand non-specific"? Why? Because car companies pay big money to sponsor teams and put the name of their car on those shell bodies in an effort to get people to show up at Ford, Chevy, Dodge and Toyota dealers and buy cars. It's all about selling cars, we all know it. To that end it's a sport based around an "All American" ideology from its inception on the beaches of Daytona. Heck the Daytona 500 is still referred to as the "The Great American Race", not the Great Canadian Race or the Great Mexican Race. So in my book, Toyota has a valid point in that their production Camry, that is represented on the race track by their racing Camry, is a car that uses more "American" content then any of the other represented cars on the track in this very American sport. I would think a bunch of guys who are so adamant about Americans buying American made cars could understand that. As far as I'm concerned Ford should be making the Fusion here in the US. A large idle plant in Atlanta comes to mind. The same is true for the Charger and the Monte Carlo. Until then these companies shouldn't try and pretend they are really racing their "American" cars at The Great American Race. Edited March 17, 2007 by BlackHorse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 If we play by Toyota's rules, it all changes when GM goes to the Impala for the COT and for future seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 National Association of Stock Car Auto Racing. The name hasn't been accurate since the 1950's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 National Association of Stock Car Auto Racing. The name hasn't been accurate since the 1950's Holy crap, Mark is 100% right!! I had to look it up. All the more reason mind you for the cars to be made in the United States. Thanks Mark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F250 Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 National Association of Stock Car Auto Racing. The name hasn't been accurate since the 1950's I consider 1988 to be the last year of NASCAR because it was the last year of the Chevrolet Monte Carlo Aerocoupe, a car specifically designed and sold in limited numbers to be legal for NASCAR. After that manufacturers just paid off NASCAR so they could use any body they wanted. In the mid 80's Ford's regular production Thunderbird had a big aero advantage over the Monte Carlo so Chevy built the Aerocoupe with a bubble back glass and shorter trunk replacing the standard flat rear window and smoother front and rear bumpers. Both the Ford and Chevy were available with a V8, rear wheel drive and they were 2-doors. After that year NASCAR just let anything run if your check cleared. Toyota never made a OHV pushrod, carbureted, distributor ignition V8 so what are they allowed to use? A GM V8? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAC_Sparky Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 This is an "American" sport. NASCAR isn't any more of a sport than pro wrestling. And we all know how THAT's all real. :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebritt Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 In the next few years everyone will have identical cars...........WTF????? Why watch that crap! NASCAR...You suck!!! You have no balls. Good-bye..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 NASCAR isn't any more of a sport than pro wrestling. And we all know how THAT's all real. OAC Sparky, let's both read the following definition of "sport" from the dictionary. 1. an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc. From dictionary.com my friend. I thought it was particularly funny that the first "sport" it mentions is racing. Additionally let me just add that if you think you can be just some beer bellied chump cake and be able to handle turning a race car against the force of gravity at 180 mph for 3 or 4 hours then you clearly have little understanding of how much physical effort that takes. Now couple that with driving that speed and having a couple of other drivers only inches off your front bumper, back bumper and side doors. Clearly that takes a pretty great degree of skill. Don't forget the no AC to cool you off factor. I always get a kick out of it when guys bash auto racing as not being a sport as if they had what it takes to be a professional NASCAR driver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 I consider 1988 to be the last year of NASCAR because it was the last year of the Chevrolet Monte Carlo Aerocoupe, a car specifically designed and sold in limited numbers to be legal for NASCAR. After that manufacturers just paid off NASCAR so they could use any body they wanted. In the mid 80's Ford's regular production Thunderbird had a big aero advantage over the Monte Carlo so Chevy built the Aerocoupe with a bubble back glass and shorter trunk replacing the standard flat rear window and smoother front and rear bumpers. Both the Ford and Chevy were available with a V8, rear wheel drive and they were 2-doors. After that year NASCAR just let anything run if your check cleared. Toyota never made a OHV pushrod, carbureted, distributor ignition V8 so what are they allowed to use? A GM V8? While I agree that an argument can be made for the late 1980's as the end of Stock Cars based on the last of the rear wheel drive V-8 powered street versions, I think the real end was many years earlier. The NASCAR of the late 40s and early 50s truly had stock cars as the basis of the race versions. They still ran bumpers most of their interiors and glass. These cars started life on an assembly line along side their street driven bretheren. Through the 50s they still used full frames and steel bodies many still had factory bench seats. By the early 60s the bodies became more highly modified and the cars were lightened for race duty. Side by side, they were sitll recognizable. Ned Jarret's '64 Galaxie (see below) rides on a full frame and still has a stock dash and steering wheel. By the late '60s when Nascar downsized to intermediate bodies like the '67 Fairlane and '68 Torino the chassis went through more substantial changes The bodies began to lose the trim pieces of the street versions. This continued through the '70s as Ford returned to BOF construction for the '72 Torino and '74 Cougar. Ford pretty much left NASCAR after the '76 season. When they returned with the T-bird in 1982 the race car bore little similarity to the street cars. A lot of the difference was due to the safety advances and that has been a good thing for the sport. When the RWD 2-door T-bird was replaced by the FWD 4-door Taurus the "Stock Car" analogy was lost forever. The Lincoln Mark VII and VIII would have made great race cars. I still love watching the films of the old races. BTW, Toyota was not the first foreign marque to compete in NASCAR. Anyone know who was first? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 (edited) I don't know about the rest of you guys, but personally I would love to see a true stock car racing series again. I mean right now the cars are just purpose built racing machines that have zero in common with the cars they are trying to represent. Who really believes a NASCAR Fusion has anything to do with the Fusion on the lot down at the Ford dealer. It's gotten to the point that it so commercialized that its practically an insult to the intelligence of the entire population of race fans to say "The so and so Fusion race car was running really well today". The fans are all thinking "Right, calling that thing a Fusion is about as smart as hooking a 4 place horse trailer to your Lamborghini Diablo." Now, what I think would be cool is to see honest to God, no bones about it stock cars on the tracks again, front wheel drive and all dammit!! By all means, you can modify the cars to the extent of adding a roll cage, removing all but the driver seats, beefing up the brakes and they should be allowed to tinker with the engines to see how much they can get out of them but the key factor should be that it has to be a production engine. So for instance in the case of the Fusion, it has to be a FWD 3.0 V6. They can beef up the breaks, stiffen the suspension, and tinker with the motor all they like to see how much they can get out of it, but it has to be the production model engine. My guess is that pretty soon you would see race teams opting for the Crown Vic. But as Mark pointed out, the car must have begun its life as a production stock car and must remain true to that parameter throughout it's racing life. They still do this sort of thing down under by the way, but those races tend to be road course races. Which may not be such a bad idea here. At any rate, it will put and end to the age old debate about who is the better or faster manufacturer. Arguing about who is the better company based on the results of a NASCAR race is pretty stupid to me. I think this might actually be more helpful to the sales figures of domestic cars than some glorified NASCAR race where the cars are nothing remotely similar to any current production "stock" car. What say you Mark? Edited March 19, 2007 by BlackHorse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stray Kat Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Jaguar was the first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retro-man Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 (edited) Toyota never made a OHV pushrod, carbureted, distributor ignition V8 so what are they allowed to use? A GM V8? For your edification: a list of Toyota V8 engines: (bold type are OHV) V8 1963 - V - OHV 1963-1967 - 2.6 L (2599 cc) V 1967-1973 - 3.0 L (2981 cc) 3V 1973-1983 - 3.4 L (3376 cc) 4V 1983-1998 - 4.0 L (3995 cc) 5V 1989 - UZ - DOHC 1989 - 4.0 L (3969 cc) 1UZ 1998 - 4.7 L (4663 cc) 2UZ 2000 - 4.3 L (4300 cc) 3UZ 2006 - UR - DOHC/VVT-i 2006 - 4.6 L (4608 cc) 1UR 2007 - 5.7 L (5663 cc) 2UR The Toyota Century was V8 since its inception in 1967, and was based on the V8 powered 1964 Crown. Mark Morrow, if I'm not mistaken, Jaguar ran cars in NASCAR in the 1950s, along with several other foreign makes. I wonder if it brought the xenophobes out of the woodwork the way Toyota is this time? I kind of doubt it. BTW, love those shots of the '64 Galaxie. Edited March 19, 2007 by retro-man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rwall10279 Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 (edited) Mark Morrow, if I'm not mistaken, Jaguar ran cars in NASCAR in the 1950s, along with several other foreign makes. I wonder if it brought the xenophobes out of the woodwork the way Toyota is this time? I kind of doubt it. I belive the last foreign make in Nascar was MG in '62, but others included Aston Martin, Austin-Healey, Citroën, Jaguar, Morgan, Porsche, Renault, and Volkswagen. I had to look those up. Edited March 19, 2007 by Rwall10279 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Jaguar was the first. Congratulations Stray Kat. It must have been strange to see a Jag XK running amongst all that big Detroit iron. Jag ran its first Grand National Race in 1954 and a second at Road America in 1956. (Collectible Automobile June 2006) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAC_Sparky Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 (edited) Blah blah blah... So then you agree that NASCAR is like pro wrestling. You could have just say that. The problem with online dictionaries is that you'd have to jam the whole PC up your ass. If sitting in a car for 5 hours getting a sweaty bag constitutes a "sport" then I guess 3/4 the men over 45 that made a 300 mile drive before A/C was standard equipment on a car would be star athletes. :shades: Edited March 19, 2007 by OAC_Sparky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAC_Sparky Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 That would be true, if you only make left-hand turns. The was no GPS back then either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 There's a difference between sports and athletics. And Nascar is neither a sport, nor an athletic contest, IMO. Not with the rules they've got in place these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.