Do you think it took more skill to drive a 1967 cup car vs.2007 cup car?

Question

Or the other way around...And why.....

Answer 1

1967 for sure. you were driving a brick on biased tires at 150 to 190 on most tracks [daytona to martinsville]plus in 67 you didn't drive on all these cookie cutter tracks no 2 tracks were the same,[rock,north wilks.,riverside,plus some of the tracks that still exist]you drove on dirt ,as well as everything they have today. none of this safety bs they have today,they used mirrors instead of spotters hans devise and were responsible for their own driving instead of getting out of a wreck and saying my spotter let me down.also if they wrecked a car on sunday they spent the next weak building a car for the next Weeks races instead of walking away and having it done for them.this way they new a lot more about the car they were driving.then you can mention the lack of comforts,[power steering,air-cond suits, ect] compared to the old drivers[petty,pearson,yarbrough,allison bros.,aj foyt ect] these new drivers are a bunch of p*ssys

Answer 2

Back in 1967 the cars were shaped more like bricks, the brakes were kinda lousy, the tires were very different and much skinnier than what is being used today, and most of the suspension parts were stock from the factory. It's a whole lot tougher to win in a car like that than it is in the high tech, almost bullet proof cars being built today. I doubt many 18 year old kids would be able to race and win in a Cup car back in 1967.

Answer 3

It's funny you mention a 1967 car. That's the year that it didn't take Richard Petty much skill to whoop the field with his hemi on steroids. He had 10 wins in a row, won 27 races and an uncontested championship that year. It is what it is and surely the cars handle better now. As far as skill goes I'm not sure about that. It might have taken better conditioning to manhandle the cars from 1967? There are bigger packs of cars now because they are more evenly matched. That, along with higher speeds dictates that today's drivers have to be more precise and in tune with how the car is handling. Back in the day you could win more on horsepower than handling. Handling has always been important it just wasn't AS important back in 1967.

Answer 4

The cars from the 60's were a different bread of car and were very different to drive.The steering the fact that these were full body cars from Detroit.These were big cars and were a handful to drive.
Newer cup cars have the power steering and are made of lighter sheet metal.
So yes it was harder then(1967) to drive than now.
And the 1967 Dodge Charger is still my favorite year stock car.

Answer 5

I agree with most of the answers above. I think on the skill level that today's cars may take more skill to drive because they are more sensitive to any little change and because of rule changes they are almost always in larger packs. I do think that from a physical standpoint the older drivers had to have more stamina and strength. No creature comforts in those cars. I remember watching Cale Yarbrough on the first in car camera I'd even seen at Daytona. It was amazing how much he had to fight that wheel. I remember an interview with him where he said he lost an average of ten pounds per race. I also think the drivers back then were exposed to a lot more fumes in those cars.
Just my opinion!

Answer 6

I dont know, in 1967 I wasnt even born yet but I would think the 67 would be harder because of the aero issues and Im not for sure if they had power steering in their cars or not. The technology back then wasnt as good as what they have today. It takes skill no matter what era you drove in to drive in Nascar.

Answer 7

It depends on what you mean by skill...in '67 the cars were usually spread out a lot more because you didn't have nearly as much parity as you have now...races were often won by three or four laps...cheatin' is racin' was prevelent and whoever got the edge that week was in control...no restrictor plates and very little inspection meant high speeds, seperation, but more of a chance of equipment failure and spectacular wrecks (notably fire)...if lack of fear equates to more skill than the '67 car gets my vote...but now you have 190mph racing with a majority of the field bunched the whole time and most races decided by either failed pit strategy or engine/tire failure...how many times has JJ stated he had a fourth or fifth place car but won anyway? So if being crafty and lucky equates to skill than the '07 takes more...taking the question as asked I feel it took more driving skill and strength to perform well in the '67 car whereas now it takes concentration and stamina to perform...

Answer 8

Actually the 1967 cars were built to steer without power steering, which is easier to steer than a power steering car without power steering. I know, because I've driven both. If the older cars took more skill than the newer cars do, then Bill Elliott should be so skillful he would win every race he is in
Other than that, I like what Beth said.

Answer 9

I think it takes the same amount of skill, but maybe not the same type of skills. The cars back then were probably harder to drive than the cars of today. But the cars of today are a lot more sensitive. A half pound of air pressure or a dinged front quarter panel wouldn't hurt one of the older cars much, but today it'll put your car out of contention. Today a driver needs to be able to take care of his equipment more, and be able to communicate what the car needs to his crew.

Could drivers from different eras compete in each others equipment? I think many of them could, especially if they were brought up driving in that type of equipment.

Answer 10

Old school or current, it really doesn't matter, your competition is driving basically the same stuff you're driving. The '67 cars weren't as fast as the '07 cars are, so the reaction time has to be faster now than it was then, but technologically the '07s are a lot better than the '67s, so they would be easier to manipulate.
I'd rule it a wash, different times require different skills.