I've been a Nascar fan for a few years, been to a few races, and watch most tv broadcasts. All the talk I ever hear is about who has the best car, which team has the best set-up, which team has the track figured out. Like the races that start during the day and end at night, they talk about who will keep up with the changing track conditions the best. It seems like it doesn't matter who the driver is, as long as his team has the best car. I get the feeling that if you put Kyle Petty in the #48, he would be racing for the championship this weekend. So what is more important, the driver, or the team with the best car set-up?
2007-11-15 10:44:46 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Auto Racing ➔ NASCAR
Thanks for some pretty thoughtful answers so far. Except for that Jack *** Coca Cola Cowboy ( who I have now blocked.) I asked a question because I wanted a real answer. Thanks to all so far who have written a thoughtful response.
2007-11-15 13:54:54 · update #1
It 70% sponsor, 28% car and 2% driver. They all know how to mash the accelerator to the floor but the car wouldn't be competitive without the major sponsor bucks to man up the shops with the best talent, have an inventory of 8 race-ready cars for each driver, and foot the bill for extensive testing.
2007-11-15 15:52:29 · answer #1 · answered by toughnottobeacynic 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
The initial car as it arrives at the track, the engine and all the engineering that goes into the car are about 40% of the equation.
The communication between the driver and crew chief, how well the driver can describe the condition of the car and all the adjustments and pit actions that come from this account for about 25% with 5% coming from the driver and 20% coming from the crew chief and crew.
The drivers ability is 35% plus the above 5% for a total of 40%.
So I agree with the 40/20/40 explanation. You can't win without a good driver, crew chief and car, you need all three. A mediocre driver will not win in the best equipment and the best driver will not be able to carry a poor car.
One exception is a fuel mileage race. Any car/crew/driver combination capable of running somewhere around 25th place can win under the right fuel strategy situation.
2007-11-15 22:57:09 · answer #2 · answered by beth 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It's true that you have to have the right set up. But how does one go about getting the right set up? The crew chief. If a team doesn't have a smart crew chief, then that team isn't going to win races.
The driver has to be smart, too. Take Kyle Busch. That kid has great car control. I was watching him in the truck race at Phoenix, and man that kid can drive! The same thing in the Busch race the next day. He was putting those cars in places cars should not have been! It's exciting to watch his hands as he's coming out of the turns sideways!
Some other drivers just don't have that same control. Once that car starts coming around, they just can't seem to save it.
The other factor is the crew members. The tire changers have to make sure they hit all of the lugs, the jack man has to be sure he gets that jack in the right spot, jack the car up enough so the tire changers can get the tires on and off, and make sure everyone's all clear before he drops the jack. Then pick up his jack, run around to the other side and do it all again!
I mean if all of those guys aren't working together and fumble one thing, it could be disastrous.
So it's not just the driver or the car, it's the driver, the crew chief, and the pit crew that make or break a NASCAR team.
2007-11-15 21:40:23 · answer #3 · answered by billkur 1 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I think that it is 50 50 since ever driver likes a car that handels diffrent from the man raceing beside him plus plus every driver has his own style of driveing so that allso comes into play when the car is set up for the first time at the shop before they load the car up to go to what ever track they are raceing at plus the old style car there were diffrent cars built for diffrent tracks unlike the cot and that will basiclly be the same car at every track and that is supposed to help teams save money and make everything more competitive
2007-11-16 10:01:08 · answer #4 · answered by willie b 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm going to give you an answer that doesn't really fall under the guidelines that your question is seeking. Instead I want to bring another approach at the equation.
I think that 95% of the sucess is team, car, and driver together. Why not 100%? Because I think there is always room for improvement in either 3 areas and also you have to factor in luck.
I have seen drivers and teams have everything going for them except luck. I give that additional 5% to luck and then you could break that down to a scale between 0 to 5 with 5% being the goal.
For instance, one year Kurt Busch's tire falls off right at the entrance of pit road. With most people if a tire falls off you go laps down and never recover and usually destroy the car. But Kurt? Well he ends up winning the race or coming in 5th. I can't remember exactly where he finished but he was lucky.
No matter what statistics anyone uses to weigh importance luck can factor above all. Funny how 5% luck holds so much weight.
2007-11-15 23:46:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
More a mix than anything
It helps that you have to have a good car, but its also about having a good crew, knowledge of the track, good team chemistry.
Look at Hendrick, especially with the 24 and 48, they have everything going for them, good drivers, good team, good chemistry (why do you think Hendrick is kicking out Kyle Busch?), good preperation.
Now look at Roush. They have a good team, and have good drivers (minus Ragan, but hes a rookie, he will learn), but the problem has been that Roush, and he has admitted it, was unprepared for the COT, and you also have Kenesth and Edwards at eachother's throats, and that just trickled throught the team.
2007-11-16 12:11:45 · answer #6 · answered by martin_rulz6 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's different for diffrent drivers. I think Hendrick cars are gold mines. If there were a ratio of driver ablity to car performance. Tony Stewart would probably lead the group with about a 80/20 ratio (80 being driver talent and 20 being the car). Jimmie Johnson would be about 75/25, Jeff Gordon 60/40 I don't think Gordon would do too good if he couldn't depend on his car. It's that ratio that has destroyed Juniors racing season this year. Matt Kenseth is also a good driver as opposed to the equipment he has. I would give Kenseth a 72/28 ratio, Kyle Busch probably won't do to well next year and will probably be around 55/45, but i'm sure you've seen drivers drive with equipment failures, like, a power steering belt or turning off all fans and cooling systems to preserve the electrical system. The only reason that I put it in this perspective is so you will look at the hows and whys of a drivers winning or losing a race. Think about that next time you see someone win a race who you would never expect to have won. And then ask yourself is it the driver or his car.
2007-11-15 21:28:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
I read everyone`s answers all but 1 seemed like pretty intelligent ones, Now I am thinking if everything has to be near perfect. maybe the total of 100% needs to be devided equally. as in
33.1/3%-driver
33.1/3% Car
33.1/3% Crew and chief
The questioner gave us something to think about tho.
I like that
2007-11-16 07:10:19 · answer #8 · answered by Bill 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If Josh's answer were correct, anyone could jump into a HMS car and win.
Some tracks it is more car, like Daytona, and others it is more driver like Bristal or The Glenn.
It is aprox 40% car, 40% driver, 20% team, giver or take 10% to any depending on the track and the team.
2007-11-15 19:13:03 · answer #9 · answered by Charles 4 · 4⤊ 2⤋
I'm with Charles on this 40% car 40% driver 20% team, again it all depends on the tracks, not all tracks are the same, and also race conditions....
Geez, if Josh's answer were correct heck I'd get in a Hendrick car and drive, I can do 1% anyday.
2007-11-15 22:48:56 · answer #10 · answered by Go Team Penske 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋