Nascar ?

[wnffe]

Dude..sorry...I don't fancy NASCAR at all...so I voted no.

But I have tons of respect to any NASCAR or oval drivers. All I can say, they have balls that made of steel. Have any of you complainers ever driven over 150mph irl? (Just for a consistent several minutes would be enough)...

On the other hand for those unbelievers...just think about this for a moment. Anybody can run, but not everybody can run fast...similar to racing, it's very easy to race and anybody can...but it takes a lot of knowledge and loads of experience to go super fast and it is definitely not easy on the limit..Talent alone is just not enough in racing.

Like playing music of course, musician made it looks easy but it is definitely not for ordinary! My conclusion is...although not my cup of tea...Oval racing is just as hard and technical as any other form of racing...and I respect that.

👍

 

[wrcsti]

Actually nascar has power steering, but it isn't as storng as in streetcars so they can get more feel.
I love nascar, I've been to 2 races and may be going to the daytona 500 this year. But I also love other types of racing for different reasons.
Nascar- exitement, strategy, man-handling fun.
F1- technical, computers, stupid quick
Rally- balls
The TV doesn't give the cars any justice. They look fast doing 70 mph at the pace laps. When we went to the pepsi 400 in 2007 (Daytona) we were amased at the begining when they start and went by, then we realised "ohh ****, it takes them 2 laps to get up to speed". The next 15 laps we were uncomfterble at the sped untill we mentally understood that these guys knew what they were doing. This was on the front row. Tickets said row 3 but it was the front right by pit exit.
Nascar isn't just about the racing, it is about the enviroment. Got to the track at 10 AM and had 3 **** loads of fun untill the pre race started. then we had 4 **** loads of fun when it started.
When we went to homestead we got VIP tickets from a friend and got to meet the drivers, not meet like look at them from 10 feet away, I mean meet like have a conversation with them. They are mostly cool people (the ones I talked with were awsome) and very modest. Not something that happens in F1 where drivers are hidding and pushing people (KIMI).

 

[bicycleshorts]

Really ? I don't see your name on any PGA registry,American,or European tour. If it's so easy why are you not out there making "big money" for hitting a ball in a cup ? 💡

He was being sarcastic .

I'm amazed anyone on here is saying it's "easy" to drive Nascar - I assume those saying that are in the top 10 for every car on the Daytona Oval on GT5p? And this is completely ignoring the balls it takes to drive a car that quickly for that long without any mistakes. Driving 2 hours on British roads at motorway speeds is more fatiguing (for me) than a round of golf.

If you don't like it then fair enough - don't be ignorant and underestimate how talented any professional sportsmen are.

 

[Nicksfix]

Actually nascar has power steering

Yes , I know this .
The statement was in referal to the one race ( forget which one in particular ) , where Ryan Newman's power steering pump went out early in the race , he raced all afternoon muscling this car around the track without power steering , that is amazing , his arms had to have felt like spaghetti noodles when the day was done.

 

[Ferrari_Tifoso]

I voted no, because GT5 has been primarily about road racing. I don't fancy that type of motorsport. To me oval racing doesn't compare to the excitement of battling with someone lap after lap after lap in a track like Spa.

 

[McLaren]

I voted no, because GT5 has been primarily about road racing. I don't fancy that type of motorsport. To me oval racing doesn't compare to the excitement of battling with someone lap after lap after lap in a track like Spa.

You do realize stock car racing is 2 hours+ of consistently battling 42 other people lap after lap....

 

[Ardius]

@ the so called critcisms of NASCAR the no-people are bringing in, the reason I don't like NASCAR is not because of "a lack of skill" or "because its boring". It's because you never seem to have a clear winner very often. Yes, this might have its advantages, makes racing interesting, etc. But it makes the overtaking itself rather hollow when it happens so much it becomes expected, when your favourite driver gets into the lead, its not such a thrilling event because you know he'll just as easily lose it soon enough.
This is just my personal opinion and I still think NASCAR should get a bit of a representation in GT5P or GT5.

Its just becoming a bit one-sided in this thread and I'd thought I'd just say its not all so brilliant to watch, even though most of the reasons (excuses?) the negative people have given are rubbish.

 

[DaddyVDUB]

I have very little interest in NASCAR,this after having been a casual fan for years. The primary reason...Boring Tracks. I have no problem with the cars really they are quite awesome race cars 3500# with 800HP. A large part of the races become nothing more than fuel mileage events. If there were more races at tracks like Sonoma,or Watkins Glen,why can they not run on the road course at Daytona.💡 I can not see the appeal of watching a race at one of the "cookie cutter" tracks such as Michigan or California If PD were to include a Stock car type of race car in GT5 that would not bother me. Just please no 2.5 mile Ovals.

 

[nissan tuner]

No, I would not expect to see any stock cars in GT5. Its impossible due to EA's exclusivity, and wouldn't really fit the MO of GT5..

see post 115. Its very much possible to do so long as there's no official paint schemes on it.

I think it would fit GT5 perfectly fine too.

Daytona, Infineon, Suzuka east & Motegi obviously has held a nascar race before, Toyota already brought some COT's to Fuji Speedway 2 months ago for the Toyota MSF, AJ Allmendinger did laps at Laguna Seca with a COT so they can be ran there and High speed ring for obvious reasons

 

[Vaxen]

@ the so called critcisms of NASCAR the no-people are bringing in, the reason I don't like NASCAR is not because of "a lack of skill" or "because its boring". It's because you never seem to have a clear winner very often. Yes, this might have its advantages, makes racing interesting, etc. But it makes the overtaking itself rather hollow when it happens so much it becomes expected, when your favourite driver gets into the lead, its not such a thrilling event because you know he'll just as easily lose it soon enough.
This is just my personal opinion and I still think NASCAR should get a bit of a representation in GT5P or GT5.

Its just becoming a bit one-sided in this thread and I'd thought I'd just say its not all so brilliant to watch, even though most of the reasons (excuses?) the negative people have given are rubbish.

I'd agree with this.

Like virtually all sport, unless you know the details of the strategy behind it, the subtleties of the difficulty in execution, you'll find it boring. Most Americans find "soccer" to be boring (due in part to the lack of scoring), most of the rest of the world finds America football to be boring (due to the puzzling stop and go action). Most everyone who hasn't played golf (and many who have), find televised professional golf to be boring.

Most American motorsport (whether Indy or stock car) is different from European in that they'll bring out the safety car for the smallest obstruction on the track. You can pretty much guarantee that they'll have multiple full course cautions every race, and so fueling strategies often revolve around this. It also means that you are never, ever out of the race, even if you fall a lap (or more) down. (Jacques Villeneuve won the 1995 Indy 500 after receiving a 2 lap penalty. Indianapolis is a 2.5 mile oval, so this was an astounding feat.) Oval racing tends to have lots of passing, up and down the field. Most American fans come to expect this, and see each lead change as an interesting and exciting event in the field.

The disadvantage, of course, is that early action in the race doesn't matter so much. As long as you stay on the lead lap for the first 3/4 of the race, you have a decent chance to win.

F1 is pretty much the exact opposite of American oval racing. There are virtually no full course cautions, so track position is hugely important. Every pass anywhere in the field at any time is important. The start of the race tends to be very exciting, and the sorting of the field really matters. However, passing is very rare (by comparison), and lead changes even more so. Most Nascar fans would criticize the sport as being boring because of this lack of passing. Watching an F1 race without an appreciation for the subtleties makes it seem something like a high speed parade.

Both forms of racing are exciting in their own way, but you'll have a hard time convincing a fan of one form of racing to appreciate the other. To succeed at the highest levels of both, you have to have talent, skill, perseverance, a bit of luck, and proper backing.

Now, to tie this in to the thread topic: The brilliance of the GT series is that it serves to educate players on the appeal of different forms of motorsport. Before I played GT1, I found road course racing to be boring, and rally racing even more so. But being thrust into the competition opened my eyes, and I've come to appreciate it for what it is. Adding a proper oval course and cars built for that environment is just expanding the experience even more, and this is a good thing.

 

[Ardius]

I'd agree with this.

Like virtually all sport, unless you know the details of the strategy behind it, the subtleties of the difficulty in execution, you'll find it boring. Most Americans find "soccer" to be boring (due in part to the lack of scoring), most of the rest of the world finds America football to be boring (due to the puzzling stop and go action). Most everyone who hasn't played golf (and many who have), find televised professional golf to be boring.

Most American motorsport (whether Indy or stock car) is different from European in that they'll bring out the safety car for the smallest obstruction on the track. You can pretty much guarantee that they'll have multiple full course cautions every race, and so fueling strategies often revolve around this. It also means that you are never, ever out of the race, even if you fall a lap (or more) down. (Jacques Villeneuve won the 1995 Indy 500 after receiving a 2 lap penalty. Indianapolis is a 2.5 mile oval, so this was an astounding feat.) Oval racing tends to have lots of passing, up and down the field. Most American fans come to expect this, and see each lead change as an interesting and exciting event in the field.

The disadvantage, of course, is that early action in the race doesn't matter so much. As long as you stay on the lead lap for the first 3/4 of the race, you have a decent chance to win.

F1 is pretty much the exact opposite of American oval racing. There are virtually no full course cautions, so track position is hugely important. Every pass anywhere in the field at any time is important. The start of the race tends to be very exciting, and the sorting of the field really matters. However, passing is very rare (by comparison), and lead changes even more so. Most Nascar fans would criticize the sport as being boring because of this lack of passing. Watching an F1 race without an appreciation for the subtleties makes it seem something like a high speed parade.

Both forms of racing are exciting in their own way, but you'll have a hard time convincing a fan of one form of racing to appreciate the other. To succeed at the highest levels of both, you have to have talent, skill, perseverance, a bit of luck, and proper backing.

Now, to tie this in to the thread topic: The brilliance of the GT series is that it serves to educate players on the appeal of different forms of motorsport. Before I played GT1, I found road course racing to be boring, and rally racing even more so. But being thrust into the competition opened my eyes, and I've come to appreciate it for what it is. Adding a proper oval course and cars built for that environment is just expanding the experience even more, and this is a good thing.

Exactly, though I don't see it as "not knowing the subtleties" and more as 2 different ways of motorsport, I just have a preferrence of less outside-intrusion and more driving. Of course, someone can enjoy both, I just don't.

 

[Mad Matt]

I'd agree with this.

Like virtually all sport, unless you know the details of the strategy behind it, the subtleties of the difficulty in execution, you'll find it boring. Most Americans find "soccer" to be boring (due in part to the lack of scoring), most of the rest of the world finds America football to be boring (due to the puzzling stop and go action). Most everyone who hasn't played golf (and many who have), find televised professional golf to be boring.

Most American motorsport (whether Indy or stock car) is different from European in that they'll bring out the safety car for the smallest obstruction on the track. You can pretty much guarantee that they'll have multiple full course cautions every race, and so fueling strategies often revolve around this. It also means that you are never, ever out of the race, even if you fall a lap (or more) down. (Jacques Villeneuve won the 1995 Indy 500 after receiving a 2 lap penalty. Indianapolis is a 2.5 mile oval, so this was an astounding feat.) Oval racing tends to have lots of passing, up and down the field. Most American fans come to expect this, and see each lead change as an interesting and exciting event in the field.

The disadvantage, of course, is that early action in the race doesn't matter so much. As long as you stay on the lead lap for the first 3/4 of the race, you have a decent chance to win.

F1 is pretty much the exact opposite of American oval racing. There are virtually no full course cautions, so track position is hugely important. Every pass anywhere in the field at any time is important. The start of the race tends to be very exciting, and the sorting of the field really matters. However, passing is very rare (by comparison), and lead changes even more so. Most Nascar fans would criticize the sport as being boring because of this lack of passing. Watching an F1 race without an appreciation for the subtleties makes it seem something like a high speed parade.

Both forms of racing are exciting in their own way, but you'll have a hard time convincing a fan of one form of racing to appreciate the other. To succeed at the highest levels of both, you have to have talent, skill, perseverance, a bit of luck, and proper backing.

Now, to tie this in to the thread topic: The brilliance of the GT series is that it serves to educate players on the appeal of different forms of motorsport. Before I played GT1, I found road course racing to be boring, and rally racing even more so. But being thrust into the competition opened my eyes, and I've come to appreciate it for what it is. Adding a proper oval course and cars built for that environment is just expanding the experience even more, and this is a good thing.

Sorry to repeat the quote but I think this is a very good summary of the differences and was what I meant when I said it was a matter of 'culture".

 

[seckcimike]

idk how people watch nascar! its cars going on circles....but thats my opinion. ahh till this day i dont understand the thrill of it. and yes I am "American" but i love formula one

 

[ryanVAMPIRATE]

Hey i am American and i do not really care for Nascar, But i grew up around it. I do not see a problem with them being the game. I have skimmed though the forum and did not really see any one mention that there is Road course that are in the Nascar season Walkens Glenn and Infinion race way (which has been in GT4 and i think GT3) which one of the versions was the STOCK CAR track. Some Teams even hire drivers from the American Le mans series to drive these races but i do not ever recall these outside road course racers ever winning. So i do not know why people try to say they are not skilled drivers, but any way there is already 2 tracks from the Nascar series and a Stock car mentioned in this forum many times. What would it hurt to put it in the game. Like i said i much rather watch any form of racing that involves turning both right and left. I am not big on Drag Racing either but i think it be sweet for them to have a dragstrip in the game as well and i am sure you die hard road track guys would not mind having that either i do not see any one objecting to that. I love road racing and rally more then any other form of motor sports but i think variety is what has and always will be the reason so many people love Gran Turismo series. So i do not understand the big deal about this.

 

[Ferrari_Tifoso]

Nascar has no place in the GT world, and by that same token, neither does Formula 1 (And I love F1). GT is about two things GT cars, and road racing (mainly). Personally I would like to see SuperGT, DTM, LeMans LMP & GT, BTCC, etc. cars in GT.

 

[zippyuk]

I really dont know what all the fuss is about, hey each to there own wether it be F1, Touring car, GT whatever, i voted yes.

I have actually had the pleasure of driving a NASCAR which was bought over to this country (UK), it was one of Daryl Waltrips and this one was geared for Talladega. The car was shown around the small stock car ovals at the time, although many of them have now gone, it was also shown at Brands Hatch, Sheffield Arena, and the Autosport show.

I had the pleasure of going to Atlanta to see Richard Pettys last race, i had an all pass to go anyway, and was stood behind pit road for the start, theres nothing more awesome then the sound of the pack coming round turn 4 for the green, i now know where they get the term thunder from, oh i forgot Richard Petty came over to the Autosport show one year and i have actually shook the Kings hand.

So dont knock it guys everyone to there own.

 

[Fruitcake]

Nascar has no place in the GT world, and by that same token, neither does Formula 1 (And I love F1). GT is about two things GT cars, and road racing (mainly). Personally I would like to see SuperGT, DTM, LeMans LMP & GT, BTCC, etc. cars in GT.

Yes please

(btw, all the mentioned classes were in a GT game )

 

[Duke of Pendle]

Some more food for thought here.
In the Weekly Race Series last week, we had to run an event, all in the same car, against the AI over 6 laps.
There were 20 entrants, and the fastest race time and the slowest race time were no more than 5 seconds apart. That means that the average lap time of all the entrants was within 1 sec of each other. These were drivers spread over 5 divisions. With the benefits of slipstream the advantage is effectively NIL.
Now I don't know about the rest of you, but I would relish being on that grid at the start of that race, no matter where it was. Every driver in that field would have a chance of winning the race. The only factor to influence the outcome would be racecraft.
Conversely, you can sit on the grid at the start of a Suzuka 550PP race and scan through the entrants. You will more than likely be able to pick the podium before the race starts. Also you will be lucky if more than 2/3 of the field finish within 30 secs of the leader.
I accept that racing at Suzuka has a different interest to racing on an oval.
This is my point though. Oval racing has it's own USP (unique selling point) - and that's close racing for all the field.

 

[machscnel]

Some more food for thought here.
In the Weekly Race Series last week, we had to run an event, all in the same car, against the AI over 6 laps.
There were 20 entrants, and the fastest race time and the slowest race time were no more than 5 seconds apart. That means that the average lap time of all the entrants was within 1 sec of each other. These were drivers spread over 5 divisions. With the benefits of slipstream the advantage is effectively NIL.
Now I don't know about the rest of you, but I would relish being on that grid at the start of that race, no matter where it was. Every driver in that field would have a chance of winning the race. The only factor to influence the outcome would be racecraft.
Conversely, you can sit on the grid at the start of a Suzuka 550PP race and scan through the entrants. You will more than likely be able to pick the podium before the race starts. Also you will be lucky if more than 2/3 of the field finish within 30 secs of the leader.
I accept that racing at Suzuka has a different interest to racing on an oval.
This is my point though. Oval racing has it's own USP (unique selling point) - and that's close racing for all the field.

You seem to be the first person to understand what I was trying to get across in my original post. It seems this forums' members would fight against extra cars/race/tracks/game time, (Isn't that what they whinge for?) than to actually think about what I was proposing.

Oval racing would be great fun and fair, which are things races like Suzuka are not.

Thank you Duke, for thinking about something for longer than ten seconds.

 

[Radracing]

it only takes one stock car in GT5 to start a NASCAR like series in the game and Toyota already races in it. So I think for PD to get Toyota to let them put a Toyota stock car to their car line up it would be a done deal. All they need is just put it in with different liveries and colors as an option. They are a spec series anyway so you don't really need NASCAR's permission.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

I voted "no". GT and NASCAR are two different breeds.

 

[Kryz11]

So what Exacly is G(ran) T(urismo)?

Voted yes.. why not? But we all know we won't have NASCAR.

 

[Flogger]

Seems to me that a Morrison event at Daytona would be mighty close.

 

[McLaren]

I voted "no". GT and NASCAR are two different breeds.

And yet, they've already crossed once before.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

And yet, they've already crossed once before.

Sure, i'll give you that. I'm just saying in general, NASCAR and GT racing have little to do with one another. The fan base is generally different, the cars in NASCAR events boast very little variety (unlike cars in FIA, IMSA, SCCA events, etc). I don't see the point in adding NASCAR vehicles to Gran Turismo.

It seems that since Daytona is in GT5P, lots of weight is given towards opinions opposite to mine, of course. Whatever.

So what Exacly is G(ran) T(urismo)?

I'm not gonna attempt to explain the entire meaning & history of how GT cars got developed, perhaps i'll explain this tomorrow. I gotta get some sleep now. Or you can google this info yourself. 💡

Suffice it to say, GT has little to do with travelling around and around in an oval, while brain-dead fans pay little attention to the fact that the "Camrys", "Tauruses", and "Impalas" that appear in NASCAR events are nothing but over-regulated GeneriCars which bear absolutely no resemblance to the automobiles they supposedly represent.

It didn't used to be this way. Have a look on YouTube at some older NASCAR events from the 70s and 80s. Back then, these cars were actually based on the machines they were supposed to represent. In effect, a Ford Thunderbird on the tracks was more equivalent to a Ford Thunderbird from the dealer. I have much respect for the way NASCAR used to be, even tho it was 100x more dangerous.

I'm getting off-topic now. Dangit!

 

[DaddyVDUB]

I agree with you 100%,That is the exact reason why I am NOT interested in NASCAR. While I believe it is no simple task to win at a NASCAR oval,ie Juan Montoya who was good enough to win more F1 races than he has NASCAR. The cars are such a joke to me,there is precious little of the whole thing well I think the engine block has some ties to Mfg design thats it. Used to the cars had the very same body panels bumbers and all. I think the C O T in GT5 would be a very large egg for PD to lay. And well besides the NASCAR bunch has EA I think its a perfect match.

 

[LR-tripowergto]

I agree with you 100%,That is the exact reason why I am NOT interested in NASCAR. While I believe it is no simple task to win at a NASCAR oval,ie Juan Montoya who was good enough to win more F1 races than he has NASCAR. The cars are such a joke to me,there is precious little of the whole thing well I think the engine block has some ties to Mfg design thats it. Used to the cars had the very same body panels bumbers and all. I think the C O T in GT5 would be a very large egg for PD to lay. And well besides the NASCAR bunch has EA I think its a perfect match.

Although I realize that Nascar and GT racing are 2 completeky different breeds, why not have a few oval tracks? We have drifters, and in the last version rally cars as well. We're all aware of how good the graphics and physics are. I'm playing Nascar '09, but EA should be "relieved" of thier Nascar game making privledges. A few ovals wouldn't hurt anyone here, and make all the "closet" Nascar fans here happy.👍

 

[TunerFocus]

I voted "no". GT and NASCAR are two different breeds.

Yeah, that is kind of true in some way or another, but if this is true, why is there the "Daytona Oval", on Prologue, that is a stock car track, hint the term oval racing...stock cars, hmm...oval tracks & stock cars go together like bread & butter. Oh, & by the way, you could have a FWD stock car on GT2.

 

[Jay]

Well GT has always had some type of oval before.

I think the reason Daytona was added is to appeal to American players (GT4 USA sales dropped a lot compared to previous GT's) by adding another iconic world known US track that also had a road variant.

Personally the oval is a little boring but I like the road variant.

 

[TunerFocus]

Well GT has always had some type of oval before.

I think the reason Daytona was added is to appeal to American players (GT4 USA sales dropped a lot compared to previous GT's) by adding another iconic world known US track that also had a road variant.

Personally the oval is a little boring but I like the road variant.

I couldn't agree with you more.👍