SPEEDZZTER ON THE RAY NICHOLS/EPA SUPERBIRD, MAYFIELD V. NASCAR, DON GARLITS, AND THE WAR AGAINST MUSCLE CARS

[Get the latest "Truth With Speedzzter" here]

Truth With Speedzzter (TWS) has been hanging out over at Bangshift where a number of interesting topics are under discussion.

1. The Three Million Dollar Ray Nichols / EPA Plymouth Superbird

TWS's take:

At one level, this doesn't really seem much more insane than the million dollars paid for the Ray Allen LS6 Malibu Convertible a couple of years ago at Barrett-Jackson by a "private collector" (who is now apparently having RM Auctions liquidate it and about 80 other race cars and hot rods at the Petersen Museum on September 26, 2009 (See http://www.rmauctions.com/PressRelease.cfm?PressID=668 or pay RM EIGHTY DOLLARS for a catalog (Talk about insane!)))

On the other hand, paying even six figures for any muscle car (not to mention THREE MILLION DOLLARS) probably represents a triumph of ego gratification over common sense. Still, it's good that some collectors are apparently motivated to pay the crazy money necessary to preserve many of these unique historical vehicles for future generations.

2. The Burnout Kid (Kid wrecks Dad's collector car after an epic burnout)

TWS's take:

I wonder if his friends got a picture of the smoke for Car Craft's "burnout" page?

3. Another Don Garlits comeback?

TWS's take:

Actually, although the NHRA does have more opportunities for "senior drivers" than virtually any other motorsport (because of the limited duration of the races and lessened physical demands on drivers), it's too bad that the promoters, manufacturers, and sanctioning bodies haven't figured out a way to develop viable "seniors tour" championships for drag, oval and road racing.

There are probably a lot of fans who'd still pay to see famous septuagenarians like Garlits still mixing it up on a regular basis (see e.g. the celebration of octogenarian Hershell McGriff's return to stock cars http://sports.yahoo.com/nascar/blog/from_the_marbles/post/81-year-old-NASCAR-driver-will-outdrive-you-punk?urn=nascar,171500)

And don't senior citizens need role models too?

4. Mayfield v. NASCAR (Why do so many people hate NASCAR?)

TWS's take:

There are several imbeded and overarching conflicts motivating the "fan boys" on both sides of the Mayfield controversy:

1. Monolithic dictatorship vs. the little guy (the following factors are motivating beliefs and concerns)

a. NASCAR's five decades of crushing those who don't "go along."
b. American individualism and the "underdog" preference.
c. Fear of "crossing" or criticizing NASCAR (see subpoint "a" above).
d. Widespread fear of getting caught up in a similar bureaucratic nightmare/SNAFU and not being able to defend against it.
e. Distrust of accumulations of power.

2. Angst over drug testing vs. worries over the effects of drug abuse on society.

a. Concern over loss of privacy to bureaucratic "War on Drugs" measures.
b. Concern about the "role model" effect of even minor celebrities such as Mayfield.
c. Concern that illegal drugs are making society more dangerous, more selfish, less productive, and less safe.
d. NASCAR's hypocrisy (sport built on the foundation of Southern bootleggers, moonshiners, and tobacco/alcohol money).

3. Hatred of NASCAR for ruining "stock car" racing vs. Unquestioned loyalty to "The Show."

4. "Old" NASCAR vs. "Modern" NASCAR. (i.e. The hope that anything that "brings down" the "Modern" NASCAR could help the return of what was good about the "Old" NASCAR)

5. Libertarianism vs. Support for law & order.

6. Rebellion vs. Conformity.

7. Distrust of NASCAR's objectivity and procedures vs. faith in NASCAR's bureaucracy.

For some, its just personal (e.g. they like Mayfield and/or don't like Brian France). There's also probably a lot of "tweakers" who simply wouldn't want Mayfield (if he's actually on meth) to suffer any punishment for doing the same thing they're doing.

TWS's second take:

["Every type of racing eventually gets ruined . . . ." -- Mopar57]

Racing gets ruined because the sanctioning bodies have not found any way to beat the "cycle."

1. Beginnings -- pioneers of the sport experiment in obscurity and set the basic parameters of the sport

2. Period of grassroots innovation (mostly sportsmen and innovators battling on their own money in front of a few locals or in obscurity. In retrospect, these are usually remembered as the "golden days" of the sport, notwithstanding the carnage that often results from "pushing the envelope" )

3. Emergence of commercial viability (stars, sponsors, professional teams, media attention, sanctioning body bureaucracy, basic rules and parameters take a set)

4. Dominance -- one or a few professionals start to "stink up the show" by "breaking out" to dominate all of the events (this is when the huge haulers and the super-teams emerge, often with factory backing)

5. Shakeout -- marginal teams get tired of getting slaughtered and the sportsmen move on; rules packages start to squelch grassroots innovation as a means to "level the playing field", marginal promoters/tracks ushered out by move to increased "professionalism" and higher event costs (appearance fees, sanctioning fees, prize money).

6. Crisis (some star gets hurt or killed, economic crisis, fad wears off, too many marginal teams leave the sport, older tracks close)

7. Protectionism -- rules are conformed to protect the monopoly of a few professional professional teams and their "stars" and the "loyal" tracks & promoters. Outsiders, grassroots dreamers and nonconformists are excluded.

8. Stagnation -- sport trapped in "feedback loop" of Stages 4-7 as new stars are groomed and older stars/teams are replaced. Mass media and savvy promoters may increase fan base for a while but the novelty often wears off. "OG" fans start becoming alienated as too many traditions are lost. Sanctioning body is focused on maximizing revenue and keeping the super-teams/stars happy.

9. Decline -- lack of innovation, barriers to grassroots entry, and too much stagnation starts killing the sport.

Just name a type of racing and I can show how this "cycle" has occurred.

TWS's third take:

Quote from: Brian Lohnes on July 28, 2009, 11:19:56 AM
"Swamp Buggies and LSR.

You're 100% right on your cycle for any truly popular form of racing though. The niche stuff can maintain it's purity as there is minimal commerical investment.

Money corrupts all."



That's what my boss says every time I ask for a raise . . . .

And if Diamond P's American Sports Cavalcade would have just covered the Swampers a little more (or Sumner Redstone not bought The Nashville Network from the Gaylord family and turned the TNN cable channel into "Spike") maybe even the buggies would have gotten past stage 3 . . . .

It also could be that nearly all forms of "clock racing" (e.g. autocross, LSR, hill climbs, and other non-side-by-side forms) are exceptions to the "cycle" because they never become commercially viable or have such diversity and decentralization that sportsmen never have to directly compete with the stars or the factories.

On the other hand, some fairly unpopular forms of racing (judging from the number of fans in the seats, the TV ratings, and the magazine ink) are definitely subject to the "cycle" (i.e. many forms of sports car racing; dirt oval track racing).

TWS's fourth take:

Quote from: Brian Lohnes on July 28, 2009, 04:31:16 PM
"Speed, my personal hero is EJ Potter. Not sure if you know of or about him, but if not google him up. A great empirical thinker and a truly neat guy.

Potter came up with an idea for what he saw as the perfect form of automotive competition a few years ago and it was published here. It's a neat read. Potter saw this form of competition as being immune from the corruption of purpose (hell I'm starting to sound like you) that big money brings to racing.

This is one of my favorite things to read every now and again. EJ's a very neat guy and I've had the pleasure of talking t to him several times.


Check it out...

Part 1 -- http://www.draglist.com/artman/publish/daily_stories/article_1030.shtml
Part 2 -- http://www.draglist.com/artman/publish/daily_stories/article_1031.shtml


Brian"

We've certainly drifted off-topic a bit . . . .

Yeah, I'm old enough to remember E.J. Potter and his crazy SBC Harley. He's a legend.

But his idea, of course, has been "corrupted" (i.e. Engine Masters Challenge http://www.popularhotrodding.com/enginemasters/dynopulls/index.html)

Potter admits that much of the motivations for competitive hot rodding are "showing off" (excluding, of course, hot rodding's private gratification and entertainment effects -- to which Warren Oates's G.T.O. in "Two-Lane Blacktop" erroneously alleged -- without any actual experience -- that "Those satisfactions are permanent" (They're not, as the legion of "for sale" vehicles at any Goodguys or NSRA event or collector car auction can demonstrate))

"Showing off" requires somebody to watch and lawful venues for the contest. By eliminating uninvolved spectators and promoters/track owners as mostly superfluous, Potter's plan deprives hot rodders of much of the "fuel" and "air" for "showing off." Back before NASCAR, a couple of bootleggers racing their 'shine haulers on an improvised oval in pasture somewhere simply didn't stroke the egos of the "show offs" enough. Besides, racing, like most "masculine" competitions, really boils down to attracting girls and besting rivals for the "best" girls. Thus, "showing off" in relative obscurity doesn't really cut it.

Certainly You Tube and the internet allow for "virtual" spectators and clandestine (often illegal) locations. But a better solution would be for the development of public access "speed parks" that are not dependent upon the "big event/full grandstand/broadcast TV" model for financing.

Of course (back on topic) Mayfield is may soon learn about the dissatisfactory nature of having to "show off" in obscurity . . . .

5. New York Times says muscle cars are bad

TWS's take:

Quote from: Schtauffer on Today at 07:37:52 AM

"Someone from the city of New York writing an editorial about which cars everyone else should like-- that sounds like a vegan saying what kind of meat tastes good."

Do we really expect people who travel by taxi, "black car service" and subway to understand anything about motoring or motorsports or automotive freedom?

Global warming has taken on the elements of a quasi-religion in the toney echo-chambers of the elites. (http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Global+warming+religion+First+World+urban+elites/1835847/story.html) The NYT editorial merely reflects what's being said in some of the exclusive coastal coctail circuits, where "climate change" assumptions are elements of "faith."

On the other hand, back in the '50s and '60s, the appliance motorists and the mainstream press were often campaigning against the "evils" of speed, racing, muscle cars and hot rods, so what's really new here?

Tom McCahill put it best in 1966, when somebody wrote into Mechanix Illustrated to ask why Detroit was downplaying horsepower and playing up cubic inch displacement. "Horsepower" was then the safety/environmental/Insurance lobby's whipping boy. Paraphrasing from memory, McCahill opined that even the next-to-dumbest kid on-the-block could make comparisons on basis of cubic inches, but that the dumbest kids were in the Senate and Detroit was hoping that they wouldn't be able to figure it out . . . .

And why should we be surprised that they're using 1980 as a benchmark. That's what the environmental bureaueaucrats and policymakers have been doing for a while now. (See http://speedzzter.blogspot.com/2007/04/epa-hack-back-to-dismal-70s-again.html ; http://speedzzter.blogspot.com/2007/07/pee-eewww-liberal-pew-campaign-spews.html ; http://speedzzter.blogspot.com/2008/04/whackos-click-and-clacks-tm-earth-day.html)

5. Formula One: Massa's injury and Renault's suspension

TWS's take:

A Brawn launches a part that nearly killed Massa (and most likely has ended his career) and no suspension, but Renault muffs a tire change, no one gets hurt, but Renault is suspended.

Logical?

On the other hand, the stewards claim that Renault knowingly released Alonso's car without the wheel nut retainer in place, and then didn't even tell him when he complained of tire trouble just before the wheel launched.

And the suspension was in the wake of the death of Henry Surtees, who was killed by a loose wheel while competing in a Formula Two event at Brands Hatch.

I also seem to remember somebody saying on the Fox/Speed broadcast that this was not the first time that Alonzo's Renault had a problem like this.

Any wonder why French cars aren't sold here anymore . . . .

7. Pending loss of "Old" GM and Chrysler archival documents

TWS's take:

Thousands of V8s lost to "Cash for Clunkers" and now this.

This sacking of MoTown's history is like watching the decline and fall of the Roman Empire.

These historic documents ought to be donated to an archive. If the Government owns them, then the Smithsonian seems a logical choice. Or maybe the LeMay or National Automobile Museum or AACA.

Some of these employees may actually be enthusiasts who will preserve the documents better than the factories would have, though.