Posted by:

Some weeks ago, Brad Keselowski was "secretly" fined for speaking out on the new fuel injection technology, letting the "cat out of the bag" that this is to be far from modern, effective and efficient technology, but rather more like early 1980's throttle body.

I can think of two VALID reasons why NASCAR would take this path, however, each points out a serious,serious issue that this governing body has to face, and so far has failed to adequately address.

First issue.

NASCAR has not moved forward on technology issues because it has little or no knowledge on how to monitor and police the new "opportunities" it will present the crews to be creative. It is moving much slower than the industry, instead of leading development of innovations. For the manufacturers, this is a serious issue, as racing budgets could at one time be partially justified as funding product development. I do not propose that NASCAR become the technological equivalent of F1 racing, but in many regards, "amateur" leagues like SCCA are more advanced, as the utilize many of the street legal innovations. NASCAR needs to find and hire someone who can guide their technological advancement, and fast.

Second Issue.

NASCAR may be purposely holding back on new technology as it has yet to be able to govern a way to level the playing field for all teams. Any new major technology will add significant expense for teams to implement, and the superteams will come up with that funding first and biggest, thus widening the already significant gap between themselves and the second and third tier teams. Look at the sponsor issue with Bower this year: MWR offered up to field the team for a much lower price tag than RCR. Racing s now about horsepower per dollar.

I'm looking forward to the Grand Am series more and more.

December 29, 2011  06:55 AM ET

If this all ran together as one paragraph for you, check back later. Posted via my tablet. I will fix it

December 29, 2011  07:12 AM ET

If this all ran together as one paragraph for you, check back later. Posted via my tablet. I will fix it

It must be FN not me. sorry.

December 29, 2011  07:54 AM ET

It must be FN not me. sorry.

Looks good to me on my computer Pond.

December 29, 2011  09:10 AM ET

I agree a lot of the lack of technological change comes from and inability to police the new tech, and to even the playing field. The policing being the major factor, and the even playing field being the "public" reason.

NASCAR has a history of "innovation", heck it was what the sport is built from. But somewhere along the line "innovation" became the same word as "cheating" which in racing has become the equivalent of using steroids. if you look back in sports history it would not surprise me is the over-regulation (weekly rule changes) in NASCAR would correlate with the federal clampdown on steroid use in major sports. As if NASCAR were trying to keep Congress from putting a magnifying glass on the sport to eliminate "performance enhancers".

Apples and oranges when comparing NASCAR performance enhancers to steroids? Yes, but that doesn't mean it everyone see it the same way.

"Parity" is the public excuse NASCAR will most likely use if they are approached about the subject, mainly for the reasons Pond pointed out. But these days we have parity more then ever, and what does it give us? Boring races that are decided on pit road rather than on the racetrack. TV really made it a story this year by covering the "save me some fuel" conversations highlighted right after the last expected pitstop of the day.

And even with all of this parity we still have the same superteams with the big money winning a majority of the races. This year 4 teams who are not directly owned by one of the big 4.5 (HMS/SH, RCR, Roush, JGR, Penske - the .5) won races. Where is the parity in that? One win was based on dumb luck (Trevor Bayne), one on pit strategy (Regan Smith), one a roadcourse ringer (Marcus Ambrose), and only one being an arguably dominant car (Kasey Khane in a lame duck team). If anything parity is making the rich richer and the poor poorer.

December 29, 2011  10:44 AM ET

I think that the main issue with fuel injection for the powers that be in NASCAR is they can't regulate it as easy. It would be a simple matter to change the setting to increase horespower and change it back for inspections.

I'm not sure that going to an fi engine would bump the lesser teams out of the competition. Everyone is buying from a few engine makers anyway. It would probably make it more expensive, but the engine would have all of the technology on it when it came. The biggest thing would be getting the mechanics, crew chiefs, etc. up to speed on how to work on the engine. They'd probably have to hire a computer geek and call him a Fuel Injection Specialist or something.

It would be nice to see them take the next step and require that the teams run with the actual body specifications of the production car they supposedly represent. Make them actually look like something, not just a generic body with different stickers.

December 29, 2011  11:02 AM ET

I don't know a whole bunch about motors but, couldn't Nascar hand out the jets on raceday like they do with the restrictor plates?

December 29, 2011  11:37 AM ET

No matter what they do, Chad Knaus has already got the system figured out.

December 29, 2011  11:38 AM ET

It matters not what they do, Chad Knaus has got it all figured out already.

December 29, 2011  11:39 AM ET

OOOPS is it just me or has this site been acting wierd for the last few days.

December 29, 2011  11:40 AM ET

OOOPS is it just me or has this site been acting wierd for the last few days.

yes it has. morning everyone.

Comment #11 has been removed
December 29, 2011  12:57 PM ET

I had read that this involves more then just the top end for the change.Owners are finding out that the fuel tank, fuel lines, fuel pick up, and much more have to be changed for this new system.I'm with Burgh-Fan, do some cosmetic changes, Make them LOOK like the cars we drive before you try selling making them comparison to how they run.Good Late morning, Slept in!

Hadn't thought about the other necessary changes. NASCAR will probably just write up requirements in the rule book anyway so there won't be any room for "innovation".

December 29, 2011  01:37 PM ET

No matter what they do, Chad Knaus has already got the system figured out.

Thats the trufe, trufe

December 29, 2011  01:38 PM ET

OOOPS is it just me or has this site been acting wierd for the last few days.

Yes! See #1 and #2from this AM

December 29, 2011  01:43 PM ET

Here,s another thought on throttle body vs. True fuel injection: the computer control. The last time nascarchanged rules about computer control and fuel metering, all the more it could think of was to move the "ignition box" to on top of the dashboard in plain sight. See a trend here? They know the crew chiefs can outwit them, so have to dummy everything down to the level all the inspectors can handle.

Comment #16 has been removed
Comment #17 has been removed
December 29, 2011  03:12 PM ET

You think the control factor by NASCAR just moved up, another notch?

Will it ever go down?

December 29, 2011  03:37 PM ET

pondscum; I need a plumber! I have no problem with painting, flooring, electrical, etc., even ran the cable and wall mounted a TV in the Master Bath BUT I'm a very bad plumber!<no, I'm not talking about being older!> LOL

I can plumb, and in the end it,s all good, but I am slow as hell getting it done right

Comment #20 has been removed


Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.

Start Your Own Blog

Start Now

Truth & Rumors


  1. 1
    Kerr 'absolutely expects' Knicks offer
  2. 2
    Bryant headed back to Germany
  3. 3
    Shakeup looms for White Sox
  4. 4
    Yankees, Mets, Red Sox among Hanrahan hopefuls
  5. 5
    Lightning may be swept aside

SI Photos