Ford Lagging Behind GM, Chrysler and Toyota in NASCAR

[Mark B. Morrow]

And IROC is officially dead. They are selling off all the assets as we speak (type).

Me too. The beginning of the end was when 1984, when Chevy was having a real hard time selling the Monte Carlo and winning. So they got Nascar to approved an oversized rear window, which became known as the MC aero coupe. That broke the homologation rules Nascar had had as Chevy never produced any for production. Then Chevy wanted to use the Lumina in '89 (FWD) that killed off any resemblance to "stock car" in their name .

 

I immediately lost all interest.

 

RaZor, Chevy did make a street version of the Monte Carlo Aerocoupe in '86-'87. I had a friend who had one at the time. The trunk lid was shortened to accomodate the long rear window and the trunk was pretty much useless since it opened like a mail slot. Pontiac had a Grand Prix version as well. They are quite rare these days. I still see a Monte Carlo version once in a while. The '83-'87 T-Birds were very slick compared to the competition at the time. Nascar really lost it when they went to FWD bodies for the templates like 4 door Taurus', Lumina etc. At that point there was nothing left of Stock Car Racing.

 

I still love the classic Nascar years of the '50s and '60s.

[mackinaw]

Being in my mid-50s', I can recall a time when Nascar raced real STOCK cars. I remember seeing a race back in 1964 or 1965, at Atlanta, where the winning car was a Mercury Marauder with a 427 dual-quad engine making 425 HP. I think that Darel Derringer was the driver. I lost interest in current Nascar once Fox took over the broadcasting.

[Edstock]

Nascar really lost it when they went to FWD bodies for the templates like 4 door Taurus', Lumina etc. At that point there was nothing left of Stock Car Racing.

 

Right on.

 

And it was such an insult to all the creative mechanics and builders that made NASCAR what it was.

 

When FWD hit, if the France gang had any imagination, they could have had hi-po FWD cars, and then AWD. But they didn't even try.

[syrtran]

Note - I'm not much of a NASCAR fan - I prefer ALMS and Rolex, then IndyCar/Champcar - but I usually try to catch at least the beginning and end of Daytona, and at least one of the Bristol races.

 

"After Ford’s dismal showing during Speedweeks at Daytona, it’s time for a Ford driver to stand up and make something happen. "

 

Hey, Ford wasn't even a factor at Daytona. Doesn't Ford know winning NASCAR races sells cars? You would have thought they already knew that, wouldn't you?

Yeah. It's too bad Greg Biffle (and his Ford) wasn't in the top 10 for most of the last 20 laps... Oh, wait! Yes he was!. In fact, he was in third place with 1 lap to go and only dropped to 10 because he was caught out by the fight between the Penske and Gibbs teams.

 

"What wins on Sunday, sells on Monday" may be an old saying but what wins on Sunday builds your brand.

Car brand hasn't mattered in NASCAR for at least 10 years, more like 20. If you look at the merchandise, most of it is centered around either the driver or the team. There's very little promotion of the makes.

 

Dodge comes in 1 and 2 and Nardelli goes into the garage and gives Newman a million dollar check while all 9 Ford drivers came in where?

 

Watch out for Toyota. They had more HP than anyone at Daytona and if you think Tony Stewart, Kyle Busch and Dave Blaney won't win a race this year, think again.

If you think a "Chevy" or "Ford" driver won't win a race this year, think again. The cars are now a spec formula. They're too closely matched.

 

@SVT_Man

No proof of this, but, at about the 150 lap mark I got a feeling that Newman was going to win. While the Hendricks and Gibbs cars were going back-and-forth for the lead, Newman stayed consistent and in the thick of it, and easily got back in the thick of it after cautions. So did Biffle, for the most part, but he seemed to need the draft more than Newman did.

[mlhm5]

I see you completely ignored this post from earlier in the thread.

 

 

"The old adage has always been: Win on Sunday, sell on Monday," said Terry Dolan, manager of racing for GM's Chevrolet brand.

 

"The No. 1 vehicle of choice of NASCAR fans is the full-size pickup and the highest volume vehicle at General Motors is the Chevrolet Silverado, so you can see a nice correlation between our bread-and-butter vehicle and the fan base of the sport," he added.

 

GM said its U.S. market share hovers in the mid-20 percent range, but jumps to more than 40 percent among NASCAR fans, while Ford found consideration for its products was more than 100 percent higher among race fans.

 

Chrysler research shows NASCAR fans buy Dodge vehicles at a rate 30 percent higher than the general population.

 

"NASCAR fans have a propensity to buy domestic automobiles," says Chrysler's Accavitti. "Is it because we're in racing that they buy us? I can only look at the facts.""

[TomServo92]

"The old adage has always been: Win on Sunday, sell on Monday," said Terry Dolan, manager of racing for GM's Chevrolet brand.

 

"The No. 1 vehicle of choice of NASCAR fans is the full-size pickup and the highest volume vehicle at General Motors is the Chevrolet Silverado, so you can see a nice correlation between our bread-and-butter vehicle and the fan base of the sport," he added.

 

GM said its U.S. market share hovers in the mid-20 percent range, but jumps to more than 40 percent among NASCAR fans, while Ford found consideration for its products was more than 100 percent higher among race fans.

 

Chrysler research shows NASCAR fans buy Dodge vehicles at a rate 30 percent higher than the general population.

 

"NASCAR fans have a propensity to buy domestic automobiles," says Chrysler's Accavitti. "Is it because we're in racing that they buy us? I can only look at the facts.""

 

The men you quoted are PR types whose job is to present positive spin. Do you really believe they would say anything else?

 

Also, I'll repost part of my original quote from the article:

 

Jim Hossack, vice president of industry forecaster Auto Pacific, said when his firm asks consumers what they consider important when choosing a car, auto racing is near the bottom.

 

"Virtually no one says it's important. It's tiny, maybe 1 percent. You may get something out of it, but I'm not sure it's a whole lot," he said, adding that the impact may be greater among hard-core NASCAR fans.

 

You still haven't posted anything worthwile in this forum.

[mlhm5]

The men you quoted are PR types whose job is to present positive spin. Do you really believe they would say anything else?

 

Also, I'll repost part of my original quote from the article:

You still haven't posted anything worthwile in this forum.

 

You believe the spokesmen from Ford, GM and Chrysler lied about easily sourced statistics to the national press?

 

Worthwhile was misspelled.

Edited February 22, 2008 by mlhm5

[Mark B. Morrow]

Being in my mid-50s', I can recall a time when Nascar raced real STOCK cars. I remember seeing a race back in 1964 or 1965, at Atlanta, where the winning car was a Mercury Marauder with a 427 dual-quad engine making 425 HP. I think that Darel Derringer was the driver. I lost interest in current Nascar once Fox took over the broadcasting.

 

 

I have posted these before but they are appropriate.

 

Ned Jarrett's '64 Galaxie

[TomServo92]

You believe the spokesmen from Ford, GM and Chrysler lied about easily sourced statistics to the national press?

 

I can only describe your life as ignorance in action.

 

Ok, from those numbers you quoted, tell me exactly how many actual sales NASCAR generates for GM & Chrysler?

 

 

 

 

 

Waiting...

 

 

 

 

 

Waiting...

 

 

 

 

 

Didn't think so. Those are meaningless stats that they're throwing out to create positive spin. There's a reason they don't tell you the actual bottom-line.

 

Again, your opinions are worthless.

 

Which explains why your opinion of me means so little....

Edited February 22, 2008 by TomServo92

[TomServo92]

You believe the spokesmen from Ford, GM and Chrysler lied about easily sourced statistics to the national press?

 

Worthwhile was misspelled.

 

OH NOES!!!! I forget to press the "H" key! :rolleyes:

 

Is that all you got?

[P71_CrownVic]

Here's a real RWD Fusion Ford might want to consider:

WAY too nice for Ford NA.

[Ford??-LOL!]

Nascar hasnt been a factor ever.

 

 

I fixed it for you!

 

Ring-a-ding-do.

 

Nascar is a joke.

 

 

I couldn't agree more!!

 

Yea, NASCAR is so boring.....nothing like left turns all day. FUCK THE RIGHT TURN!!!!

 

Yep!! Retarded way of "racing"!!

[TomServo92]

The decline of NASCAR:

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_spo...he_decline.html

 

http://www.autoracingdaily.com/article/nas...-in-tv-ratings/

 

http://www.speedwaymedia.com/Articles/08/021408staff.asp

 

http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/...0/-1/sports0301

[630land]

not too many truly care anyway. The cars are fake, fake, fake, and big f-in deal. Ford should pull out of the mess and take a stand.

[ANTAUS]

Ok so I didnt click on to read this thread, because I've never really cared for Nascar, I sort of it see it as "TPT" (Trailor Park Trash) amusement...I give it some days, and notice that it's about 4 pages long, so I read the first few posts, and others thing it's irrelevant as well, and a joke, yet...we have 4 pages going on this topic ?

[BigBadBflo]

There were production Monte Carlos in the 80's with the bubble rear window. A son of th eowner of my mother's work back then had one and went on and on about how it made the car faster for NASCAR and was limited prodcution. It also had a remote start he was very proud of. I was only 10 but can easily recall that type of boastful behavior.

 

I liked NASCAR around that time because I was raised a Ford Man and enjoyed watching the Aero T-birds battle it out against the Montes that got the aero front end and rear window. It was cool to watch production cars change to meet the racing requirements. Once the Limuna FWD came into play I lost 50% of my interest, and when the FWD Taurus replaced the T-bird I never turned it on again since. No interest in watching a bunch of kit cars with stickers going in a cirle. I wish Ford would be the smart one and just pull out.

 

Now Moto-GP....there is a race and sell. Watch the race over the weekend and then walk into the Yamaha/SuzukiKawasaki dealership on Monday and buy pretty much the same 185mph piece of machinery

[IMSA-XJR9]

WAY too nice for Ford NA.

 

And as much as I LOVE the Aussie Supercars Ford still uses a OHV engine, and not the mod-motor for their cars. So . . . mostly stock sans (moreso than NASCAR) engine.

 

Also ran across this from 2007 . .

 

Ford considers its future in V8 supercars

http://blogs.drive.com.au/2007/05/ford_con...uture_in_v.html

[SVT_MAN]

not too many truly care anyway. The cars are fake, fake, fake, and big f-in deal. Ford should pull out of the mess and take a stand.

 

What I find ironic about all of this is how people flippantly argue that Ford's presence in NASCAR doesn't matter, yet, in other, smaller markets, people say Ford should be investing more dollars and that Ford is discriminating if they don't invest money in particular markets.

 

So basically, what you are saying is that Ford shouldn't invest in NASCAR lifestyle fans, where fans actually care about cars. NASCAR, by conservative estimates has 75 million fans world-wide, and at least 18 million die-hard fans in the United States alone. Typical Daytona ratings are in the neighborhood of 34 million viewers. We should apparently let every NASCAR fan out there simply have no choice but to follow Chevy, Dodge, or Toyota. Good call.

 

On the other hand, many here have argued that Ford should continue marketing to GLBT, which according to census data, accounts for almost 2 million people in the United States (couldn't find wordwide data - but 2 million is probably high given research) ..

 

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:doBfe...cd=38&gl=us

 

Automobile industry is about selling vehicles and Ford's internal research data pegs that people who watch NASCAR are 100% more likely to buy a Ford than other markets ... can you say that about the GBT community? Probably not. Even if you could, it's a small market comparatively.

Edited February 22, 2008 by SVT_MAN

[Michael Reynolds]

Whoa, whoa....

 

Who said anything about Ford not spending any money in NASCAR. I think it's fairly obvious that Ford isn't going anywhere.

 

Second of all, how much money does Ford invest in NASCAR vs. the GLBT community? Donations here and there in conjunction with additional advertising, more than likely doesn't add up to much.

 

If NASCAR is such a help then maybe Honda is totally missing the mark by not having a stickered up Accord in there somewhere. Yet, they manage to sell how many more Accords v. the Fusion which has an entry in NASCAR. NASCAR has been such a success for GM that the Monte Carlo is no longer being made.

 

So come again?

Edited February 22, 2008 by Michael Reynolds

[TomServo92]

What I find ironic about all of this is how people flippantly argue that Ford's presence in NASCAR doesn't matter, yet, in other, smaller markets, people say Ford should be investing more dollars and that Ford is discriminating if they don't invest money in particular markets.

 

So basically, what you are saying is that Ford shouldn't invest in NASCAR lifestyle fans, where fans actually care about cars. NASCAR, by conservative estimates has 75 million fans world-wide, and at least 18 million die-hard fans in the United States alone. Typical Daytona ratings are in the neighborhood of 34 million viewers. We should apparently let every NASCAR fan out there simply have no choice but to follow Chevy, Dodge, or Toyota. Good call.

 

On the other hand, many here have argued that Ford should continue marketing to GLBT, which according to census data, accounts for almost 2 million people in the United States (couldn't find wordwide data - but 2 million is probably high given research) ..

 

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:doBfe...cd=38&gl=us

 

Automobile industry is about selling vehicles and Ford's internal research data pegs that people who watch NASCAR are 100% more likely to buy a Ford than other markets ... can you say that about the GBT community? Probably not. Even if you could, it's a small market comparatively.

 

I haven't watched a NASCAR race in over a decade. My issue with it is that it mutated into more of a spec racing series. While the cars stopped being true stock cars in the 70s, they at least maintained bodies that actually resembled their production counterparts. For instance, this:

 

 

Looks a helluva lot like the '85 T-bird you could buy in the showroom. On the other hand, this:

 

 

looks pretty much like this:

 

 

which looks pretty much like this:

 

 

and none of them look very much like their production counterparts.

 

If you took the brand, grill, and headlight stickers off, you'd be hard pressed to tell one from the other.

 

Currently, NASCAR is more about the drivers and the companies that sponsor them than the auto manufacturers. I wouldn't be surprised if NASCAR mandates a spec engine in the near future, removing manufacturers from the equation all together.

Edited February 22, 2008 by TomServo92

[IMSA-XJR9]

I haven't watched a NASCAR race in over a decade. My issue with it is that it mutated into more of a spec racing series. While the cars stopped being true stock cars in the 70s, they at least maintained bodies that actually resembled their production counterparts. For instance, this:

 

 

Looks a helluva lot like the '85 T-bird you could buy in the showroom. On the other hand, this:

 

 

looks pretty much like this:

 

 

which looks pretty much like this:

 

 

and none of them look very much like their production counterparts.

 

If you took the brand, grill, and headlight stickers off, you'd be hard pressed to tell one from the other.

 

Currently, NASCAR is more about the drivers and the companies that sponsor them than the auto manufacturers. I wouldn't be surprised if NASCAR mandates a spec engine in the near future, removing manufacturers from the equation all together.

 

Agree 100%

[SVT_MAN]

Whoa, whoa....

 

Who said anything about Ford not spending any money in NASCAR. I think it's fairly obvious that Ford isn't going anywhere.

 

Second of all, how much money does Ford invest in NASCAR vs. the GLBT community? Donations here and there in conjunction with additional advertising, more than likely doesn't add up to much.

 

If NASCAR is such a help then maybe Honda is totally missing the mark by not having a stickered up Accord in there somewhere. Yet, they manage to sell how many more Accords v. the Fusion which has an entry in NASCAR. NASCAR has been such a success for GM that the Monte Carlo is no longer being made.

 

So come again?

 

If you've ever watched NASCAR, which you probably haven't judging by your post, Ford hardly EVER advertises the Fusion during the races. It is always the F-150 pretty much. I have seen the Fusion advertised maybe 3 or 4 times during the entire season last year, whereas the F-150 is advertised almost constantly.

 

Furthermore, Toyoyta is using the same strategy. They never EVER advertise their Camry during the race. It is always the Tundra. Tundra this. Tundra that. Toyota even admits that they used the Daytona 500 as a platform for the Tunda.

 

Let's be honest: Most NASCAR fans own or buy trucks because it's part of their lifestyle.

 

It isn't about marketing the vehicle on the track. It's about getting your nameplate out there in the public eye. Honda doesn't need to join NASCAR to get people to drive their Accord. It's already a proven seller. If Honda ever decided to sell a full size V8 powered truck (please don't Honda, you've never built a V8), they would probably join NASCAR too.

 

Toyota is a marketing juggernaut. Everybody knows that. They don't do things by accident.

 

 

I agree with you Tom. Those 80s T-birds were great examples of how a car can still look like what is raced on the street. I wish NASCAR still did that, but no .. parity. Kinda stupid really.

Edited February 22, 2008 by SVT_MAN

[Edstock]

Headlight stickers.

[Michael Reynolds]

Oh, I've watched NASCAR races before. I don't follow it, but I will check them out from time to time.

 

You're missing the point though. Consumers already know what the F-150 is all about, if Ford vaguely advertised those trucks I doubt it would have the impact that you've alluded to. Ditto that with the Tundra. Everyone already knows that Ford can build a truck, heck most import buyers know that. This isn't about selling a truck, it's about getting car operations in line with the best of the market and getting a piece of the almost 1.4 million (Camry/Accord/Corolla/Civic) sales that Ford is missing out on.

 

Don't get me wrong, again I am not advocating that Ford pull out or half ass it with NASCAR. What I am saying is the supposed impact isn't anywhere near what some are trying to make it out to be. Classic blueovalforums sky is falling syndrome, per the usual.

 

I also wouldn't be too quick to call Toyota's entry into NASCAR a success....

Edited February 22, 2008 by Michael Reynolds

[Mark B. Morrow]

Headlight stickers.

 

 

From Cars:

 

Dusty Rust-eze: Thanks to you, Lightning, we had a banner year!

Rusty Rust-eze: I mean, we might even clear enough to buy you some headlights!

Dusty Rust-eze: Are you saying he doesn't have headlights?

Rusty Rust-eze: That's what I'm tellin' ya - it's just stickers!

Lightning McQueen: [bored] Well, you know, race cars don't need headlights, because the track is always lit.

Dusty Rust-eze: Well, so is my brother, but he still needs headlights!