Year in Review: Car of Tomorrow
December 4, 2007 by Tim Zaegel
Filed under Racing
Heading into the 2007 NASCAR Nextel Cup season we were all subjected to quite a bit of hype about the “Car of Tomorrow” and the fact that the series would be piloting it in 16 races prior to running the full schedule in 2008. At first the only real criticism the COT received from the majority of people was the look of the car … people didn’t like the look of it, but in all seriousness, let me ask you all – aren’t most stock cars in racing somewhat goofy looking in general? Okay, well, that aside, as the season progressed, more and more people began falling off of the COT bandwagon for various reasons. They didn’t like the way the cars ran or they thought there were too many mechanical issues with the cars and so on and so forth. Well, I had personally never really developed much of an opinion on the Car of Tomorrow one way or the other, so it got me curious. I went back to look at a few key stats that I felt could be somewhat of a true measure of how the COT stacked up in comparison to the old model. I then took the average of those stats for the 16 COT races and compared them to the same races from last season, and here’s what I came up with:
Different Race Winners:
COT – 9
Old Car – 11
Average # of Different Race Leaders:
COT – 9.38
Old Car – 9.50
Average # of Cars to Finish on the Lead Lap:
COT – 21.06
Old Car – 19.88
Average # of Cars W/ DNF’s Caused By Accidents:
COT – 3.56
Old Car – 3.44
Average # of Cars w/ Engine / Mechanical Failures:
COT – 2.38
Old Car – 3.44
Average # of Cars w/ DNF’s or Finished 8+ Laps Down:
COT – 9.88
Old Car – 10.81
To me, in one way or another, these are very important stats, and as you can see, the COT stacked up very competitively in its first season, and I have to believe that it will continue to improve over the course of the next few seasons … especially once it gets a full Sprint Cup schedule under its belt and they run the preliminary COT races for the Nationwide Series next year. The COT has made a huge step toward bringing this sport to the parity that it needs to be at, and it should only get better with time. The conclusion I came to after compiling these statistics is the fact that NASCAR fans – much like many others around the world – have a nasty combination of feeling the need to bitch about something – anything – and just have a real lack of an appetite for change. The COT invaded their comfort zone, and so now it just can’t do anything right. Many people probably also attribute Hendrick Motorsports’ success this year to the Car of Tomorrow, and I’m sure that doesn’t help matters any. All I know is that before today, I was indifferent on the matter … now that I’ve laid the evidence out there for myself to see, I have to say that the Car of Tomorrow had a very successful debut season in 2007.
What do you guys think?
Car looks cool but I still think the splitter is going to eventually take away from allot of the bumping and rubbing as the corners and rods become issues with breaking off or cutting tires. Drivers will become weary of that. The spoiler with the old front end would have looked better.
I think it’s fairly evident that the new car will deter some of the bumping and rubbing for awhile. You have to remember, though, that one of the ultimate goals for this new model is to provide a safer ride for these drivers while still maintaining the great competition at the end of races. I think that they may not have achieved it in whole in the inaugral COT season, but it was a lot better than some of the more reason seasons in the old car. My favorite stat is the one that points out that the COT averaged only 2.38 mechanical failures of any kind that eliminated drivers from the 16 races that they ran the car. In those same 16 races last season, that average was 3.44 … yet, one of the main gripes about the car is mechanical failures.
The front end of the CoT actually held up better than anyone expected – as evidence look at the results of all the bump drafting at Talladega. Mechanical failures generally relate to powertrain and suspension issues – which are basically identical in both cars. Nice stats, but the sample of comparative races is probably too small for any real analysis.
Appreciate the feedback, Charlie (as always). The stats I compiled, though, were actually the 16 COT races run this year and the same 16 races in 2006. Comparing stats from Bristol to Daytona is obviously like comparing apples to oranges. I agree, though, that it’s nowhere near enough to put together a complete analysis of the COT, and it’s also still too early to give it a real grade, but I was impressed mostly by the fact that they didn’t have more issues in the debut season than what they did.
Well…I still think a trackfull of these cars looks a wee bit too generic for my taste, but you have to admit, that last-lap change-up at Daytona last week was a thrill, so there might be something to this CoT thing yet. (Did the Penske drivers break any splitter rods in that late maneuver?)
- Barrett
That last lap was definitely a thrill, and huge props to everyone that’s had a hand in developing the COT, because it’s not the first great finish we’ve seen thanks to the Car of Tomorrow. My big hangup right now, though, is how boring the first three quarters of many of these races are due to everyone still trying to figure out the car. That’ll pass with time, obviously, but still a bit frustrating.
I’m not sure about the splitter rods, but I don’t believe so.