Brian2by2 said:
See, thats just an opinion clearly expressed...and I respect that.
I can't stand watching Cart/F1/IRL/Le-Mans, etc for a few reasons:
A) all the cars look the same
B) there are few drivers that you can relate too...just a few superstars and they dominate the races and thats about it.
C) All the cars look the same
D) An elite few always seem to be the best.
E) The courses are hard to memorize, a wreck and the car is gone for good, and it's too scattered across the globe...plus its popularity (particularly and mostly in the US) is no where near what NASCAR has generated.
NASCAR is stock car racing...any driver can win. Ya, there's dominate drivers, but it comes down much more to overall team strategy.
Take Bristol for instance: Matt Kenseth had a shot at the win but he decided to go against his team and avoided pitting even though there was rumor of a caution for debris. He pit under caution and fell back a few positions more than he would have...(i don't understand...i always thought pitting on caution when everyone else pitted green flag was GOOD 
)
Anyways, NASCAR also has much more personable drivers and much bigger names in overall motorsports. I mean, how many CART/F1/IRL circuits consecutively bring 80,000-200,000 people per event? Every event is sold out in NASCAR...Can the open-wheels say the same?
Sorry, its just a matter of opinion. I like oval courses better than twisties, but thats just me. I like watching IRL live because the cars are wicked fast on them ovals and sound bad ass!!
By the way, those of you who don't really "enjoy" NASCAR...have you ever been a race?? I HIGHLY suggest it!! No open-wheel could ever compare to the roar of a 750hp carb'd engine! None-the-less 42 of them! 
I totally disagree with this....
A) Anyone who thinks a Ferrari looks like a Minardi does not look closely enough. I would argue that there is a greater difference between individual F1 cars than between "stock" cars. Remember, all stock cars have templates which restrict the bodywork dimensions. Oh, and yes, the NASCAR Taurus and Monte Carlo look just likt the models you can drive off the showroom floor.
B) Are you saying that you only relate to superstars? The biggest fan club in F1 is for Jos Verstappen, hardly a man who has a chance of getting a point, let alone winning.
C) Again
D) The elite few are the best because they work the hardest. While I am a Ferrari fan, and have been since the late 1970's, I can appreciate the fact that McLaren and Williams will always be winners because Ron Dennis and Frank Williams would rather have their eyes poked out, than to lose a race. They are totally driven to win.
E) The courses are not hard to memorize. If we were talking about the Old Nurburgring, with its 14 plus miles and 172 (I think) turns, then you might have been right. The current crop of courses have a good mix of fast and slow, left and RIGHT turns, although I would prefer fewer chicanes. F1 is run across the globe because its a world championship, not a regional series. This way you get a variety of conditions, extreme heat in maylasia, to the drenching "English sunshine". As for its popularity, F1 has a much bigger TV audience than NASCAR, by far. I agree that NASCAR is more popular than F1 in the States, then again, so is Anna Nicole Smith!
As for any driver having the ability to win, one must understand that F1 is a team sport. There is just as much competition to design and build the car, as there is to drive it. Thats why the Renault designer is being tempted to go to Toyota for $10 million a year. In NASCAR all the cars are generally equal, and when one make gets an advantage by working hard, NASCAR will reward their opposition with a new spoiler rule, or a bodywork adjustment of some kind. Kind of like rewarding the lazy. Also, NASCAR is far from a stock car. All the treams run basically the same tube frame with only the bodywork different. Oh, and how many rear wheel drive, carbureted Tauruses, Intrepids and Monte Carlos can you find in Ford, Dodge or Chevrolet dealers?
Finally, as a person who has seen a NASCAR race, the Pocono 500, the sound from just one F1 car is easily louder and more impressive than the entire pack of NASCARs. A Ferrari or BMW V10, screaming at 19,500 RPM, with the traction control cutting in and out, with the POP of a gear change in less than 15/1000ths of a second, with the carbon brake discs glowing firery orange in broad daylight is by far a more interesting and impressive sight. In Canada, the cars it 222 MPH at the fastest point, the slowest turn was taken at 40 MPH (oh and in the rain, the cars still were doing in excess of 200 MPH at the fastest point, while of course if it drizzles NASCAR hides in the garage).
For me, the basic difference lies in the idea that for F1, the car is an equally integral part of the show, while in NASCAR its all about the driver, and the car is merely there for the ride.
Finally, a NASCAR engine tops redlines at 9,000or so, the same as my old S2000, while an F1 engine IDLES at 7,000! I think the best comparison between NASCAR and F1 was made by the relative expressions on Juan Montoya and Jeff Gordon as they got out of each other's cars at Indy a few weeks ago. JPM was midly excited, saying that the car was heavy, and didn't brake very well, but that he enjoyed it. Gordon on the other hand was like a 17 year old kid who had just gotten the keys to a Ferrari, He was so excited and impressed!
), they specifically said that IRL hasn't yet confirmed road courses...just quoting SpeedVision...not calling you wrong.
