Hey All,
Panther It's ok to express an opinion. Sure it's probably wrong (J/K

) but at least we know what you think.
Wombat I refer to racing as a science from the perspective of using all the engineering/mechanical skills, management skills, people (CC, Driver, Pit Crew) strategy and tactics available to you under the rules to achieve your objective whether it's winning a race or a championship. It has nothing to do with whether or not the racing series uses the latest technology. So yes I do call it a science. In the case of the TdF the use of radios to inform riders of the time ahead or behind their main competition is is part of a scientific approach.
So I take it your favorite era of NASCAR is basically the 80s and 90s - basically post Richard Petty during the time of Earnhardt Sr, Darrel Waltrip, Terry LaBonte, Neil Bonnett (I can never think of Sr without thinking of Neil as well), Bobby Allison, Davey Allison, Cale Yarborough, Rusty Wallace, Bill Elliot, Tim Richmond, Harry Gant on into the 90s which brought in Jeff Gordon, Tony Stewart, Alan Kulwicki, Dale Jarrett to challenge Dale Sr. - basically those two decades were the era of Dale Earnhardt Sr. The cars basically did represent the companies they were meant to.
As I recall even during the 90s the issue of aero was coming to the forefront. I remember well the battles over how much advantage the nose of the chevys gave the chevy teams - all because of that little ledge. You can't stop science and progress and so there was never any doubt that NASCAR would have to make the car bodies aero equal - and they did/tried. Ignorance was bliss and science always takes away the magic. Those years were great though.
Anybody else with an opinion?
-Ed-