# What ever happened to real racing? **URL:** \ **Category:** Shift518 Automotive\ **Created:** [June 23, 2009, 2:09pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/what-ever-happened-to-real-racing/244977 "2009-06-23T14:09:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 45
**Author:** ![TurboTravis](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/turbotravis/32/6406_2.png) [@TurboTravis](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/TurboTravis)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2009, 9:25pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/what-ever-happened-to-real-racing/244977/45 "2009-06-24T21:25:30Z")
> [@Should i move?](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/should-i-move/19839/27): > > NASCAR has done tremendous things within their rules restrictions. The reliability of the motors run that long at that high of an rpm with those rules on capacity are remarkable. > > PJB’s point is that the RULES have limited them to 60s/70s technology (carbs, 4 speeds, etc) where other series have progressed with the times. F1 is using kinetic energy recovery systems and LeMans prototypes are running on ethanol. They are at the frontier of technology, NASCAR is stuck doing the best they can with the same stuff they’ve had for years. What they’ve done is impressive, just not relevant to the age we live in. Dirtbikes even have electronic FI now. > > I dont hate NASCAR nor is this post meant to insult them (in fact I complimented their accomplishments twice), but you’re still supposed to say “you’re superiority complex bla bla bla my penis” and we move on. No, I understand your point. Who cares about the carbs and 4 speeds though, really? Does that make the race any less, or more exciting to watch? I’m sure the cars are more reliable with a carb than if they had FI, plus the lack of technology can actually make the race more fun to watch, which should be all that matters to us at home. --- _[View the full topic](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/what-ever-happened-to-real-racing/244977)._