During this years running of the Daytona 500, I had an old friend over that had never watched much NASCAR racing before. He was a Lite beer drinker, so his favorite driver immediately became Rusty Wallace. Rusty led most of the race, so before my buddy knew it, he was really getting into the race. It was a good race, with one of the most exciting endings in recent memory, and I am sure my friend will tune in to see more NASCAR racing in the future. Being a new follower, my friend had a few questions during the course of the race. Most of his questions were pretty easy to answer, but he had one that really got me. It was really an easy question, but one with a difficult answer. "How can you tell the Fords from the GM's?" "Well, Fords have the round rear windows." I started. "And the front ends look……" I was done for. I could see in his eyes that he wasn't buying it for a second.

So what are the differences? I realize that there are some technical differences in the aerodynamics, slightly differing deck lids and so on, but really to the naked eye, they look almost alike. Now take a factory Taurus, Monte Carlo and Grand Prix, line them up end to end and it is very easy to see the differences. Why should NASCAR be so different. Heck, I saw an article a year ago showing how none of the racing models come close to fitting the template of their street counterparts. So what happened to the "Stock" in stock car racing?

I saw Kenny Schrader and Johnny Benson briefly discuss common templates on Inside Winston Cup last night. They didn't really seem to want to elaborate on their thoughts, but it almost appeared as if Benson was in favor of all teams using NASCAR developed common templates with manufacturer trim and Schrader was more in favor of making the race cars actually fit the manufacturers template. Michael Waltrip seemed to be on the fence. That got me thinking. I really think it would be a mistake if NASCAR was to mandate a single template.

My reasons are simple. NASCAR is a sanctioning body, not an automobile manufacturer. It seems more and more that whenever a manufacturer or even a team gains an advantage on the track, NASCAR is there to change the rules to bring the cars back on an even keel and gain parity. If they want all the cars to be the same, why bother with manufacturers in the first place? Why not just provide the common template that it seems we are headed towards anyways. I'll tell you why. Money talks. Right now, the manufacturers are still putting a lot of money into the sport, clinging to the belief that what wins on Sunday, sells on Monday. Well, I don't buy into that theory. It may have been true 20, or maybe even 10 years ago, but the truth is, not many people care what type of car their favorite driver drives anymore, they are fans of the driver. Personally, I am a Ford fan, and as such I would like to see all the Fords finish ahead of all the GM's every race. That doesn't mean that I like all the Ford drivers or dislike all the GM drivers. As a matter of fact, I like several of the GM drivers a lot more than some of the Ford drivers. A GM has won something like all but one of the last 10 Daytona 500's and all of the driver championships since Alan Kulwicki; yet I feel no urge to trade my Fords for Chevy's. So what incentive do the manufacturers have to continue to develop strong race cars. Well part of it is probably because they can take some of the knowledge they gain on the tracks to the showrooms. Another part of it, and I suspect the biggest part of it, is pride. Ford wants to outdo GM and Chrysler wants to outdo both of them. NASCAR claims they want manufacturer involvement, yet when one of the manufacturers come out with a better product, NASCAR is right there to negate any advantage gained. The Taurus uproar and the delay of the new Monte Carlo are proof of that.

It's been said by a lot of fans that the races aren't as exciting as they used to be. There isn't as much passing, drivers tend to play follow the leader and rely on pit strategy to gain positions on the track. I tend to agree with that. NASCAR's answer has been to add and remove spoilers to make things more even. It is my opinion that is the reason things have become somewhat boring. It is sort of like IROC. All the cars are equal and the winner is the one that had the luck and the best friends that day. It has become that way in NASCAR. Every week, we have the same cast of characters up front. Martin, Burton and Jarrett's Fords, Gordon's Chevy and Labonte's Pontiac with a sprinkling of Wallace, Earnhardt, and the other Labonte. Is it a fluke that those teams have the most engineering help from their manufacturer? I don't think so. The more NASCAR makes changes to slow one or more of those teams down, the more the Elliotts, Rudds, Petty's and Marlin's become disadvantaged.

Johnny Benson seems to be in favor of a common NASCAR approved template with manufacturer race trim. I say turn your TV onto the race on Sunday. We already have it.