F1 vs IMSA: Which event is better to watch live?
Going to a race should be a thrill. Whether you're a die-hard racing fan with a favorite team or a first-time gawker, a race should leave you wanting to return.
Not all experiences are the same; for most who attend a race, the first impression is lasting. Having attended both F1 and IMSA races, I found some distinct differences, and you might be surprised at what I discovered.
F1 cars are built to go insanely fast and are incredibly nimble. There are 10 teams, with Cadillac set to be the 11th next season. Like all racing, F1 cars are held to strict standards for performance and specifications. For most, an F1 car is the quintessential race car.
IMSA has many classes, depending on the series. Its main series, the WeatherTech Sportscar Championship, has four classes: Grand Touring Prototype (GTP), Le Mans Prototype 2 (LMP2), GT Daytona Pro (GTD Pro), and GT Daytona (GTD).
Within IMSA, you'll see Mazda MX-5 Miatas, Mustangs, BMWs, Porsche, and many more.An F1 car is nothing like any IMSA vehicle, and the events are also wildly different.
If you want to attend the next domestic F1 race, the Formula 1 crypto.com Miami Grand Prix, tickets start at an eye-watering $975. This earns you an entry to the event and a grandstand seat.
That's it, that's the tweet, kids. Almost a grand, and you get an uncomfortable fold-down seat next to some strangers. Cool.
Tickets to the IMSA's Firestone Grand Prix at St. Petersburg start at $30. You aren't guaranteed a seat, but you will have grandstand access. If you want a guaranteed seat, single-day prices start at $105 for adults. A three-day pass with a guaranteed seat will run you $135-165. A 3-day pit pass will cost an extra $150.
If you balled out for the IMSA race, it would be $315. You could take two friends and still have $30 for a cheeseburger. (Seriously, concession prices are nuts, and cheeseburgers are now $30.)I want to be clear that I'm comparing the F1 Las Vegas Grand Prix to the Rolex 24 Hours at Daytona here. And F1 wins—sort of.
The F1 Las Vegas Grand Prix's on-site experience was top-notch. The main fan area had plenty of games, shops, and great food options.
Daytona's concessions and on-site shops were good, but it felt more like a carnival than an event. If you're there for a grittier racing experience, IMSA can't be beat, but more on that in a minute.
Most fans don't venture into the pits or paddock areas, so when it comes to on-site activities, F1 beats IMSA.
Fun fact: At one point late in the race, I found an empty pit area. It had been cleaned out, so I'm guessing a team had to withdraw early and just packed it all in overnight.
Since I had a pit pass, I could camp out in the pit and watch the race from there. There were pit stops happening mere feet from my face. It was incredible.
Daytona had many spots to watch the race from, and the grandstands were also great. You could see the entire track from the stands.
F1 has been lackluster to watch live. In Las Vegas, you get snippets of cars zooming by, and that's about it. Not to mention that seeing the entire track is impossible from one vantage point.
Because IMSA allows fans more access, you have a better chance of seeing the race from various places.
At Daytona, you can walk through the paddock and on pit row. Just stay out of the way.
You won't get that kind of access at an F1 race. Paddocks are heavily restricted, and pit row is off-limits. IMSA races just offer far more access, and it's awesome.F1 Las Vegas, and all domestic F1 races, are full of pomp and circumstance. There are side events to check out, and a lot goes on at the race itself. The venues are typically nicer, too.
IMSA races don't have that energy. The race is the star. Sure, you can get a bite to eat, but even the nicest catered event we found on-site paled compared to F1.
This comparison is ultimately about racing culture. F1's culture is more European, where access is kept far from fans. IMSA's level of access is far more 'American' and trusts fans to respect teams in the paddock and pit areas.
IMSA team principles tell me that some European drivers have difficulty adjusting to the access fans have at IMSA races. They're just not used to it. The restrictions aren't an F1 thing; they're just a European cultural thing regarding racing.
Colloquially, I've noticed fans at F1 races are more frustrated by everything being pay-to-play. If you want access, you can get it, but it'll cost you.
IMSA may not be as fancy as F1, but its bang for your buck is impossible to beat.
Love reading Autoblog? Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get exclusive articles, insider insights, and the latest updates delivered right to your inbox. Click here to sign up now!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
Did Max Verstappen get off lightly? A poll. Plus, a fix for the Monaco GP
Prime Tire Newsletter | This is The Athletic's twice-weekly F1 newsletter. Sign up here to receive Prime Tire directly in your inbox on Tuesday and Friday. Welcome back to Prime Tire, where we're basking in the glow of our largest ever response to a poll on this newsletter. Or so Patrick tells me, at any rate. We could already see in our numbers on The Athletic pretty much instantly after the Spanish Grand Prix that interest in Max Verstappen's latest controversy was high, so on Tuesday, we offered our PT subscribers the chance to have their say on the fallout. The results are in, and they make for tough reading for both Verstappen and FIA officials. I'm Alex, and Madeline Coleman will be along later. Our survey asked if Verstappen's 10-second penalty for colliding with George Russell late in Barcelona, which, with the Dutchman's non-apology apology a day later, all but confirmed was a deliberate move, was an appropriate sanction. There were three options to vote — in agreement, that it was too lenient, or too harsh. Advertisement All told, 93.4 percent of you were in agreement that Verstappen's move merited a penalty, with the other 6.6 percent feeling his sanction was actually too harsh. But the bigger story is that 81.4 percent of those who thought Verstappen deserved a penalty felt the 10-second penalty didn't go far enough. In our request to explain your votes, the words 'disqualified,' 'black flag,' and 'ban' came up repeatedly. Here's a selection of that feedback: Given Verstappen will be on the verge of a race ban until after the next two races, this topic isn't going to go away any time soon. And if something similar occurs again, as one high-profile paddock figure told me this week, a precedent has now been firmly set. And now, to something else that has been much discussed in recent weeks. Please bear with me, but I needed to get this out there before the F1 Commission discusses the failed Monaco-specific race rules at its next meeting. Luke Smith recently revealed that this is scheduled for the gap between July's upcoming Silverstone and Spa races. Obviously, the team principal and senior officials who make up that panel are readers. (Ed. note: Unlikely.) Anyway, while listening to an episode of The Race's excellent 'Bring Back V10s' podcast on the 1993 Monaco Grand Prix, the moment where Gerhard Berger dived into the pits and transformed his race got me thinking. That all came from the then-Ferrari driver changing tires and going on a charge that took Berger past his teammate, Jean Alesi, and into a podium fight in the race, where the win eventually went to Ayrton Senna — before he tangled with Williams driver Damon Hill and retired. And this is how I think F1 can resolve its Racing Bulls and Williams-botched Monaco-specific racing rules. Here goes: My thinking (yes, there was some) is that this approach would increase the likelihood of pitstop shambles (a la Red Bull in the 2016 Monaco GP) and also makes things (slightly) more meritocratic. I can't deny it's contrived, but it's basically a more sporting version of the chicane-cutting joker lap George Russell suggested the drivers take anyway, as it would get them out of traffic twice in the race and mean they're potentially pushing to overtake rivals via the pits. Stefano Domenicali, Mohammed Ben Sulayem — I'm available for your call to discuss implementing this at any time. Earlier this week, the Cadillac Formula 1 Team announced its first official partnership: Tommy Hilfiger. The iconic New York fashion house's F1 ties date back to the 1990s, when it sponsored Team Lotus. What may surprise some F1 fans is that Lawrence Stroll, now the owner of Aston Martin's F1 team, helped bring the American designer to the pinnacle of motorsport. From there, Hilfiger's involvement in the space grew, launching a motorsports-inspired capsule collection with Team Lotus' colors in 1994 and later becoming Ferrari's clothing sponsor in 1998. Advertisement The brand's most recent involvement in F1 was a partnership with Mercedes' F1 team (which ended in 2024) and F1 Academy. Hilfiger currently supports Alba Larsen (above, left, Tommy Hilfiger) in the all-women's racing series. It has also put its name into the upcoming F1 movie and launched The APXGP Collection this week, the same day the Cadillac partnership was announced. Plenty of buzz surrounded Cadillac since it received approval to be the 11th team on the grid next year, particularly as rumors brew about its driver lineup. One thing that the team has made clear is that it will be an American team, operating under an American license, and this multiyear partnership with Tommy Hilfiger, as Cadillac's apparel partner and lifestyle sponsor, only strengthens those ties. 'Tommy Hilfiger is an American original, and we're proud to welcome them as our first official partner,'' said Dan Towriss, CEO of Cadillac Formula 1 Team, in the announcement. 'This collaboration represents the fusion of two bold, innovative brands — where performance meets iconic style. As we build a team that reflects American ambition on the global F1 stage, this partnership sets the tone for what's ahead.' While Hilfiger is a well-known name within the F1 world, what jumped out to me during my conversation with Cadillac team principal Graeme Lowdon during the Miami GP weekend last month is that there are a number of brands interested in partnering with the new squad. They're both well-known organizations, and 'a lot that are new to Formula One, so that suggests that we're offering something new' – per Lowdon. 'What will happen to the grass?' This was, naturally, the first question we asked when the news that a Red Bull F1 car had been pitched (SEE WHAT I DID THERE??) into a race against three Leeds United players at their Elland Road stadium. Well, it turns out, very little. The RB7, driven by Red Bull junior driver and Formula Two racer Arvid Lindblad, skipped between the penalty areas — bar some start wheelspin that would put Lando Norris to shame, and needing a very wide, slow, turning circle at half distance. Advertisement But it didn't churn up the turf, which probably had plenty to do with its 640kg weight. Red Bull's 2025 car should be operating at the current minimum weight of 800kg — a 20 percent difference that might've got Lindblad mired in mud and in serious trouble with the Leeds ground staff. Car weight is quite the topic in F1 given a small step to get back towards nimble car designs is coming in the 2026 rules reset. But a full return towards the near 20-year stretch, cars weighed around 600kg from the early 1990s until the early 2010s, with the new target weight set at 768kg, this is not. Lindblad won the day, but Red Bull's press release announcing the race suggested there's more content (shudder) to come on its social media channels in the form of an agility test and some sort of penalty shootout. Something tells me the footballers, soccer players (they absolutely made me change this!) will indeed get their revenge. Our Leeds United correspondent, Beren Cross, has all the details on how this challenge came about at the 2024 British Grand Prix, with Red Bull a Leeds sponsor. But this is far from the first time Red Bull has arranged such a cross-sport stunt. Back in 2016, then Red Bull ace Daniel Ricciardo used an RB8 to scrum down with the forwards from Bath's premiership rugby squad (above). No formal winner of the challenge was revealed (the video ending with Ricciardo using a rugby ball to abuse a drone, of course). But it highlights how Red Bull uses its late V8 era cars for most of its F1 show runs — the RB7 and RB8, the cars that took Sebastian Vettel to his final two titles with the team in 2011 and 2012. This has much to do with how the hybrid-engined cars from 2014 onwards rarely leave any F1 factories due to the complexities of their power units. Oh, and Lindblad has been in the headlines plenty this week, as Red Bull's longstanding request for the 17-year-old to get an early F1 super license will be adjudicated by the FIA this month. Verstappen could be banned, and a hole might temporarily appear in the Red Bull/Racing Bulls driver stable. 🇨🇦 Lance Stroll looks set to race in Montreal after his Spain injury DNS — according to this report. Luke explained what happened with the Aston Martin driver in Barcelona in our regular post-race mailbag feature with Madeline this week. 🤝 Lewis Hamilton met UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer in 10 Downing Street on Wednesday (side note — my birthday, spent largely eating Tacos in Peckham). They discussed education reform and Hamilton's Mission 44 charity initiative. Advertisement ‼️ Red Bull will give Yuki Tsunoda the time it denied to Liam Lawson, according to this story on F1's official website. This is after his disastrous Spanish GP weekend and seven-point haul since leaving Racing Bulls (Verstappen has scored 101 in the same seven-race stretch). 📫 Love Prime Tire? Check out The Athletic's other newsletters.
Motor 1
3 hours ago
- Motor 1
Why Carbon-Ceramic Brakes Are Expensive. And Why They Might Be Worth It
A couple of years ago, a Brembo engineer told me something that stuck: If you buy a car with carbon-ceramic brakes, you'll likely never need to replace the rotors. I'd heard the benefits of carbon-ceramic brakes talked up before, but this particularly bold claim seemed wild, an answer to the ultimate question: Are these fancy brakes worth their huge price tag? On the Cadillac CT5-V Blackwing, the carbon-ceramics are a $9,000 option; BMW charges $8,500; Porsche charges more than $9,000. Carbon-ceramic brakes are routinely among the priciest options for cars that already have a lot of big-ticket extras. Is there any world in which they're worth it? Welcome to The Rabbit Hole, a bi-weekly column where Senior Editor Chris Perkins explores his latest obsession with automotive technology. He speaks to the best in the business to understand how cars work and what the future of the automobile looks like. Photo by: Brembo Cast iron is a wonderful material for making brake discs. It's relatively cheap, easy to cast and machine into shape, and crucially, it has higher thermal conductivity than, say, steel. To perhaps state the obvious here, brakes convert a car's kinetic energy (forward motion) into heat via friction between the pad and rotor when the two come together. So a brake disc's thermal properties are of key importance. "[Cast-iron discs] have a better ability of absorbing the heat," explains Emanuele Bruletti, senior engineering manager for Brembo North America. "They can absorb it at a lower rate [than other common materials], and therefore, they can help in taking some of that away from the pads." It's the same reason cast iron makes for a great skillet, but if you cook with one, you know just how heavy it is. Weight is a car's enemy. So too is the increased demand on braking systems as cars evolve. This story was available to our newsletter subscribers before it hit the website. Want early access? Sign up below. back Sign up For more information, read our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use . "What has been driving the size increase in braking systems in the last few years is basically the performance envelope increasing," Bruletti explains. Cars are simply more powerful and heavier. Tires also play a role. Bruletti says that modern developments in tires have allowed for far greater deceleration rates, further increasing the demand on a braking system. That increased demand translates to more heat. Upping the size of your cast-iron rotor helps deal with all that heat better and improves the brake's ability to effectively slow a car. For obvious reasons, though, you can only make rotors so big, both for packaging and weight. Brake rotors are unsprung, which means their mass has a disproportionately high effect on ride and handling relative to a car's sprung masses. They're also rotating masses, which have a big effect on a vehicle's ability to accelerate, brake, and turn. "If you can shave weight off your car and more importantly, unsprung weight and evenly more importantly unsprung rotating weight, which is what a rotor is, [there are] huge gains to be had in performance," says James Walker Jr., a racer, engineer, and author on a book about braking systems. Chasing lightness, Dunlop developed the first carbon-fiber reinforced carbon brakes for the Concorde in the 1960s, and by the 1980s, these became common in Formula 1. However, these carbon-carbon brakes, still in use at the top levels of motorsport, are entirely unsuitable for road use, as they don't work well at cold temperatures. They're also extremely expensive and time-consuming to make, even now. A carbon-reinforced silicon-carbide matrix brings some of the weight-saving benefits of carbon-carbon brakes, but in a package that actually works at cold temperatures. And while still expensive and time-consuming to make, a carbon-ceramic brake disc is a lot easier and cheaper to manufacture than a carbon-carbon disc. We're talking a production time of around a couple days vs four months here. (That said, Brembo can make a cast-iron disc in about two hours.) Photo by: Porsche Photo by: Ferrari German company SGL Carbon introduced carbon-ceramic brakes in a road car, with the 2001 Porsche 911 GT2. Brembo's first carbon-ceramic brakes arrived a year later, with the Ferrari Enzo. In 2009, SGL and Brembo formed a joint venture for the development and manufacture of carbon-ceramic brakes, and today, it's one of, if not the largest, suppliers of brakes of this type. Bruletti says the carbon-ceramic matrix it uses has about a third the density of its cast iron. In terms of actual weight savings, you see all sorts of numbers thrown out. A good example is the brake discs in the previous-generation M3 and M4. In a technical document, BMW quotes a 30.6-pound weight for the car's standard front rotors and 17.1 pounds for the carbon-ceramics. So nearly half. The proportional weight savings for the carbon-ceramic rear rotors on the old M3 and M4 are similar, and that's despite the fact that BMW's carbon discs were slightly larger than their cast-iron counterparts. So great! But, we also need to talk about what carbon-ceramic brakes don't do. As Walker explains, a brake system is, essentially, a series of hydraulic levers that turn the relatively light force the driver applies to the brake pedal into a huge force at the road that slows the car down. In a road car, a 20 to 30 pound pedal input can translate to 1G of deceleration. This is called gain. Here, carbon-ceramic brakes don't have an advantage. "There's nothing that's done with a carbon-ceramic system compared to a cast-iron system that increases the mechanical output of the brake system," Walker explains. "So there's no real advantage to them in that space. The only reason people say, 'Oh, they feel better, they stop better,' is not because it's carbon ceramic, it's because [the automaker has] tuned that carbon-ceramic system to have a higher gain." Taking things a step further, Walker also points out that the braking system is only as good as the tire you have attached to it. Imagine you could have two identical cars, on the same model tires, the only difference being that one has cast-iron brakes, the other has a carbon-ceramic brake package. The brakes don't change the level of grip the tire is capable of. On the flipside, and to Bruletti's earlier point, the tire has a profound effect on the energy that goes into the braking system. Photo by: Ferrari As we've established, a carbon-ceramic disc is materially very different from a cast-iron disc. Carbon-ceramic has a much lower level of thermal conductivity than iron, but also far less mass and heat capacity. Which is a good and bad thing. Good because the brake disc can withstand the higher temperatures that today's faster/heavier/grippier vehicles generate in extreme braking events, courtesy of that ceramic chemistry. Brembo says carbon-ceramic discs can comfortably operate between 1,000 and 1,400 degrees Fahrenheit and can even withstand temperatures beyond 1,800 degrees. That's why carbon-ceramic brakes are frequently praised for their resistance to fade on track. But since the lighter and less-dense carbon-ceramic rotors gain and lose temperature quickly, that leads to huge thermal stresses on the rest of the braking components as they heat and cool in rapid succession. A cast-iron rotor better contains its heat, which keeps everything else cool. "You need to find a way of dissipating that heat away from the pads in some other way, and this is where it becomes very important to provide the necessary cooling at the brake system," Bruletti says. Photo by: Porsche Photo by: Porsche Beyond carefully designed cooling from both external components and internal rotor ducting, the fact that carbon-ceramic rotors aren't made from a homogenous material also has implications . The length, diameter, and orientation of the individual carbon fibers all have an effect on the material's thermal capacity. Adding additional layers and coatings also improves thermal capacity, which is why Brembo and SGL offer CCB brakes with additional ceramic friction layers on both sides, and CCW brakes, which use five carbon-ceramic layers. These options allow automakers to size down components, further saving weight, but their manufacturing processes are more time-consuming and thus, expensive. That's helpful because generally, carbon-ceramic rotors are larger than their cast-iron equivalents, in cars where both are optional. This is a direct result of the heat a carbon-ceramic rotor reflects into the pad during large braking events. 'In order to guarantee a stability of the friction material, you need to go larger with the pad,' Bruletti explains. And when you make the pad larger, you make the caliper larger, and the rotor larger. It's all cyclical. Yet, there's also a virtuous cycle here. Reducing unsprung, rotational mass means there's less weight to control. In theory, an automaker can use the weight reduction from carbon-ceramic brakes to employ smaller tires, lower spring and damper rates, smaller anti-roll bars, and so on. Photo by: McLaren All because of the outsize effect that a brake rotor's weight has on the rest of the car. That's a big part of why Ferrari and McLaren only use carbon-ceramic brakes, beyond the simple need for a brake system that can handle the huge stresses these fast cars generate. And now, we get to the original claim, the thing that started me down this path. Does a carbon-ceramic rotor last the life of the car? Yes. In some cases. 'The wear of the components really depends on usage, how you use them,' Bruletti says. 'If we assume that the usage, the cycles will be the same, yes, it is fair to say that in normal driving and non-track usage, just everyday driving, a carbon ceramic rotor will last in my opinion almost the entire life of your vehicle.' It's not just the guy from Brembo saying that too. Walker agrees that in normal street use, a carbon-ceramic rotor will last a very long time. Obviously you'll need to replace pads, but the rotors could have incredible longevity. But add track use into the mix, and the calculus becomes very different. With lots of heavy braking events, the carbon fibers in a carbon-ceramic rotor will eventually burn out. They'll lose thermal capacity. At road speeds, this won't happen much, if at all, but depending on what sort of car you drive on track, what sort of tracks you go to, and how you drive it, the carbon fibers can burn out very quickly. Photo by: BMW Let's say you're running your new, 5,300-pound BMW M5 at Road America, where you'll regularly blow past 150 mph on the track's long straights. Let's also say you're one of the last of the late brakers, pushing your brake zones as deep into the corner as you dare, hitting the pedal as hard as you can. If you've got carbon brakes on, you shouldn't expect those rotors to last very long at all. But say you've got a Porsche 911 GT3, which weighs in around 3,330 pounds, and you're at Lime Rock Park, which has only one heavy braking zone. And let's also say that you're a bit more measured. Rather than braking hard and late, you brake a little lighter, a little earlier. In that case, you can reasonably expect a more life out of your carbon-ceramic rotors. That difference, though, is why Porsche still offers cast-iron rotors on its GT cars, even the mighty GT3 RS. It knows that some customers will use up their brakes tracking their cars often, and in that instance, it makes sense to go for cast-iron discs, which are much cheaper to replace. Some other things to consider: With usage, a carbon-ceramic rotor doesn't lose thickness like a cast-iron rotor, but when those carbon fibers burn out, they do decrease in weight. This means a carbon-ceramic rotor won't develop cracks or warp like a cast-iron rotor would on track, so there's another point in favor. It's also why the hats on many carbon-ceramic rotors list a minimum weight. Once the rotor goes below that weight, it's time for a replacement. So, there isn't a simple answer to whether carbon-ceramic brakes are 'worth it.' But given what we all now know, their high upfront cost can be offset by rotor longevity, and the myriad other benefits the technology brings. It becomes a question of you, the customer. How are you going to use your car, and what do you value at the end of the day? More Deep Dives Brake Dust Is a Problem. Brembo Has a Solution Why BMW's B58 Is a True Successor to the Toyota 2JZ Share this Story Facebook X LinkedIn Flipboard Reddit WhatsApp E-Mail Got a tip for us? Email: tips@ Join the conversation ( )
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Here Are The Automotive Events On Jalopnik Readers' Bucket Lists
What car event have you always wanted to attend but just haven't managed to make it for one reason or another? There are so many incredible car gatherings around the world, from Mille Miglia to King of the Hammers, there's something for just about everyone. I've been lucky enough to see almost every event my little gearhead heart could ever dream of, bar one, the Goodwood Festival of Speed. One day I'll have to make the trip over and see it in person, but for now it remains the biggest event still on my list of things to do before I kick the proverbial bucket. Earlier this week we asked all of you to tell us about the event still on your bucket list, and you did not disappoint. With dozens of great suggestions to choose from, we picked ten of our favorite answers and included them below. If you think there's something missing from this list, or your bucket list has a more unique answer, feel free to sound off in the comments below. Read more: These Are The Best Engines Of All Time, According To You I'd love to attend the Pebble Beach Concours. I enjoy car shows of all kinds and that seems like the ultimate event to attend. Hope to get to it one day. Suggested by Dan60 The Chili Bowl Midget Nationals in Tulsa, OK Sage Net Center, two weeks after Christmas. I'm not all that big of a fan of Tulsa, but the racing is supposedly incredible. An international cast of the baddest midget drivers, sprinkled with NASCAR and Indycar stars slumming for the week. A week of cut-and-thrust midget heats, sub-features and last-chance qualifiers capped with a Saturday night A-Main. Suggested by jrhmobile The Lane Museum's 'Rally for the Lane' I participated in the first one and it was a blast. Unfortunately, trying to convince a group of friends to shell out a grand apiece to spend a weekend driving a weird foreign car through rural Tennessee is more challenging than one would expect. Suggested by Earthbound Misfit I Spa. I have not been as in to F1 as I used to be, 10-, 20-, 30- years ago, but I'd still love to see F1 cars go through Eau Rouge at speed once in my life. Suggested by WeryPert1 This might seem like an odd choice, but as someone not from the States, I would really like to attend RADwood some day. It is much smaller in scale than a lot of the major automotive events around the world, but it happens to represent my favorite automotive era. Suggested by epep- I lived and worked out there but never had the chance to see it in person - the Africa Eco Race. It's kind of a pared down Paris - Dakar when it was still run in Africa. But this course snakes through the Atlas Mountains of Morocco, through Mauritania, and into Senegal. It's stunning country out there. Downside, while staying/eating there won't destroy the budget, flights will cause the credit card to wince. And personal security is always an issue in some of the areas where the route passes through. Stateside, I'm still kicking myself for not getting my MX-5 up and down the Pikes Peak route. But it's still on my bucket list. Suggested by Xavier96 Any WRC event in Europe. Rallying is amazing, European fans are out of their minds. The settings and courses are beautiful. Suggested by JohnnyWasASchoolBoy Sure it is riddled with issues but after visiting Monaco during spring break more than 20 years ago, I still want to attend the Grand Prix before I get too old to travel. The city is beautiful and I got chills just walking through the famous tunnel under the Fairmont Hotel, imagining the cars wailing and transitioning as they exit. There are so many elevation changes and turns and the concept of turning a small coastal city into a race course ticks so many boxes on my happy list. Like my previous trip, I will most likely stay in much more reasonably priced Nice and take the train over. Or, I could rent a scooter, lose my riding buddy within 10 minutes, and accidentally wind up in Monaco (this was before Google maps). Back in 2003, a dirty martini at the Casino Monte Carlo set me back €20, so I can't imagine how expensive things are nowadays. It might be five figures alone just to get tickets for two people for the race weekend. As a runner up, I want a chance to drive a fun car (most likely an M Car), at the Nürburgring on a tourist day. It's not a proper motorsports event but would certainly be the highlight of my amateur weekend warrior track day career. Suggested by ODDseth Isle of Man Tourist Trophy. Nothing more to add, really. Suggested by Pete I grew up in Indianapolis and my dad took me to the Indy 500 when I was probably 9 or 10 and it was... boring as hell. We even had fantastic tickets- across from the pits and under the big roof so we didn't get baked by the sun. Jim Neighbors sang, a really old lady said "gentlemen start your engines," There was a pit fire where one of the pit crew spilled fuel and the car caught on fire, that super weird clear fire you can't see except for the effects it has on anything near it, it was objectively a cool experience but I was 9 and it was 4 hours of watching cars blur past in a straight line over the bricks. So, I'd love to go back. I'd love to go to the 500 as an adult who has patience and some understanding of what was going on. As a hoosier, even a former hoosier who'll never move back, I feel like this is a thing I need to do. Maybe I can take my own kiddo and help her see why the 500 is the greatest spectacle in racing. Suggested by Buckfiddious Want more like this? Join the Jalopnik newsletter to get the latest auto news sent straight to your inbox... Read the original article on Jalopnik.
