Does racing heritage really has a significant impact for car

It used to- what wins on Sunday sells on Monday and all that- but nowadays the average Joe doesn't know about nor care about racing so he buys based on badge and what his friends/family/co-workers say is good/what will make him look the most important.

>>17270973
Racing heritage only really has an effect if the car has been consistently winning races for at least 20 or 30 years hence why E30 ask for quite a bit of money and the "M" badge alone can sway buyers.

When Mazda "won le mans" once for example it didn't really make anyone give any more of a shit about rotaries and they still fell off production cars anyway.

Lexus doesn't need a racing program like AMG or M or whatever Audi has and even if they had it, it would take decades to build up to the point where it has any possibility of swaying buyers. Lexus sales are strong already because they make luxury cars without the meme'y german car bills or repairs.

Tesla also has no racing Pedigree and it sales Model S's to the same smug self fart sniffing cunts who buy BMWs and they sell a lot of them. Even throwing your car around the nurburgring will have a bigger impact on sales than actually proving your competence against formidable competition because who really watches motorsports anyway? not most of the people buying or leasing executive cars. not most of the people buying super cars either.

Honda is also pushing the NSX in Motorsports in the US to try and increase sales but it will be awhile before they are Corvette Racing famous. There have been some special edition corvettes hinting to the car's participation in motorsports which leads me to believe the corvette's racing program has had something of an effect after nearly 20 years.

Cadillac has been pushing towards motorsports recently too in the last 10 years.

File: 1495120833187.jpg (31KB, 433x419px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 433x419px

>>17270973
>racing in USA
>straight lines
>USA
>racing

>>17270973
Only Americans care about about prestige in Nascar... It's that "Win Sunday, buy monday" mentality or whatever the hell it's called.

>>17270973
It's important to develop the brand initially but once that's established a racing heritage is almost inconsequential.

File: Skoda-Fabia_WRC_mp49_pic_28935.jpg (286KB, 1600x1131px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 1600x1131px

It used to when racing technology was just improved car technology. Today a racing engine, suspension, body etc. would not actually improve a daily driver. On the other hand every shitbox can win the WRC when you change absolutely everything about it. Racing is just a completely different branch now and most cars in a series are pretty much exactly the same anyway.

I think it does for the sports car makers, especially ferrari and porsche.
As far as BMW, Benz, Audi, and Lexus.. probably not alot. I think it mattered for a while, but people would still buy them because they are luxury cars. It might help them move some of their sports cars, it might help them with research.
I think rally helped subaru and mitsu... this is from an american perspective.

>>17271121
>you

Even touring car series are basically silhouette cars these days.

Racing means next to nothing for road cars.

>tfw no more Group B homologation specials

It's like horse racing. It's a social event, etc. That's what it's become.
The goal is to break even doing it. Not make money from it.

It hasn't been about the cars since the mid 80's

>>17271490
And arguably it was never a goal to make money from it. Most car related companies started their company just so they could race. It's a break even game. Ferrari famously I'm pretty sure only sold road cars in order to make money to race. It wasn't about profits. That's part of where the heritage comes from.

Normies don't care or know about heritage. So that's definitely not the point of racing.

>>17271490
well yeah for the manufacturers it's just marketing, advertisement, and r&d funds