How Stock Car Racing Began

[Olen McGuire]

In 1920, the 18th Amendment banned the production and possession of alcohol, and Prohibition officially began,but drinking alcohol wasn't illegal, so many people made their own liquor, known as "moonshine".
As law enforcement officials tried to enforce the 18th Amendment, moonshiners had to be clever about their business. To transport moonshine, they needed vehicles that would blend in with the public and not attract attention. They began transporting the moonshine in their personal cars at night, calling themselves "moon runners." Unfortunately, the moon runners couldn't outrun the police. To give their cars an advantage, they began modifying the vehicles.
Moonshine runners would take ordinary cars and alter them slightly to make them capable of reaching high speeds. The cars still looked like all the other automobiles on the road, but they could now beat law enforcement.

Moon runners were constantly bragging about their exploits. They boasted of making nighttime trips on dirt roads at more than 120 mph with no headlights. Soon, runners started racing on weekends, and stock car racing was born.

Below are a couple of pictures of an early modified stock car (1934 Ford) built for racing.
99 100

[Mitch G.]

Check out this photo from Spa, Belgium taken in 1928! From a 24 hour race held there. The #6 is a Chrysler, the DeVere / Mongin team, head lights, license plate, full fendered stock car.
http://www.autoracingmemories.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=34&pictureid=319

[Mitch G.]

Here we are stateside, 1939 Langhorne, PA on the dirt mile, the AAA was sponsoring stock car races, well before NASCAR was founded.
http://autoracingmemories.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=34&pictureid=320

[Jerry Lee]

Those pics are great, Mitch!

[Olen McGuire]

Even the women drivers started racing stock cars way back when.Here's Vivian Harvey in her 42 Ford after she won the Women's State Championship of N.J. in 1950.She's now Vivian McGraw,age 83 living in N.J.
(Photographer unknown,picture taken from Vivian's album.)
http://autoracingmemories.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=38&pictureid=328

[indybigjohn]

Somebody once told me that all automobile racing started when somebody built the second car.

[Jerry Lee]

This is complete twaddle and utter nonsense, a myth that does not stand up to even the mildest of inquiries.

The origins of stock car racing owe very, very little, if anything, to the moonshiners. There was stock car racing long, long before the myth of the bootleggers was ever invented.

It is very clear that the "Creation Myth" that stock car racing originated in the Carolinas and Georgia is simply not true. It certainly did not begin in a cow pasture in Stockbridge, Georgia nor on the back roads of Wilkes County, North Carolina or Dalton County, Georgia by any stretch of the historical record.

This is yet another example of the idea that if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes accepted as the truth.

So possibly this thread should have been titled "How Stock Car Racing Began in the Southern Part of the U.S." instead. The "moonshiners" part of the story seems to hold up for that part of the country, at least from what I've read about NASCAR. I'm sure there was some sort of auto racing in that region even long before that, but were they "stock cars"? I don't know.

Please, school us on what you know about the origins of the sport Karl. Leaving out any "twaddle" of course!:chuckle:

[indybigjohn]

I would say stock car racing as we know it began with moonshiners wanting to race their cars.

However, you could argue that the Indianapolis 500 in the beginning was a stock car race.

[Mike Croley]

That was certainly a courteous response Karl . To settle this debate you'd have to decide what stock car racing is . Is it stock automobiles , in which case the first stock car race was when the first two stock automobiles on earth raced each other . Or is it Stock Cars , which are stock bodied ( sort of ) cars that are modified to go fast , those being the type of car we all associate with Stock Car racing . And that type of Stock Car racing did in fact get it's start with the moonshiners in the Carolinas .

[Mike Croley]

I have to go along with Olen here , Stock Car racing as we know it did indeed evolve directly from the moonshiners . The racing you refer to that went on in the 30s and 40s , especially in the South , were in many cases the very same men who drove and or built the moonshine cars later on . I'm sure most of the people on this board are very familier with the AAA . But i think you would have a far easier time drawing a straight line from the moonshiner cars to todays stock cars . I know of very few men involved in the beginning of what we consider big league stock car racing that weren't involved somehow in running shine .
I don't presume to speak for Olen , but his post seemed to be only connecting the moonshiners to the current NASCAR , which i admit is what most peple think of when stock car racing is mentioned , i'd say his point is legitimate .
I was always a bigger fan of USAC stock cars than NASCAR .
You seem to have a very good grasp of auto racing ... or wikipedia . But please do post some threads here on the history of auto racing . Virtually everyone here is a fan of the history of racing .

[Olen McGuire]

There are many books written on the subject of auto racing. Some books are factual such as that list of race tracks from "Americas Speedways-Past & Present".
Probably the closest to actually how stockcar racing began is Indybigjohns quote "Somebody once told me that all automobile racing started when somebody built the second car." It's only rational to think that some form of racing had to start before racetracks were built. I don't think the first drag strip was made before two kids were trying to see who's car would start the fastest down main street. Someone had to do some kind of racing before it was structured and race tracks were built. It would be like building an airport before the Wright brothers even tried to lift off their crude craft.
So to quote, "This is yet another example of the idea that if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes accepted as the truth." is as absurd as saying the earth is flat.

[webby]

ARM's first disagreement. :)

It's all very interesting so as long as everyone stays calm there certainly isn't anything wrong with a little bench racing.

[indybigjohn]

The operative word in the last post is "cranky." LOL

[Olen McGuire]

The operative word in the last post is "cranky." LOL

Yeah, that and "automotive historian" is quite laughable.

[Olen McGuire]

I am happy that I amuse you, but insulting me will in no way change the fact that you are still wrong in what you wrote in the opening post.

Sir (I assume) you seem to amuse quite a few people on this site, and as far as insults, that seems to be going the other direction.
I'm truly sorry that you have such a negative outlook on auto racing in general. I only hope that negativity doesn't carry over to your personal life. Most of us here on this site are here to swap memories with each other on auto racing. If you can't be constructive with your attitude then I for one have no need to reply to your awkwardness here on ARM. ~Olen

[webby]

I am happy that I amuse you, but insulting me will in no way change the fact that you are still wrong in what you wrote in the opening post. I doubt anyone would have insulted you had you not had such a combative disposition.

It's clear you are here to argue. That's not why we are all here. We are here to fellowship and reminisce about auto racing. If you would like to do that with us you are more than welcome to stick around.

However...
If you are just here to be a grump and argue please find another home on the internet.

[indybigjohn]

Yeah, what Webby said.

[JThur01]

First, Karl is a historian of the highest order and focuses on auto racing history. An area sadly neglected. I can vouch for his credentials.

What you view as an attempt to argue is actually an attempt to set the record straight.

I can empathize with his frustrations. Auto racing history has been so poorly recorded and often the only tales re-told are those of the "tall tale" variety. Which is all fine and well in "bench racing" circles, but disastrous when it finds it's way into print and becomes taken seriously and literally.

Sadly, I've seen this scene repeated at other forums where those who get their information questioned, or worse yet, disproven, take it personally and attempt to turn "history" into a contest.

Karl's points are valid. For example, how do you address or explain the following: "The sort of stock car racing that is assumed to have originated with the moonshiners was already popular in the Midwest, the Pacific Coast, and other areas long before it gained any popularity in the Southeast." Thoughts?

[webby]

First, Karl is a historian of the highest order and focuses on auto racing history. An area sadly neglected. I can vouch for his credentials.We all believe you.

But, that's really not the point. I don't think anyone here minded that Karl disagreed with the content of the thread, it was Karl's disposition and his statement that he planned to "set the record straight" on a bunch of other topics that set off red flags. It became clear that Karl was here to pick a fight.

Think of it like this....
This website is sorta like the local watering hole that all the racers go to after the pits close. We come here to fellowship, shoot the breeze, bench race, and if somebody comes here and disagrees with the topic that's fine as well! But if that person is only looking for a fight then there is little reason to keep them around. It's not very fun to sit around and drink beers when there is somebody constantly trying to punch you in the face.

This website is called Auto Racing Memories, it's not called... Auto Racing Wikipedia. In other words... we are all here to share our OWN auto racing memories, we aren't here to document the history of auto racing in every detail.

Again, I hope Karl sticks around. I am sure that with a little effort he could still "set the record straight" in a way that was more palatable.

[webby]

What you view as an attempt to argue is actually an attempt to set the record straight.I think if you go back and review this thread... you might be able to see why Karl's reception was the way it was.

furthermore...
Karl sent me a private message explaining that he wont be participating here on this forum any longer because the members of this forum are "dumber than rocks". That may be true... (I know that I probably fall into that category) yet I can tell you that these "rocks" are some of the greatest folks I have ever met.

Life is tough enough as it is, why make life even tougher by being so abrasive? If Karl is the one to "set the record straight" for the entire world on auto racing and it's origins, he's gonna need to be a more effective teacher, otherwise all his effort will be nothing more than spitting in the wind.

[Mitch G.]

Karl Oakie is a phony, sorry to stir the pot. He's read a bunch of books, big deal, that's someones opinion also. Ask a guy like Chris Economaki , he's 85 years old and actually knew most people involved in stock car racing. There are few accurate auto racing historians, Donald Davidson of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, and Economaki are probably the best. Outside of those guys you just get opinion pieces because most writers are too young, and most don't do the hard research, sorry Karl. Glad he's gone, we don't need big mouthed self proclaimed experts. If you read most of Ecomaki's writings, he's more aligned with Olen, than Karl, and again, Chirs Economaki was there!

[Quick Time]

Thank you Webby.......Well done and I for one appreciates you looking out for our well being.

Chuck

[Olen McGuire]

I would like to thank everyone that participated in keeping this thread alive. With the awesomeness of this site there is bound to be some "smart rocks" with no social skills invading the best auto racing site on the net. A special thanks to Webby, indybigjohn, Mike Croley and Jerry Lee for their input.Dumb Rock #1 ~Olen