Do you believe that 43 cars in a starting lineup is too many?

I agree with some of the previous answers...43 cars on tracks like Martinsville and the other half-milers are so crowded, but that is what makes those tracks so much fun! Rubbin' is Racin' and without that many cars...I don't know if it would be as entertaining for the fans. However, I also feel that it would be much safer if they did drop to maybe 36 drivers. Unfortunately that would bump out many newcomers to NASCAR and would make it that much more difficult to become a Nextel Cup Racer... I suppose it's opinion at this point, until NASCAR decides to do something about it.

This is a good number to test the skills of the drivers.Yes at Martinsville or Bristol this seems too many but in the overall race this is a good number and there is the chance that some of the newer drivers can make the field.

If they do away with the 43 car field then they have to do away with the guarenteed 35 starting spots for owner points.Then it would be the fastest 36 (or 38) only.This would increase the chance that a driver like Jeff Gordon or Junior ,Kasey Kahne ect would not make the field if they had a bad day at quailifing.

Since I started watching races in 1960 I've seen as few as 16 cars start a race and as many as 60 at Talladega.

No, The better question is will they be able to field 43???

With all the changes Nascar is making It's very hard for small teams to make the race any more. The top 35 rule is making it not cost effective to build two cars drive all the way to say Fontana, and then Be 40th fastest but still go home because A hendrick or DEI car has a automatic start. The COT makes it even worse. A completely different car you have to build for only part of the races.

I agree that the inexperienced drivers due tend to create more of a "situation" on the track -my question back to you is ... Does NASCAR change the rules and reg. to eliminate the problematic situations they may occur? I also am interested in knowing how many drivers do you feel there should be ? If they got rid of cocky drivers say like Denny Hamlin maybe then the sport would lighten up a bit ... sorry dont mean to single him out but that interview on late night Sports machine left a bad taste in my mouth with that man ...He should remember he is in the ten top but... he is sitting with some "time earned " drivers and should respect the drivers he keeps company with I know it is the sport ....but respectfully he needs to not be so full of himself...

Go # 8 !!!!!!!!!!!! and # 9 !!!!!!!!!!!!

They should have maybe 45 to 47 cars start a race but no less than 43.

absolutely not. dont change a thing, 43 is just the right amout. take a long look at indy car racing. they have a hard time filling the 33 spots at indy each year. yet at some cup events you have over 50-60 cars/teams entered each week. no, 43 is perfect.

NO!! Theres never enough cars on the track. If i have to drive home through rush hour gridlock traffic then so should stock car drivers, after all thats what I'm driving is a stock car right?? The more cars the more explosions, the faster we all get to see a guy do a 300 mph cartwheel in a car as it sheds parts, then watch the driver jump out and punch himself in the head as he tries to put out the flames on his helmet.

No, i dont think 43 cars is too many, If you watch the end of the races they are all spread out. If they take some cars out then it will deifantely be spread out and boring.

Call me crazy, but I'd like to see 50 cars in the starting grid.

43 cars might be too many on the short tracks, but not the longer ones.