When NASCAR finally cranked the engines of the 750 hp and brought it back to 1-mile tracks in late 2025, it felt like a piece of rain. The fans had been yelling, and drivers had been hinting. Everyone wanted more power, more throttle, and more control. And while NASCAR granted a slight jump from the original 680 HP, the bump didn’t feel as dramatic as one expected. The fans will have a desire for wanting more, but it is impossible, and now NASCAR president Steve O’Donnell is stepping in with the cold water explanation, and it is not as simple as it seems.

“The biggest thing is how much it costs, and I know fans don’t want to hear that, but our job is to allow the race teams and drivers to go racing for the lowest amount of money possible so that they can put money into promoting the sport and going out and winning,” said Steve O’Donnell in the NASCAR Live podcast, outlining a financial reality that shapes every technical decision inside NASCAR.

The decision to stop at 750 hp, rather than chase even higher figures, comes down to more than just performance. Teams and engine builders have been quietly warning that once you push past the threshold, you are not tweaking; you are rebuilding, and rebuilding is expensive.

While the 800 to 1000 hp fantasy sounds great on a podcast, in reality, it could cause a deep dent in the NASCAR wallet. It is a potential $40-$50 million escalation for manufacturers and teams, with no guarantee that the racing magically transforms into the 1990s thunder.

And while 750 might feel underwhelming, chasing 900 could mean lighting a pile of money on fire just to find out the racing looks maybe the same.

News served to you like never before!

Prefer us on Google, To get latest news on feed

Prefer Us on Google

Part of the complication stems from the fact that NASCAR’s current pushrod V8 engine has rules designed to balance cost, reliability, and competition. Simply increasing horsepower on that setup, which already demands engine seals, spacers, and a mandated lifespan across multiple races, will put additional wear on components and necessitate internal redesign. And O’Donnell knows this all too well.

“And but when you look at engines and the technology, once you went above 750, every conversation we had was that it would require almost a completely new engine or a lot of new aspects, and the money started going way up with an unsure return. So what we looked at is we’ve got some interest from new OEMs; can we grow to where we’re going to be within a reasonable cost amount for the teams and engine builders?” he added.

If this sport were to invest in a makeshift high-horsepower package now, only to overhaul the platform in three years, teams and OEMs could be left with redundant investments. By settling on 750 HP, the sanctioning body is attempting to deliver more power and sharper throttle response while maintaining the financial stability of the sport’s ecosystem.

It is a compromise, one that may frustrate fans craving bigger numbers, but one designed to protect the long-term health of the garage.

NASCAR gets real about emerging fuel-saving concerns

During last weekend’s Daytona 500, long stretches of the race turned into a strategic exercise rather than an all-out charge, with much of the field lifting early and running partial throttle to stretch fuel windows and limit time spent on pit road.

The approach frustrated sections of the fan base and even some drivers who felt it dulled the intensity typically associated with pack racing. Speaking midweek, Cup Series managing director Brad Moran acknowledged the concerns but cautioned against expecting a quick or simple remedy.

“We have a lot of fan councils, and we listen. We listen to the fans and the industry. But I don’t know when the last time you went 165 or whatever miles per hour, three-wide down the highway, was, and it’s quite entertaining when they’re doing it. But we understand what folks are saying,” he said.

At the same time, he conceded the issue isn’t as straightforward as instructing teams to stop conserving fuel. Crew chiefs view fuel management as a legitimate strategic element, which they have refined over the years to gain a competitive edge.

Eliminating that advantage isn’t as easy as flipping a switch. Moreover, communications executive Mike Forde echoes a similar tone. While admitting that completely removing fuel savings from the equation is unlikely, it is stressed that the topic is under active review.

“Getting rid of that entirely is probably not going to happen,” he admitted. “But that doesn’t mean that we’re not going to try and work at it. It’s something on the docket. Fans wanted a change in the playoffs, and we did that. Fans wanted more horsepower, and we did that. Fans wanted to change the (Charlotte) Roval to the oval; we did that. So this is also on the list of fan feedback, so we’ll see.”