Fans Question ‘What Went Wrong’ as HMS Miserably Fails at Flat Track Dominance

Hendrick Motorsports has long been viewed as a benchmark for success in NASCAR. They have delivered wins across intermediates, superspeedways, and road courses. Yet, their record on flat tracks tells a different story. Tracks like Phoenix, Gateway, Loudon, and Richmond have proven to be a recurring hurdle for the powerhouse team. At most, they’ve had occasional flashes at Martinsville or early-season races. Rick Hendrick’s team performance at these circuits often dips, with finishes falling into mid-pack territory. This underperformance has lingered for over a year, raising questions across the garage.

Considering that Phoenix hosts the season finale, this lack of dominance on flat tracks could be a real concern moving forward. The relevance of these struggles goes beyond simple race-day results.

Even with Kyle Larson, William Byron, Chase Elliott, and Alex Bowman providing depth and talent, their flat-track finishes often reflect mediocrity rather than superiority. An example would be how the team finished mid-pack in the Phoenix race in March last year: Larson finished P14, Byron P18, Elliott P19, and Bowman P20. Recently, Larson himself admitted that “we’re still not anywhere close to Penske… we’ve gotten closer to Gibbs, but we’ve gotten better.” The core issue here traces back to a mix of technical setbacks and manufacturer disadvantages.

In spring 2023, NASCAR fined Hendrick $400,000 and suspended crew chiefs. This was after officials discovered unauthorized modifications to hood louvers at Phoenix. That penalty disrupted development and drew attention to Hendrick’s aero program. Particularly on circuits where small aerodynamic gains make a critical difference. Since then, Hendrick’s performance at Phoenix and Gateway has stagnated. At Gateway specifically, the organization has managed just one top-five finish. Larson’s fourth in 2023 was their best despite fielding four competitive cars.

These struggles have only widened as Ford and Toyota introduced updated bodies. Meanwhile, Chevrolet’s Camaro appears harder to fine-tune for balance in transitions. Rick Hendrick’s own drivers and analysts point to instability in handling as another weakness.

Jeff Gordon, now Vice Chairman of HMS, previously noted that Chevrolets tend to swing quickly from tight to loose at Phoenix. That trait makes it difficult to lock in consistent setups across the flatter ovals. While Byron’s win at Iowa and Bowman’s runner-up at Richmond show progress, these remain isolated breakthroughs rather than sustained dominance.

And now, fans on Reddit have been quick to seize on these patterns, debating whether the team’s decline at flat tracks is a Hendrick-specific problem or a Chevrolet-wide issue.

Fans debate the real reason behind Hendrick Motorsports’ flat track lull

On Reddit, fans have been offering detailed and sometimes conflicting explanations for this lack of success. One fan dismissed the idea that Hendrick’s struggles are tied to Chevrolet’s body design. “I don’t think it’s a body issue, since Dillon won Richmond and Chevy won on all the other tracks besides in ’23, including Hendrick at Phoenix. I just think Toyota and especially Penske have better programs at these tracks specifically.” This perspective pointed to organizational differences in program development. It suggested that Ford and Toyota teams may simply be outpacing Rick Hendrick’s team in preparation and execution at flat tracks.

Another user framed the problem in terms of handling rather than body design. They wrote, “It’s a setup issue. For some reason they aren’t able to roll through the corner as well as Ford and Toyota teams, which is key to speed at those tracks.” This was similar to some of the driver feedback from Kyle Larson and Jeff Gordon. They have both mentioned how the Chevrolets tend to become unstable mid-corner.

A third fan took this setup argument further by citing a specific Martinsville moment. “Exactly. Watching Blaney run down the 9 last year at Martinsville was crazy. That car just flew through the corner. They have something figured out that Hendrick hasn’t hit yet.” For fans, that single race with Ryan Blaney performing well served as evidence that Hendrick is chasing something its rivals have already unlocked.

The fourth reaction leaned into the idea that Hendrick’s issues are organizational. “Who knows? Outside of asking every engineer and crew guy on each Hendrick team and being in a team competition meeting, we’ll never know. But it seems to be that they, as an organization, just don’t have the place figured out setup wise. And that just happens sometimes. All of the teams share data, so they generally all use pretty similar setups and info.” This explanation suggested that Rick Hendrick simply has not caught up yet in its setup evolution.

The comment further said, “And Hendrick just doesn’t have it figured out. It’s a newer track with less his total information/notebook to lean on. Some teams happened to hit the setup just right and have done well, others haven’t. As we have more years at the track, teams will evolve and figure it out. The sport ebbs and flows as far as who’s good where. It’s not a Chevy thing. Kyle Busch won there in the Next Gen and usually runs pretty well.” The view painted the struggles as a temporary phase that will likely shift with time, but one that remains glaring for now.

Finally, one fan questioned whether the “new track” excuse still holds up in modern NASCAR. They said, “Honestly, this is probably less of a thing in the modern day than it ever was in the past. Sure, it’s a ‘new’ track for Cup but HMS has probably run in 10000+ laps in the simulator, as an organization, since it was added to the schedule. Back in the days of ‘real practice’ they probably were only getting 1/10th of that data in the real world. Yes, the simulator isn’t reality but it absolutely allows each team to build a bigger notebook of ‘this works/this doesn’t’ than they could’ve ever built if Gateway was added to the Cup schedule in 1997.” It would seem that Hendrick’s problem lies in execution, not preparation. Even with advanced simulation tools, they have not been able to transfer virtual laps into real-world dominance.

Taken together, the fan reactions point to a consensus: Hendrick’s flat-track struggles are less about Chevrolet as a whole. They are more about how Rick Hendrick and HMS approach setup, balance, and data application. While some frame it as a temporary slump in the ebb and flow of NASCAR competition, others see Penske and Gibbs pulling further away at these tracks.