Kevin Harvick criticizes OEM influence NASCAR as he voices deep frustration over the direction the sport is headed, specifically blaming manufacturer involvement in rulemaking and a lack of meaningful change to competition standards. Harvick’s comments, delivered on his podcast and in conversation with former crew chief Rodney Childers, have sparked renewed debate about whether automaker control is smothering NASCAR’s competitive nature just as new manufacturers like Dodge Ram gear up for a return.
Harvick Targets Manufacturer Control and Weak Engine Restrictions
For decades, the NASCAR Cup Series was shaped by driver skill, hard-earned mechanical expertise, and the stamp of blue-chip automaker brands like Chevy, Ford, and Toyota on the cars’ hoods. In recent years, however, OEMs have moved from branding partners to power players, influencing technical regulations and even drawing official penalties for improper involvement. This shift has generated mounting concern among drivers—none more vocal than Kevin Harvick.
The impending 2026 debut of Dodge Ram in the NASCAR Craftsman Truck Series, with Kaulig Racing fielding a major five-truck effort, only heightened the spotlight on manufacturer leverage. Harvick, once a supporter of increased competition among brands, has since called for bold action to restore true parity and excitement in the Cup Series. On an episode of the Happy Hour podcast, while speaking to Rodney Childers, Harvick expressed dissatisfaction over the current system:
Why? Why did you do this? And then, the next thing you know, you know, everybody realized that it needed more power. But I know we talk about the power thing, and we talk about the manufacturers. Obviously, we see Dodge coming into the sport and doing the things that they’re doing… I don’t really understand why we just don’t put a bigger restrictor plate on there to see what another big horsepower increase… I think right now, they gave them enough power to just tell everybody that they gave them some more power. It’s not going to move the needle unless you get 150 more horsepower. And I understand that the manufacturers and the engines — you know, it takes time to get the parts.
—Kevin Harvick, 2014 Cup Series Champion
Harvick points to a power struggle that extends well beyond engine specifications. Today’s Gen 7 cars operate at roughly 650-670 horsepower, and while NASCAR has considered raising power levels—perhaps targeting 750 HP—any such move tends to be watered down by competing interests. Many in the paddock contend that these figures are chosen more for cost and branding convenience than for fan enjoyment or driver challenge.
This controversial landscape has often left drivers, like Kevin Harvick, frustrated by rules that appear more focused on harmonizing with manufacturer agendas than fostering open competition on the track.
NASCAR’s Response: Enforcement and Recent Penalties
To address growing concerns, NASCAR has put explicit policies in place to curb improper OEM sway. As outlined in the NASCAR Rule Book, Section 10.5.2.8.A commences,
NASCAR reserves the right to determine if an OEM has violated the NASCAR Rule Book and may impose penalties on the OEM or its representatives accordingly. The following framework serves as a general guideline for assessing OEM penalties. The examples provided are illustrative and not exhaustive, offering clarity on the types and ranges of infractions that may result in penalties, should NASCAR determine enforcement is warranted.
—NASCAR Rule Book
The conversation over rules and influence became particularly heated following the next-to-last race of the 2024 Cup Series at Martinsville Speedway. After a series of infractions, NASCAR upheld severe penalties for several teams and personnel for violations involving race manipulation and actions detrimental to the sport. Drivers Ross Chastain (Trackhouse Racing), Austin Dillon (Richard Childress Racing), and Bubba Wallace (23XI Racing) each incurred a 50-point deduction in their standings and a $100,000 fine. Likewise, team owners shared equal financial and point penalties.
Crew chiefs Phil Surgen, Justin Alexander, and Bootie Barker were suspended for the season’s final race at Phoenix Raceway, as were spotters Brandon McReynolds, Brandon Benesch, and Freddie Kraft. Team executives Tony Lunders, Keith Rodden, and Dave Rogers also faced suspensions for the finale. These moves demonstrate NASCAR’s willingness to enforce boundaries against both teams and manufacturers, yet debate continues over whether enforcement can truly neutralize long-term OEM influence.
Other Drivers Echo Concerns About Manufacturer Influence
Kevin Harvick has not stood alone. Well-known figures like Dale Jr., who has previously cited negative effects from manufacturer-driven strategies, have added weight to concerns. During a post-race discussion, Dale Jr. commented that automaker oversight often requires drivers to prioritize team compliance over individual performance, suggesting that
“OEMs essentially ask their drivers to understand their equipment and assist the team—acting in alignment with what the manufacturer wants, even if it means sacrificing individual competitiveness.”
He described this dynamic as erasing the raw spirit of the sport.
Growing frustration among drivers and fans alike centers on whether the current environment favors orchestrated teamwork and manufacturer interests over fair racing. Many believe NASCAR’s original appeal—drivers passionately battling it out for victory—has been dulled by this modern era of strategic control from the boardroom and the garage.
Harvick’s Additional Critiques: NASCAR’s Scheduling and TV Ratings
Kevin Harvick’s criticism of the sport was not limited to technical rules and manufacturer involvement. He has also taken a hard stance against NASCAR’s ongoing decision to schedule key races on Saturday nights. On the latest episode of his podcast, as the Bristol Night Race approached, Harvick made his thoughts clear:
Why do we ever race on a Saturday night? It makes no sense. Makes zero sense. Just look at the TV ratings when you get done. I know it’s football season, but the TV ratings are historically completely well known by everybody in the industry that it does not score ever, ever, ever, ever on a Saturday night.
—Kevin Harvick, 2014 Cup Series Champion
His concerns are borne out by recent TV viewership statistics. This year’s Richmond Raceway night race attracted just 1.3 million viewers, a 37 percent drop from the previous season’s Sunday race, which logged 2.22 million viewers. For Harvick, these numbers are not abstract; they are a loud warning. He further challenged the established logic behind the move:
We went from Saturday to Sunday at Richmond, and the TV numbers go up. We go from Sunday to Saturday, and the crowd goes up. I’m more concerned about the TV ratings than I am how many people are sitting in the grandstands because that’s what makes it go around. I don’t care what anybody wants, Sunday races rate better than Saturday.
—Kevin Harvick, 2014 Cup Series Champion
Harvick argues that fan engagement, sponsorship, and ultimately the financial health of the sport are closely linked to the traditional Sunday race slot. While moving some races has boosted on-site attendance, overall media revenue—a crucial pillar for teams and organizers—takes the bigger hit, and Saturday night events rarely match Sunday’s performance in this regard.
Potential Changes Ahead and the Road Forward
NASCAR’s leadership continues to weigh tweaks to rules, horsepower levels, and scheduling in hope of balancing diverse interests from teams, manufacturers, media, and fans. With Dodge Ram bringing renewed energy to the Craftsman Truck Series and calls growing for horsepower increases in Gen 7 cars, the coming years may see significant adjustments. However, as long as automaker relationships remain central—shaping everything from engine regulations to how teams operate—issues of influence and perceived fairness will persist.
Kevin Harvick’s outspoken comments have intensified the debate, placing new scrutiny on how decisions are made and what really defines competition in the sport. Whether his push for less controlled, more driver-centric racing will take root likely depends on future negotiations between NASCAR, the OEMs, and stakeholders throughout the community.
