The No. 9 Chevrolet Camaro driver, Chase Elliott, has endured his share of setbacks, with one of the most notable disappointments occurring during the 2013 Snowball Derby. Elliott, widely regarded as a fan favorite, winning the most popular driver award for the 7th year in a row, and a rising star in the racing world, found himself embroiled in a major controversy at the 2013 Snowball Derby. He crossed the finish line as the victor, only to be disqualified shortly after. The cause? A seemingly minor technicality that ultimately stripped him of his hard-earned win.
Renowned as one of the most prestigious short-track races in the United States, the Snowball Derby is known for its intense competition and rich history. Unfortunately, the tech inspection at the race put the 2020 NASCAR Cup Series Champion in an unenviable position. Offering insight into the incident, a prominent and outspoken NASCAR insider sheds light on the events that led to this infamous disqualification.
Insider breaks down why Elliott failed to lift the trophy despite crossing the victory line
ADVERTISEMENT
Article continues below this ad
Kenny Wallace is a popular NASCAR face who often takes to his YouTube channel and shares anecdotes about racers and events. Recently, he opened up in detail about why Chase Elliott ended up losing his trophy at the Snowball Derby even after clenching to the victory line in the year 2013. Minutes after Elliott crossed the victory line, photos of Erik Jones were seen holding the Tom Dawson Trophy. But what happened that led to Elliott not lifting the trophy and Jones claiming the trophy for the second time in a row?
Speaking more about this incident, Wallace said, “The rule is you have to run lead because it’s cheap. You have to run lead to bring your car up to weight. Well, when Chase Elliott won the Snowball Derby, he had a very expensive piece of weight in the car called tungsten.” The rules of the Derby make it mandatory for the cars to be run on lead. Lead as most would know is a cheap compound and it tends to add the requisite weight to the car. However, upon inspection, it was found that Elliott did not manage to keep up with this condition as a piece of Tungsten was found inside his car.
Tungsten is a comparatively costlier element and hence the rules of the Derby do not permit the addition of the same inside the car. Instead, one has to use lead which costs around $2 compared to $22 for Tungsten.
“Tungsten is thought of as very expensive, but boy, you can do a lot of good with it. You could use a piece like, say, 6 inches long compared to 12 inches long if it was lead. So anyway, a mere technicality disqualified Chase Elliott. People were getting very frustrated about all this, this little tech inspection,” added Wallace. Although the single six-inch long Tungsten did not add any competitive edge for Elliott, it did make him give away the trophy.
Reacting to the same and how the Tungsten got inside the cat, Elliott said, “I am not sure who put it in there. Regardless, it was a mistake and it was put in there by accident and it was overlooked before we went down there”.
Keeping his competitive spirit in mind, Elliott surged to victory two years after this incident. This time he was declared as the winner after Christopher Bell was disqualified following a post-race technical inspection. This redemption not only showcased Elliott’s resilience but also solidified his reputation as a determined and talented competitor in the world of motorsports. Elliott posted on X after his 2015 win, “I feel for @CBellRacing21, I’ve been there. Would much rather be the first one across the line, but I’m happy to take it home this time!“
Ten years since then Elliott and Bell are going head-to-head for Cup Series Championships and the former has a new look to his car for next season.
ADVERTISEMENT
Article continues below this ad
New look for Elliott’s $3.7 billion worth sponsor
Trending
Historic NASCAR Track Shutting Its Door After Final Run Has Racing Community Heartbroken
NASCAR Rumor: 66-YO Surprise Daytona 500 Winner Could Make a Return to NASCAR in 2025
1 Year After Heartbreak, Shane van Gisbergen Dominates Rivals in Dirt Track Return
Shane Van Gisbergen Discloses a Major Problem in NASCAR After Leaving Supercars
Amid Sleepless Nights, Tony Stewart’s Wife Leah Reveals Their 1-Month-Old Son’s 4 ‘Responsibilities’
Chase Elliott has been able to garner some popularity in the NASCAR world, and this has led him to bag tons of sponsorships. One of his most prized sponsors is none other than UniFirst Corporation which is worth more than $3.7 billion in the textile industry. Back in 2020, UniFirst Corporation became the primary sponsor for Elliott, and recently Hendrick Motorsports announced a look change for the sponsor. While the usual color for the car has been white with a touch of green, 2025 will see a complete revamp.
Recently, the team revealed a new look for the car which showcased a color combination of green with a touch of gray and yellow. This livery will be seen at the Homestead-Miami Speedway, Darlington Raceway (spring), Michigan International Speedway, Richmond Raceway, and the Charlotte Motor Speedway Roval. UniFirst’s Executive President shared his take on the livery. He said, “This bold design aligns perfectly with our brand evolution and captures our energy and momentum. Collaborating with Hendrick Motorsports has been an exciting opportunity to create something that not only represents UniFirst but also resonates with NASCAR fans”.
ADVERTISEMENT
Article continues below this ad
The revamped UniFirst livery signifies a bold step toward redefining the visual identity of Elliott’s No. 9 car, setting it apart on the track. With its unique color scheme, it promises to capture attention and further deepen the connection between the brand and NASCAR fans.
Have something to say?
Let the world know your perspective.
Debate
Did Chase Elliott's disqualification in 2013 reveal flaws in racing rules or just bad luck?
What’s your perspective on:
Did Chase Elliott's disqualification in 2013 reveal flaws in racing rules or just bad luck?
Have an interesting take?