Next Generation IndyCar

[bblocker68]

Thant was the propsed Champcar for 2007. Panoz won out, THANK GOD!!!!

http://www.gordonkirby.com/categorie..._is_no134.html

According to Gordon Kirby and Bruce Ashmore, THIS is what the new IndyCar SHOULD look like. Personally, I don't think this version is "sexy" enough. Looks too wind tunnel molded. Looks too much like a squid. UGH

[nigelred5]

The new Swift chassis for Formula Nippon looks good. Plus, I like the job that Swift did on the current Atlantics cars. But I wonder if this new car is built strong enough for ovals.

As for the Porsche Can AM dream, I wish Grand AM would mandate open top cars and silohuettes similar to the 917 you posted for the Daytona Prototype category.

Certainly the existing cars wouldn't be half as ugly with out the roof. Their driver cage specs really distort the roof shape. Just lopping the roof and windshield off would improve most of them aesthetically.

[Miatanut]

I don't think a 250 pound heavier engine is headed the right way...

rh

I don't see where he's calling for a 250 pound heavier engine. Lopping two cylinders off should save some weight. Adding a second turbo would add a little, but not much. Interesting he's talking about 1.5-1.8L. I agree with your point a while back that the engine shouldn't be too much smaller because of the costs of generating the horsepower from a really small engine, in the current budget-constrained environment. I would be in favor of a 2.0, because that seems like a nice compromise size between cost and weight.

[Miatanut]

http://www.gordonkirby.com/categorie..._is_no134.html

According to Gordon Kirby and Bruce Ashmore, THIS is what the new IndyCar SHOULD look like. Personally, I don't think this version is "sexy" enough. Looks too wind tunnel molded. Looks too much like a squid. UGH

He says the need to go down to about a quarter of the current downforce, which I totally agree with, but then he has a rear wing on it. Unless that rear wing is totally flat, which his isn't, you aren't going to get down to a quarter of the current downforce. Then he goes on to say 'this is what I drew, but not what I meant', and describes something more appropriate.

Too logical. The current management would never go for it.

[jimispeed]

Wouldn't be my choice as far as a new car goes. Reminds of an Indycar from the eighties.

I don't think a 250 pound heavier engine is headed the right way...

rh

Remember Can-Am?


Lime Rock Qualifying

1984 Can-Am VDS-Chevy: 44.438

1988 IMSA GTP Jaguar XJR-9: 44.885

http://wsrp.ic.cz/canam1984.html

http://www.racingsportscars.com/phot...-19-photo.html

http://www.racingsportscars.com/phot...-30-photo.html

[-Helix-]

Looks pretty cool.

However, looks are pretty unimportant in the grande scheme of things. I doubt that car would be safe enough on the ovals.

[Miatanut]

I doubt that car would be safe enough on the ovals.

[-Helix-]

Does Formula Nippon drive ovals? If so, my mistake.

[Miatanut]

Looks pretty cool.

However, looks are pretty unimportant in the grande scheme of things. I doubt that car would be safe enough on the ovals.

Does Formula Nippon drive ovals? If so, my mistake.

1. In a thread referencing the Formula Nippon car, old CanAm cars, and Bruce Ashmore's proposal for a new Indy car, and the last post referring to the Formula Nippon car was six posts before yours, how are we to connect "Looks pretty cool" to the Formula Nippon car?

2. How can one "doubt that car would be safe enough on the ovals." just because it's used in a series that doesn't run on ovals. Any modern carbon fiber monocoque car meeting contemporary safety standards is going to be safer than the aluminum monocoque cars which ruled open wheel oval racing for 20 years. Without running an FEA on it, or crash testing it, it would be difficult to know. Even if something was found deficient, relatively minor changes to the lay-up may be all that's needed to make it comply.