Fred Nation lays egg at Motor Industry Association conference

[DBell]

I came across this link and couldn't believe it when I read it.

http://www.rfmsports.com/IMSA/ALMS/S...ence.2008.html

This is what the conference was about:

The official banner of the conference was: “Fuel economy and energy efficiency: How racing can deliver innovative solutions…fast!” The unofficial tag was “Relevancy” and that theme was raised throughout the daylong conference held on Belle Isle at the Detroit Yacht Club.

This is what Fred said:

In contrast, Fred Nation, Executive V.P. of the IRL and Indianapolis Motor Speedway, offered only that all their cars operate on 100% ethanol. The remainder of his presentation focused on changes (or the lack thereof) to the IRL format following the “reunification” with CWS. For example, no one should expect to see less than 50% of their races held on ovals; the relevancy of which was lost on most conference participants. When asked if IRL was willing to become more radical, even in terms of chassis development, Nation remarked that there was “too much inertia in favor of the current evolution of Indy cars” to become really radical.

So at a conference of Industry big wigs and engineers, a perfect opportunity to state some of ideas the IRL would like to see in their future engine and chassis designs, they send Fred Nation in to say that. Brilliant!! I'm sure Fred's off topic and lack of vision for the future speech impressed the manufacturers to consider future involvement in the IRL. A stupid self inflicted wound.

Too bad the didn't have Rahal as the official IRL spokesman as he sounded great. Unfortunately he seemed to be there more for BMW and the ALMS.

[Rex Monaco]

Too bad the didn't have Rahal as the official IRL spokesman as he sounded great.

He sure did!


“Spec racing discourages innovation,” (Rahal) observed. Rahal pointed to the groundbreaking Granatelli Turbine car that very nearly won the 1967 Indy 500 only to be banned from future races by USAC. “Sanctioning bodies don’t see the big picture”, he said, the implication being that innovation must come from a “non-spec” racing series.

[Wilf]

The official banner of the conference was:

“Fuel economy and energy efficiency: How racing can deliver innovative solutions…fast!”

I am anxious to hear how a radical chassis will deliver an innovative solution to the energy efficiency. ....

Just exactly what does a chassis, radical or not, have to do with fuel economy or energy efficiency?

The ugly chassis has reduced to near acceptable levels the annual carnage which used to occur in the annual great experiment.

The Safer Barrier is now a staple of every major auto racing venue in the United States.

The variable ratio rack and pinion system was developed and currently resides in the flop stage.

And these? Energy efficiency? Good improvements all, but not pertinent to the subject.

I found the report by Neil Chapel terribly flawed; he chose to knock the presentation of the only organization that had done something innovative to providing solutions to declining natural resources, and a lack of renewable energy simply because he apparently doesn't like the results of the reunification. Did he even mention any statistics about the breakthough improvements IMSA has generated through their Green Racing Challenge?

I assume you're talking about the current fuel. Corn derived ethanol is far from a solution to declining natural resources, since it requires a higher energy input to produce than it yields.

[dataman1]

He sure did!


“Spec racing discourages innovation,” (Rahal) observed. Rahal pointed to the groundbreaking Granatelli Turbine car that very nearly won the 1967 Indy 500 only to be banned from future races by USAC. “Sanctioning bodies don’t see the big picture”, he said, the implication being that innovation must come from a “non-spec” racing series.

Rahal hit the nail on the head. Having nearly 25 yrs as an official in CART/CCWS, I'm very familiar with their rulebook. I had a chance to meet with officials and team members of ALMS while in Detroit. Afterwards it is obvious to me why they have manufacturers involved. The rules allow for innovation. Example: Suspension and shocks are free in ALMS while it took paragraphs and technical drawings to cover the same equipment in CART. (I have not been able to get my hands on an ICS rulebook yet.) Food for thought.

[Wilf]

Just exactly what does a chassis, radical or not, have to do with fuel economy or energy efficiency?

I think that is what I asked before being edited!

[Wilf]

Just exactly what does a chassis, radical or not, have to do with fuel economy or energy efficiency?


And these? Energy efficiency? Good improvements all, but not pertinent to the subject.


I assume you're talking about the current fuel. Corn derived ethanol is far from a solution to declining natural resources, since it requires a higher energy input to produce than it yields.

Why am I arguing with myself? Only the editor knows!!!

[indycool]

The thread starter provided a large leap in the story from its beginning to taking a shot at Nation. Coming from the IMSA/ALMS board, it's pretty obvious that Nation's comment about 50 percent ovals is featured to tell the road racers of the IRL to come to the ALMS instead.

[Chris R]

is there something missing from this thread? it does not really make sense?

Seems like Fred Nation was supposed to talk about energy efficiency in racing and didn't...

Sounds like Rahal did.

It does sound like Nation's comment about the "current trajectory of Indycar development" is a little out of touch with reality - I though we were talking about a new formula soon and we can all see that the "evolutionary" DP-01, while far from a flop as a car, was not what the doctor ordered in terms of revitalizing interest in Champcar.....

Anything else to the story??

[indycool]

Agreed, Chris. The story itself seems to be a left-handed ootch to competitors to play with ALMS rather than the IRL...if that was, it's even off-topic, so how far off topic can we tell that ANYONE went.

[DBell]

Anything else to the story??

Sure. Why didn't the IRL use this as an opportunity to at least say what general concepts they would like to see in the coming years in the form of technology come into the sport. Whether it be a KERS system, hybrid engines or whatever, show that someone in the series is thinking of a long term concept of how the IRL will develop.

There is very little evidence that I've seen that suggest the IRL has a big picture plan on how they will make the series attractive to auto manufacturers. Going by current TV ratings and a downgraded TV package for the future, marketing value doesn't seem to be that attractive of an option at the moment. So it has to be something else to get a company like BMW, for example, motivated to make the financial commitment to join. Relevancy is becoming a large looming question mark for all of auto racing as the world changes. Some series like ALMS,LMS and F1 are addressing this issue. The IRL needs to at least show it's thinking about it. To me, the IRL going to a conference like this and putting out the information it did says they have no long term direction. For a the IRL, a series that desperately needs a couple of manufacturers to join in 2 years, this was a needlessly wasted opportunity. They can't afford this. They have to be on the ball at every opportunity to convince companies that this series is worth investing in.