Quote Originally Posted by Enjun Pullr
px400r: I think all the answers are in the Gordon Kirby article from April 2010 linked below, which is almost entirely in the own words of HPD's Erik Berkman.

Here Berkman is talking specifically about the 2.8 V6 for ALMS, but the strategy appears to be the same for the next IndyCar 2.4 V6. Honda had no intention of developing a GRE.

"We've been working very closely with the ACO regarding the sports car racing rules," Berkman says. "They've got new rules in 2011 and we've got a production-based V-6 engine that's under development right now that will be out there next year. Think Odyssey, Ridgeline, Pilot, Honda Accord or Acura TL. That family of engines is going to evolve into a full-on race engine that will be in P2 cars from next year."

There hadn't been much written in public about Honda's plans until this article came out, and it explained everything that had been hinted at previously. Most everything that Berkman refers to in the article has already come to pass. There is no reason to suspect his motives, as far as I can read.

ICONIC took what they were offered, and left the regulations open to accept a four cylinder. The chassis is designed to accept one, should a manufacturer step up. That's the only options, other than to also permit continued use of the V8 alongside the V6. Nobody seems interested in that prospect.

Full article:
http://www.gordonkirby.com/categorie..._is_no231.html
IIRC, the IRL did not want an equivalency formula and from what I've read, there was more interest from the manufacturers on a turbo-4/GRE engine than a V6.

I understand why HPD would want to have both the IRL and ALMS engines from the same basic design, but they must know that their objective would not produce the competition that they supposedly desire.

IMO, HPD needs to at least break even on this program, so their competition will come from sportscars while their profit will come from the IRL. It's the IRL that loses.