Push to Pass added starting with Kentucky [Archive]

NickFalzone

29th July 2009, 01:30

This is good news IMO, particularly in addition to the other aero changes that they're offering the teams. No guarantee the racing will be better, but in this spec series, I think says a lot about their desire to make the racing as exciting as possible for the fans under the current car package. Also good that P2P will be usable both on ovals and road circuits:

http://www.indycar.com/news/?story_id=14744

MDS

29th July 2009, 01:34

All we need now is option tires, standing starts on road courses and a change of ownership and the Champ Car take over of the IRL will be complete.

NickFalzone

29th July 2009, 01:36

MDS, I think we have all that, except for the standing starts.

MDS

29th July 2009, 01:39

Well gee you're right. And someone said Tony George, won the war...

Easy Drifter

29th July 2009, 02:20

Well I said months ago TG won the battle but the war had not been decided basically meaning the series survival and NASCAR.

elan 02

29th July 2009, 02:42

I do not think 20 hp will show up much. Champ Car had 50 hp boost .

maxmach

29th July 2009, 12:42

The push to pass will help, as mentioned on anothere post, it is used to prevent passes as much as help them, but anything to improve the show. And it will help, how much nobody knows, but another step in the right direction.
Yes the IRL is slapping bandaids on serious wounds, but it's all they got right now.

chuck34

29th July 2009, 13:31

Push to Pass is a stupid f'ing gimick that didn't do much for the racing in CART, and won't do anything for the IRL.

What they need to do is allow wing and wicker changes. That is so frigging simple, easy, and doesn't cost anything. Why no one is talking about doing this, I'll never know.

ShiftingGears

29th July 2009, 14:01

Gimmick.

Hoop-98

29th July 2009, 16:33

chuck34

29th July 2009, 17:53

They have removed the wicker for Kentucky.

rh

I missed that. Can you run any angle you want for the wing? Or run a wicker if you want?

drewdawg727

29th July 2009, 18:50

I agree - P2P is stupid for the sole reason that if it follows the same regulations as it did in CC, P2P will be activated until you hit the brake pedal.

With the cars never hitting the brake pedal at Kentucky, how is it going to do anything?

Mark in Oshawa

29th July 2009, 20:24

P2P is more or less a waste on an oval like Kentucky I think, but since CART/CCWS never ran any ovals really, we have to see how the drivers will employ it. It cant hurt, especially if a guy with all his P2P time needs to get around a guy for position late in the race who has used his up.

A gimmick? Ya...but it wont hurt the racing.

Those who dismiss it forget that it is another resource to be used or squandered. Smart drivers will use it wisely and may gain something. At worst, it does little...but it wont hurt.

drewdawg727

29th July 2009, 20:31

I just researched it on Indycar.com - says that they have 20 presses per race to add a designated amount of horsepower based on what fuel setting they are on.

NickFalzone

29th July 2009, 23:22

Drew, they have a full explanation of it on Versus.com, the article is listed on the main page. They also discuss the wickers, and it sounds like you can add wickers or not, and ultimately the downforce changes will probably add a little over 1mph to the top speeds, which is a good thing.

http://www.versus.com/nw/article/view/81848/?tf=bruce_martin.tpl

and their new "IndyCar 101" on drafting:

http://www.versus.com/indycar101

Chamoo

29th July 2009, 23:46

It actually has 12 seconds per push.

Dixon spoke highly of it when he tested it for the IRL on an oval.

Let's give it a chance and see how it goes. Can't be any worse then Richmond or Texas.

chuck34

30th July 2009, 00:02

I'm not saying that it will hurt the racing. At worst (and how I think it will end up) it will do nothing. Maybe I'm too "old school", but this gimmick just doesn't say RACING to me. It's more like a nitro button on some video game.

All I can say is *eh*, shrug, and move on to pressing for something that I think is better. Like actually allowing different set-ups and parts.

Mark in Oshawa

30th July 2009, 00:02

It actually has 12 seconds per push.

Dixon spoke highly of it when he tested it for the IRL on an oval.

Let's give it a chance and see how it goes. Can't be any worse then Richmond or Texas.

Aaah..but Chamoo, you forget, it is an idea from the dreaded CART/CCWS cabal, To some it CANT work just based on THAT.

Chamoo

30th July 2009, 00:05

Aaah..but Chamoo, you forget, it is an idea from the dreaded CART/CCWS cabal, To some it CANT work just based on THAT.

Lol, I understand. We'll see what happens.

wedge

30th July 2009, 00:16

P2P is more or less a waste on an oval like Kentucky I think,

Wouldn't P2P help through turbulent air?

Hoop-98

30th July 2009, 00:22

Aaah..but Chamoo, you forget, it is an idea from the dreaded CART/CCWS cabal, To some it CANT work just based on THAT.

Actually, unlike the extra boost of CART/CCWS it's more the going full rich like we used to have with a new name. I think the wicker change may be more important.

rh

grungex

30th July 2009, 01:28

NickFalzone

30th July 2009, 01:34

They didn't have fuel mixture cockpit adjustments from ~2003-2007. Dario won his championship in 07 thanks a great deal to the fact that in the last race, Dixon ran out of fuel on the last lap, which wouldn't have happened if he could have done a more fine-tuned adjustment in the cockpit. They should have left it this way but there was some backlash so they broughts all the knobs back last season. I agree, let the drivers do it with their feet and their lines.

PA Rick

30th July 2009, 01:38

Mark in Oshawa

30th July 2009, 02:08

Actually, unlike the extra boost of CART/CCWS it's more the going full rich like we used to have with a new name. I think the wicker change may be more important.

rh

My point Hoop is there are some who would see it as a bad idea no matter how it was implemented because of where it came from.

Hoop-98

30th July 2009, 02:25

My point Hoop is there are some who would see it as a bad idea no matter how it was implemented because of where it came from.

Of course, but be realistic, for everyone of those on this forum there will be an equal or larger number who think any idea from the IRL is bad. As a matter of fact I don't think the majority (Over 50%) here like much of anything discussed here for whatever reason, but thats just IMHO.

rh

TURN3

30th July 2009, 02:35

They should completely eliminate all fuel mixture knobs, buttons, and switches. If a driver wants to save fuel he should use his foot, if he wants to go faster he should use his foot. I realize it's complicated, but I'm sure they could figure it out eventually...

Ding ding ding ding ding...he winner is!!!!!!!

I've been saying this since fuel mileage races started becoming norm back in the mid 90's. Gil DeFerran won a race at Portland by putting the hammer down while the entire rest of the field played the fuel game...I was no fan of DeFerran but it sort of made that strategy a little more risky.

Hoop-98

30th July 2009, 02:37

Ding ding ding ding ding...he winner is!!!!!!!

I've been saying this since fuel mileage races started becoming norm back in the mid 90's. Gil DeFerran won a race at Portland by putting the hammer down while the entire rest of the field played the fuel game...I was no fan of DeFerran but it sort of made that strategy a little more risky.

So from 2003 - 2007 you were singing the praises of the IndyCar Series for this?

rh

TURN3

30th July 2009, 03:34

So from 2003 - 2007 you were singing the praises of the IndyCar Series for this?

rh

I don't understand the context of your question. I've never sung praises of the Indycar Series for anything really. What I was getting at is that when Champ Car and IRL each tried out the no fuel mixture adjustment option, it did away with fuel mileage races. To be honest, I can't totally remember which series did what in what year for how long off the top of my head but I know taking away the knob makes the racing better...and brings the more truly talented drivers the top because they can go faster while using less fuel.

Hoop-98

30th July 2009, 03:37

I don't understand the context of your question. I've never sung praises of the Indycar Series for anything really. What I was getting at is that when Champ Car and IRL each tried out the no fuel mixture adjustment option, it did away with fuel mileage races. To be honest, I can't totally remember which series did what in what year for how long off the top of my head but I know taking away the knob makes the racing better...and brings the more truly talented drivers the top because they can go faster while using less fuel.

Your kidding you haven't lol ? Well I don't think removing the knobs affected fuel economy racing in either series. Not sure how you can say it worked when you say you don't know when or if it ever happened?

rh

TURN3

30th July 2009, 05:24

Your kidding you haven't lol ? Well I don't think removing the knobs affected fuel economy racing in either series. Not sure how you can say it worked when you say you don't know when or if it ever happened?

rh

Maybe you can go back and quote where I said that I "don't know when or if it ever happened?". With all the tech data you post you'd think some of that intelligence would carry over to conversation.

trinksuk

30th July 2009, 13:24

some items to add to the above discussion

1. yes it is only 5 - 20bhp depending on fuel mixture - kind of hard to get more power from an already optimized engine
2. from Kentucky on the rev limiters will be removed from the cars
3. p2p also gives +200rpm, while not much on a road course it could be significant if a car is running in the rev limiter - maybe allows a following car to accelerate faster when running in the draft
4. Indycars ran fuel mixtures 2003 (and probably before) all the way through to now, there was a break part way through 2007 after the introduction of ethanol caused problems. Fuel mixtures are what allowed Sam to win the 500 in 2006, Marco to win Sonoma, Danica to win Motegi and many other notable driver / win combination's.
5. 12 secs at Kentucky per press, maybe more or less at Mid Ohio
6. It doesn't turn off with brakes, throttle - just time

Hoop-98

30th July 2009, 14:23

Maybe you can go back and quote where I said that I "don't know when or if it ever happened?". With all the tech data you post you'd think some of that intelligence would carry over to conversation.

"To be honest, I can't totally remember which series did what in what year for how long off the top of my head but I know taking away the knob makes the racing better" Seems pretty close to me, if not my profound apologies.

My opinion is, and I know ChampCar far better than Indy, none of the stuff they tried in this area "worked". Thats why they kept changing it.

Anyways, intelligence is in the eye of the beholder eh?

rh

TURN3

30th July 2009, 14:42

"To be honest, I can't totally remember which series did what in what year for how long off the top of my head but I know taking away the knob makes the racing better" Seems pretty close to me, if not my profound apologies.

My opinion is, and I know ChampCar far better than Indy, none of the stuff they tried in this area "worked". Thats why they kept changing it.

Anyways, intelligence is in the eye of the beholder eh?

rh

I followed CC much more closely myself too. I guess the issue with what you had said was "When or if". I know both series experimented with removing it and I think IRL went back to a 3 position system (mainly for pitting and yellows). The whole point is to "attempt" to get rid of fuel mileage races and I think it did do that through those years. As I said, you still had guys trying to stretch fuel but then they have to do it through long shifting and rolling into turns deeper off the gas...etc.

Marbles

30th July 2009, 18:10

When I saw the topic header I thought it meant PT was going to be competing in the race.

Although, overall, I don't enjoy the fuel strategy (conservation, knobs or not) way of winning, it has given us some dramatic finishes in the past. One that comes quickly to mind is Belle Isle '97. I also remember Fernandez and Rahal running dry a time or two. It's just a part of the sport.

I thought PTP was pretty much a non-starter in CC but hopefully these changes will spice up the existing formula we will have for the next couple of years.

Wade91

30th July 2009, 18:44

push to pass shound awesome! :D

chuck34

30th July 2009, 22:46

Of course, but be realistic, for everyone of those on this forum there will be an equal or larger number who think any idea from the IRL is bad. As a matter of fact I don't think the majority (Over 50%) here like much of anything discussed here for whatever reason, but thats just IMHO.

rh

Exaclty. I would venture to guess that a lot of the poeple on here that are loving P2P would be screaming bloody murder had TG thought of the idea first.

And just for the record, I don't care who thought of P2P first. I think it's a dumb idea on it's merits, as described in my earlier post.

TURN3

31st July 2009, 01:02

Exaclty. I would venture to guess that a lot of the poeple on here that are loving P2P would be screaming bloody murder had TG thought of the idea first.

And just for the record, I don't care who thought of P2P first. I think it's a dumb idea on it's merits, as described in my earlier post.

Tony did think of it, haven't you heard?