Randy wants to see the record broken

[SarahFan]

Hmmm

[electron]

which one?

attendance at seson finale?
drivers/season/car average?
fuel mileage/car/race?
cars attempting to qualify/race/year?
....

[NaBUru38]

Tom Carnegie must have the answer for that! :)

[V12]

Which one, the Indy 500 track record?

Would be great, although I'm sure the Health & Safety brigade would have a field day stopping it.

[DBell]

He's talking about the 500. Honda says it would have to use 3.5 liter engines and methanol with aero tweaks in the month of May to be able to achieve 240 mph lap times at Indy. If Honda has enough parts in inventory for the old engine, they would be willing to consider it, but they don't want to have to spend money to do it.

speed article:
http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/indycar-new-speed-records-part-of-bernards-plan/P2

[SarahFan]

Thanks for the link Dbell....I was posting from my phone..

interesting comments from Randy..


funny, no talk of insurance premiums limiting speed....he probably doesnt understand what's REALLY going on

[nigelred5]

I think he knows precisely what's going on. People are ungodly bored with the status quo yet again. I'm sick of spec racing and utter predictablity at this level. Next year is the 100th and they need a big spark to pack the place for pole day. No one oohs and aaaahs and gasps when someone lays down a hot lap any more. They shrug their shoulders, give it that "hmph" look and a mild smile and say "That'll do pig".

I've said this countless times about the 500. I want to hear:

"It's a nnnnnnewwwwww traaaaack recordddddd!" THAT is what Indy is about.

[Loneranger]

Where are all those people that said we would never see another track record? What do you have to say now?

[garyshell]

Where are all those people that said we would never see another track record? What do you have to say now?


I still say it won't happen and it is a fool's errand. For me and many others it never was what Indy was about. It was and always will be, in my mind, a sideshow at the "big top". The real show was on the track during the race.

Again in my mind, chasing that dragon once more is just asking for trouble. Simple physics dictate there is an upper limit of speed paired with the current state of safety measures. And I think we already saw that limit, unless we also see a HUGE difference in the safety measures, specifically the system to keep cars out of the stands. It is weak as it is. Just look at the video of the incidents of cars in the fences the past ten years or so, and think how lucky we were that the bad ones happened where they did, on the back stretch.

But assuming the safety issues are mitigated somehow. What's the payoff? A two minute celebration of the new record. BFD. The concentration needs to be on the RACING, not on the record. The event is what matters, not the sideshow.

Gary

[nigelred5]

So then we have the current situation where the big show is in reality no different than any other race. Qualify on Saturday then and race on Sunday, just like every other processional race. It this point, I'm not going to argue with a promoter with a good track record of drawing one hell of a lot of attention to a 6 second sport.

[garyshell]

So then we have the current situation where the big show is in reality no different than any other race. Qualify on Saturday then and race on Sunday, just like every other processional race. It this point, I'm not going to argue with a promoter with a good track record of drawing one hell of a lot of attention to a 6 second sport.


I am not advocating, in any way, that we change the qualifying arrangements. I am just advocating against the idea of chasing "a new track record".

Gary

[Mark in Oshawa]

I still say it won't happen and it is a fool's errand. For me and many others it never was what Indy was about. It was and always will be, in my mind, a sideshow at the "big top". The real show was on the track during the race.

Again in my mind, chasing that dragon once more is just asking for trouble. Simple physics dictate there is an upper limit of speed paired with the current state of safety measures. And I think we already saw that limit, unless we also see a HUGE difference in the safety measures, specifically the system to keep cars out of the stands. It is weak as it is. Just look at the video of the incidents of cars in the fences the past ten years or so, and think how lucky we were that the bad ones happened where they did, on the back stretch.

But assuming the safety issues are mitigated somehow. What's the payoff? A two minute celebration of the new record. BFD. The concentration needs to be on the RACING, not on the record. The event is what matters, not the sideshow.

Gary

For the most part Gary, I am with you. If a track record happens in the next few years, maybe that is a good thing, but artificially changing the rules so we have a sure track record this upcoming May is a fool's errand and I am with you 100% that safety will become an issue, and not just for the drivers. The idea of a car in the stands is one that has never left my mind....

[SarahFan]

Why not have both?

Speed and great racing?

And would you like to discuss your claims that a track record won't happen because of insurance now Gary.... Or would it just be easier to pretend you never made them?

[Chris R]

The key to successfully managing "new track record" is to make sure it is a record, but not by much and to only allow the rules to loosen up every 4 or 5 years for it to happen... Theo ther key may be to loosen up qualifying rules or give htem more power for qaulifying - maybe allow the fast 10 to have at it for a track record derby - once they have the turbos all you have to do is cranky up the boost and say, here is your special engine for the pole position shootout.... If you allow all 33 cars to run at track record speeds together you are asking for trouble - but if you only allow qualifying speeds to be super-fast the is significantly less risk.... I am not convinced that it is necessary to race much faster - but knowing hte cars CAN and do go faster is really cool.....

[Hoop-98]

You can get 5 or 6 MPH bu using CART/CC?FIA measurements. Then ignore that measurement when calculating the event length.

Go look at the old CART Fontana timing charts. they used those for speed but called it a 2 mile track for the '500".

Seriously, if it isn't a standard car, IMO, it's an exhibition record. Get jato rockets for Q, whatever....

rh

[call_me_andrew]

Forget the qualifying speed record. Wouldn't anyone like to see the 500-mile race speed record broken?

[downtowndeco]

Some of ones whining the most for a new track record are the same exact guys who will say "I told you so" if something tragic happens.

It's not so much if someone were to just break the record on one great day using the perfect set up & a hot shoe. It's just that there is no end to it. At what point do we say, "Enough. That's too dangerous for both driver & spectators"?

The thing is, with slightly different rules I suspect that the technology exists to run a 245/250 lap (or faster) at Indy. But when you get that close to the knives edge you're just asking for trouble. It's only a matter of time. Just like the NHRA fuel cars. You need to just take a step back at some point and say, "Nah, let's just call it a day before we kill somebody."

[call_me_andrew]

It's not so much if someone were to just break the record on one great day using the perfect set up & a hot shoe. It's just that there is no end to it. At what point do we say, "Enough. That's too dangerous for both driver & spectators"?

We say that after we win at Space Invaders.

[NaBUru38]

We had Meira's and Conway's crashes the last two editions. I'm not sure if drivers will like to go even faster.


Theo ther key may be to loosen up qualifying rules or give htem more power for qaulifying - maybe allow the fast 10 to have at it for a track record derby - once they have the turbos all you have to do is cranky up the boost and say, here is your special engine for the pole position shootout.... If you allow all 33 cars to run at track record speeds together you are asking for trouble - but if you only allow qualifying speeds to be super-fast the is significantly less risk....
I like that idea.

[SarahFan]

We had Meira's and Conway's crashes the last two editions. I'm not sure if drivers will like to go even faster.


I like that idea.



Drivers?.... Maybe not

But the racers do.....Paul Tracy and Tomas Shekter are on record as saying the record needs to fall...

Tomas said in a recent blog that Kansan and Dario think it's time

[SarahFan]

There’s no track in the world that gives that feeling more than Indianapolis and that’s exactly why I think we need to be going 230 – 240 mph. Great ad campaigns like IZOD’s and leadership are of the upmost importance to any sport, but racing is sexy, dangerous, loud, scary, and on the edge. It’s all about speed, going for it, and breaking records. 220 is a thing of the past, if we’re approaching 240 we’ll be on the front page of every major newspaper in the country. Racing needs to get back to being on the edge, being on the edge is what Indy is all about. It’s the bravest drivers at the fastest track taking it to the absolute limit. We’re not playing ping-pong, darts, or bowling. We’re driving IndyCars at the greatest racetrack in the world and that’s a privilege. If you want that privilege, you have to ask yourself, “Am I willing to take that risk?” If the answer is no then it’s time to hang it up. There’s no greater feeling in the world than being able to say you were lucky enough to be one of the 33 drivers at Indianapolis.
My dad will probably hate me for saying this as he was the head of the Drivers Association when he was in Formula One. They focused a lot on safety but back in his days they lost 2-3 drivers a year. It’s a whole different world today. I’m not trying to say I want to see people get hurt or anything but I do think it’s important that we get the fans respect back. There are things we can do better to increase the safety, but still allow for higher speeds. Tony Kanaan and Dario Franchitti have started having some meetings with drivers to get everyone’s point of view on safety, etc. It’s my opinion we can absolutely go 230-240 mph safely.

[DBell]

There’s no track in the world that gives that feeling more than Indianapolis and that’s exactly why I think we need to be going 230 – 240 mph. Great ad campaigns like IZOD’s and leadership are of the upmost importance to any sport, but racing is sexy, dangerous, loud, scary, and on the edge. It’s all about speed, going for it, and breaking records. 220 is a thing of the past, if we’re approaching 240 we’ll be on the front page of every major newspaper in the country. Racing needs to get back to being on the edge, being on the edge is what Indy is all about. It’s the bravest drivers at the fastest track taking it to the absolute limit. We’re not playing ping-pong, darts, or bowling. We’re driving IndyCars at the greatest racetrack in the world and that’s a privilege. If you want that privilege, you have to ask yourself, “Am I willing to take that risk?” If the answer is no then it’s time to hang it up. There’s no greater feeling in the world than being able to say you were lucky enough to be one of the 33 drivers at Indianapolis.
My dad will probably hate me for saying this as he was the head of the Drivers Association when he was in Formula One. They focused a lot on safety but back in his days they lost 2-3 drivers a year. It’s a whole different world today. I’m not trying to say I want to see people get hurt or anything but I do think it’s important that we get the fans respect back. There are things we can do better to increase the safety, but still allow for higher speeds. Tony Kanaan and Dario Franchitti have started having some meetings with drivers to get everyone’s point of view on safety, etc. It’s my opinion we can absolutely go 230-240 mph safely.

I agree Ken. Good Post. Who is your Dad?

[SarahFan]

I agree Ken. Good Post. Who is your Dad?

my dad raced dunebuggies in the Baja 500 and 1000 in the early 70's against guys like mears, evans, Parnelli Jones and Mickey thompson......and he (my dad) is a great guy!

but the above is an excerpt from a Blog Tomas schekter wrote a few days ago......

[SarahFan]

* there is nothing artificial about a racer strapping and piloting a indy around IMS at 240mph....

what the sport needs is for everyy racer, owner, team member AND FAN to talk about for the 5 1/2 months every chance they get

[DBell]

my dad raced dunebuggies in the Baja 500 and 1000 in the early 70's against guys like mears, evans, Parnelli Jones and Mickey thompson......and he (my dad) is a great guy!

but the above is an excerpt from a Blog Tomas schekter wrote a few days ago......

Lol, If I had paid more attention to the first person narrative of your post, I might have caught on that something was off.

Really cool your Dad did the Baja 500 and 1000 back in the day. I grew up and spent my early adult years in Phoenix and So. Cal. and have huge respect for people who did or do those races. Some of the most grueling races in motorsport, imo.

[garyshell]

Why not have both?

Speed and great racing?

And would you like to discuss your claims that a track record won't happen because of insurance now Gary.... Or would it just be easier to pretend you never made them?


I am not going to pretend I never said it. Nor am I going to get back into the argument with you again unless you have something new to contribute to the discussion again. It was all said before and I haven't changed my mind on the subject. Feel free to go back and re-read the discussions if you'd like Ken, I have no intention to rehash it again.

Gary

[garyshell]

Forget the qualifying speed record. Wouldn't anyone like to see the 500-mile race speed record broken?


I totally agree. But there are others here who won't.

Gary

[garyshell]

Some of ones whining the most for a new track record are the same exact guys who will say "I told you so" if something tragic happens.

It's not so much if someone were to just break the record on one great day using the perfect set up & a hot shoe. It's just that there is no end to it. At what point do we say, "Enough. That's too dangerous for both driver & spectators"?

The thing is, with slightly different rules I suspect that the technology exists to run a 245/250 lap (or faster) at Indy. But when you get that close to the knives edge you're just asking for trouble. It's only a matter of time. Just like the NHRA fuel cars. You need to just take a step back at some point and say, "Nah, let's just call it a day before we kill somebody."

Oh come on, now you are just talking sense! ;) There is a theoretical limit to the speed that can be safely achieved given the limits of the catch fencing and other safety measures at the track. But some seem hell bent on finding out where that limit actually lies. All for the fleeting thrill of hearing "a new track record" for what may be two seconds over the PA. As I said before BFD.

Gary

[chuck34]

Forget the qualifying speed record. Wouldn't anyone like to see the 500-mile race speed record broken?

The 500 mile race speed record could easily be broken right now. All it takes is for the race to go caution free, or at least less than the number they had in 1990.

No, a record race speed would do nothing to help the sport. In fact, I believe it could be a detriment. First, no one would care about the race speed, that's never been something people have talked about. Second, the fewer cautions you get, the more strung out the field is, and there will probably be all sorts of calls of the race being "boring" and "a parade". That won't do anything to bring in new viewers.

The real excitement would come from the anticipation of seeing the lap record go down. Although in the grand scheme of things it wouldn't really be a huge deal either. But if you start to add up a bunch of little bumps in the excitement, after a while you might even start to hear a buzz about the sport again.

[Loneranger]

Oh come on, now you are just talking sense! ;) There is a theoretical limit to the speed that can be safely achieved given the limits of the catch fencing and other safety measures at the track. But some seem hell bent on finding out where that limit actually lies. All for the fleeting thrill of hearing "a new track record" for what may be two seconds over the PA. As I said before BFD.

Gary

It has nothing to do with hearing an announcer declare a new track record.

It has to do with seeing the boundaries pushed. Both in qualifying and in the race.

Why are you so apposed to that?

[SarahFan]

I am not going to pretend I never said it. Nor am I going to get back into the argument with you again unless you have something new to contribute to the discussion again. It was all said before and I haven't changed my mind on the subject. Feel free to go back and re-read the discussions if you'd like Ken, I have no intention to rehash it again.

Gary



Just manning up and admitting your wrong would be cool...

Not gonna happen though is it

[DBell]

It has nothing to do with hearing an announcer declare a new track record.

It has to do with seeing the boundaries pushed. Both in qualifying and in the race.


I couldn't agree more. Well said.

[downtowndeco]

I don't know that he is wrong. Get back to us after it happens. I think Randy is indulging in some wishful thinking here. He might look at it an entirely different way after he goes over cold hard facts of the situation, both in dollar cost and the potential cost in human life.

Until it happens Gary is still right.


Just manning up and admitting your wrong would be cool...

Not gonna happen though is it

[garyshell]

Just manning up and admitting your wrong would be cool...

Not gonna happen though is it


I see you have nothing new to contribute to the discussion. We're done.

Gary

[garyshell]

It has nothing to do with hearing an announcer declare a new track record.

It has to do with seeing the boundaries pushed. Both in qualifying and in the race.

Why are you so apposed to that?


Which part of "There is a theoretical limit to the speed that can be safely achieved given the limits of the catch fencing and other safety measures at the track." didn't you understand? Why do you think the NHRA went through all the hand wringing and re-thinking they had to do recently? There is a limit, I think we have reached it. Until measures are made to limit the possibility of a car and/or parts in the stands, I think pushing the boundary higher is, as I said, a fool's errand. It does NOTHING to improve the racing. It only satisfies a small groups lust for more speed. I could care less about the terminal velocity these cars reach. I do want to see good competition, plain and simple.

Gary

[SarahFan]

I don't know that he is wrong. Get back to us after it happens. I think Randy is indulging in some wishful thinking here. He might look at it an entirely different way after he goes over cold hard facts of the situation, both in dollar cost and the potential cost in human life.

Until it happens Gary is still right.



So you thi k we won't see a new track record be uase insurance dictates that speeds be limited?

[downtowndeco]

Speak English man, speak English...


So you thi k we won't see a new track record be uase insurance dictates that speeds be limited?

[SarahFan]

Are you saying we will never see another track record at IMS because The hulman/George family can't get insurance to cover the speed?

Because Gary has, with absolutely no basis, in the past

[DBell]

Which part of "There is a theoretical limit to the speed that can be safely achieved given the limits of the catch fencing and other safety measures at the track." didn't you understand? Why do you think the NHRA went through all the hand wringing and re-thinking they had to do recently? There is a limit, I think we have reached it. Until measures are made to limit the possibility of a car and/or parts in the stands, I think pushing the boundary higher is, as I said, a fool's errand. It does NOTHING to improve the racing. It only satisfies a small groups lust for more speed. I could care less about the terminal velocity these cars reach. I do want to see good competition, plain and simple.

Gary

Where is this quote you gave from and who decided that this is the case? What study was done to determine that over 230 mph, cars are more likely to get air born and end up in the stands? There have been more cars getting big air and ending up in the fencing during the IRL's tenure than I ever remember during the CART years, despite the higher speeds that CART ran at much of the time. In my opinion, the IRL's propensity to have flying cars some of the time doesn't have anything to do with the car or the speed it is going. It's because of the pack racing the IRL has produced and the 100s of miles of racing with the wheels inches apart that has been the culprit of flying cars during the IRL period. So to me, saying we can't go a little faster for the sake of safety, but we will continue to have pack racing while we hold our breath and hope the worst doesn't happen doesn't make sense.

Seriously, does anyone have anything other than opinion that proves another 10 or 15 mph of speed at Indy is the tipping point of safety and cars going into the stands?

[garyshell]

Where is this quote you gave from and who decided that this is the case? What study was done to determine that over 230 mph, cars are more likely to get air born and end up in the stands? There have been more cars getting big air and ending up in the fencing during the IRL's tenure than I ever remember during the CART years, despite the higher speeds that CART ran at much of the time. In my opinion, the IRL's propensity to have flying cars some of the time doesn't have anything to do with the car or the speed it is going. It's because of the pack racing the IRL has produced and the 100s of miles of racing with the wheels inches apart that has been the culprit of flying cars during the IRL period. So to me, saying we can't go a little faster for the sake of safety, but we will continue to have pack racing while we hold our breath and hope the worst doesn't happen doesn't make sense.

Seriously, does anyone have anything other than opinion that proves another 10 or 15 mph of speed at Indy is the tipping point of safety and cars going into the stands?

The quote was my own, right in the post that LoneRanger quoted when he asked: "It has to do with seeing the boundaries pushed. Both in qualifying and in the race. Why are you so apposed to that?" I think it is obvious that top speed is a factor in the safety of the folks sitting in the stands. Didn't the NHRA go through this exercise recently? Do we need to do the same thing to learn from what happened there? Didn't NASCAR institute restrictor plates because of a speed/safety issue?

I totally agree with you that there have been a lot more airborne cars in the IRL days than in the CART era. And you are correct that there has never been any sort of definitive study done, and that, to me, is the problem. We don't know. Sorry, but to suggest that the speed is not a factor doesn't make any sense to me. Physics sort of dictates that it is a factor.

No, no one has anything to prove that another 10 or 15 MPH is the tipping point. But frankly I don't want to us to find out that tipping point by pushing the boundary until we cross the line.

All I have been trying to say throughout this entire conversation is that I don't think that the payoff for setting "a new track record" is worth the possibility of a safety issue. As I have said time and again, I could care less what the top speed is. I have never felt it was important at all. What is important to me is the on track competition.

Maybe 10 or 15 mph won't make a difference. But then what? 20 to 30, 50 to 75? Where do we stop?

Finally, I am no fan of the 100% throttle pack racing and have continued to call for changes in the aero rules that would require the drivers to lift and brake in the corners at all oval tracks.

Gary

[call_me_andrew]

The 500 mile race speed record could easily be broken right now. All it takes is for the race to go caution free, or at least less than the number they had in 1990.

No, a record race speed would do nothing to help the sport. In fact, I believe it could be a detriment. First, no one would care about the race speed, that's never been something people have talked about. Second, the fewer cautions you get, the more strung out the field is, and there will probably be all sorts of calls of the race being "boring" and "a parade". That won't do anything to bring in new viewers.

The real excitement would come from the anticipation of seeing the lap record go down. Although in the grand scheme of things it wouldn't really be a huge deal either. But if you start to add up a bunch of little bumps in the excitement, after a while you might even start to hear a buzz about the sport again.

I was refering to any 500-mile race, not just at Indianapolis. I am including Tony Kanan's 186.097 mph 500-mile race at Michigan in 1999 and Mark Martin's 188.354 mph 500-mile race at Talladega in 1997.

Excitment comes from good races, not low lap times on an empty track.

[downtowndeco]

I'm not saying they can't buy insurance. You can buy insurance for just about anything. But it will cost you. Big time.

I'm saying they've weighed the costs vs the benifits and decided they don't want to go down that path. Not just Indycar, NASCAR, NHRA, any big time racing series. Enough is enough.

As far as the drivers, there will always be a few wild hairs that will have no problem tooling around a speedway at breakneck speed in a tee shirt and no seat belt. But the majority of professional racers will tell you at a certain point the risk vs reward is too high for the sake of entertainment. Hell, the NHRA fuel drivers just about went on strike because the speeds were getting so ridiculous. You start sending 33 cars around the track wheel to wheel at 240+ for a few hours and some of those guys aren't going to make it back to the pits alive. It's just too close to the edge.


Are you saying we will never see another track record at IMS because The hulman/George family can't get insurance to cover the speed?

Because Gary has, with absolutely no basis, in the past

[TURN3]

I remember going to Indy from the early 80's and all the other oval tracks throught the mid 90's and how glued to practice and qualifying the stands were when the records kept falling. The entire month of May, during practice people listened for Carnegie to call the lap times and the crowd went crazy when a car even got close. I've seen oval records fall at Indy, Milwaukee, Gateway, Chicago-Cicero, Homestead (the real one, not the Mickey Mouse track they raced one past couple years), Michigan, and Fontana (world closed course speed record). I don't care what any of you say about insurance and safety, the fans and especially the casual fans are intrigued by the speed AND the danger.

Speed is dangerous. Danger is a part of racing, I'd challenge anyone to tell me when they were 8 years old they were watching because they "got it". We were watching for a crash to see the destruction...then we grew to "get" the art and skill of racing. There is no danger factor in racing today and I think that is as big of reason the fan base is gone as any. Evil Kneivel didn't become famous for his concern for safety.

Yes, as a pure racing fan today I can say that I appreciate the on track competition as much as the speed but, that doesn't rivet an 8 year old kid or a casual fan to the TV. Sorry but if Indycar racing is to be a premeir racing series...LET 'EM RIP. I don't want to see anyone get hurt but with technology alway improving, that becomes less and less likely. You're never going to prevent the possibility no matter what the speeds. Fact is you're just going to have to deal with it.

[downtowndeco]

How you get that out of what he or I posted I have no idea. Of course, that would be typical for you.

Until someone breaks the record Gary is still right. And that would make you still wrong. Wishful thinking and PR talk doesn't make something true even if you want it to be.


So in short.... Gary was flat out wrong, doesn't have the balls to admit it

And you jumped in to back him up .... With no idea what you were backing up

[SarahFan]

How you get that out of what he or I posted I have no idea. Of course, that would be typical for you.

Until someone breaks the record Gary is still right. And that would make you still wrong. Wishful thinking and PR talk doesn't make something true even if you want it to be.


Can you post anything that supports the claim that a new track record at ims will NEVER be broken again because of insurance?

*I don't think you even k ow what dog you have in this discussion

[garyshell]

Can you post anything that supports the claim that a new track record at ims will NEVER be broken again because of insurance?

*I don't think you even k ow what dog you have in this discussion


No one said NEVER (as always you want to keep moving the goalposts). What has been said over and over is it's a slippery slope, where do you want to stop? 250, 260, 280, 300? At some point the underwriters will increase the rates to the point that it is no longer viable.

Gary

[garyshell]

Danger is a part of racing, I'd challenge anyone to tell me when they were 8 years old they were watching because they "got it". We were watching for a crash to see the destruction...then we grew to "get" the art and skill of racing. There is no danger factor in racing today and I think that is as big of reason the fan base is gone as any.

I'll take that challenge. At 8 years old I had an "uncle" (my mother's cousin who she was very close to) who raced in NASCAR, and I sure as hell didn't watch to see him or anyone else get wrecked. I did watch to see him fight and scrape with Fireball Roberts, Marvin Panch and the like. But I wanted to see them all cross the finish line. I always, even then, abhorred the fact that there were jerks out there who did want to see the car wreck, maybe because I had skin in the game.

Gary

[SarahFan]

No one said NEVER (as always you want to keep movig the goalposts). What has been said over and over is it's a slippery slope, where do you want to stop? 250, 260, 280, 300? At some point the underwriters will increase the rates to the point that it is no longer viable.

Gary


Link

[garyshell]

Link

Same old broken record huh?

Gary

[SarahFan]

Same old broken record huh?

Gary


your the one who said it, not me...

man up

[chuck34]

I was refering to any 500-mile race, not just at Indianapolis. I am including Tony Kanan's 186.097 mph 500-mile race at Michigan in 1999 and Mark Martin's 188.354 mph 500-mile race at Talladega in 1997.

Excitment comes from good races, not low lap times on an empty track.

The argument doesn't change with the track. What is stopping the 500 mile record from falling anywhere? It's the cautions. You go caution free, even with the "slow" IRL cars from the mid to late '90s, and you could shatter the 500 mile speed record.

The point is, no one would care. And in reality, most "casual" fans (and that's really what we're talking about here) would think that that fast race was just boring pack racing. That's not what anyone wants.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Which part of "There is a theoretical limit to the speed that can be safely achieved given the limits of the catch fencing and other safety measures at the track." didn't you understand? Why do you think the NHRA went through all the hand wringing and re-thinking they had to do recently? There is a limit, I think we have reached it. Until measures are made to limit the possibility of a car and/or parts in the stands, I think pushing the boundary higher is, as I said, a fool's errand. It does NOTHING to improve the racing. It only satisfies a small groups lust for more speed. I could care less about the terminal velocity these cars reach. I do want to see good competition, plain and simple.

Gary

I think laps in the 230's and tickling 240 might still be feasible and marginally safe...but you take the shackles off the genie to get the records, and we could have 240 mph lap speeds in the race..and at some point, someone will screw up..and everyone can see how much punishment a chassis gives a driver hitting the wall at that speed. Or how far bits can fly over the fences.

The issue I think isn't about what the drivers want, it will always come back to insurance, and the limits of physics. If anyone hasn't been paying attention, we have had some scary wrecks at the speeds they do NOW. Vitor last year, Conway this year went for some pretty wild rides. At 220. The forces on the car in an accident climb exponentially. At 240, it is likely going to be a hell of a lot worse than an accident at 220, and I can tell you if they start going above 250, we don't KNOW what really will happen. The engineers can tell you this and that and guestimate...but you see a car in the stands and this sport is DONE. FINIS. KAPUT.....

It is the reason NASCAR wont take the plates off the cars at Dega and Daytona, and those tanks are a damn sight less likely to float in the wind than an Indy car....

[nigelred5]

....Yet they are in the air far more often than an Indycar. Let them loose in qualifying then revert back to a minimum wing angle/wicker for the racing.

The new car should be safer and far easier to control speeds, but I know they wnat the record to fall for the 100th. It needs excitement that doesn't exist in the current formula, but in the end I just want to see a return of actual racing. The parade is downtown on Saturday.

[Chris R]

....Yet they are in the air far more often than an Indycar. Let them loose in qualifying then revert back to a minimum wing angle/wicker for the racing.

The new car should be safer and far easier to control speeds, but I know they wnat the record to fall for the 100th. It needs excitement that doesn't exist in the current formula, but in the end I just want to see a return of actual racing. The parade is downtown on Saturday.

I agree - let them have at it in qualifying - faster racing is not necessarily better racing - but faster speeds are pretty cool.... it would also make a fairly unique aspect of the sport to promote - promote the super fast cars and the nerve of the drivers for qualifying and that the cars are sooo fast they have to slow 'em down to make a good race..... You can also refuse to sell the first "X" rows for qualifying or make people sign some sort of super-wavier to be in the the front rows for qualifying.... I know some people think it is BS - but I think it is a pretty sensible twist that is in keeping with the capability of modern machines an the limitations imposed by having spectators in the stands and just plain old common sense.... The same idea works really well for road courses too - like the turbo days of F-1 - give them more than they can handle to qualify to qualify and make the cars more reasonable for racing.....

[Mark in Oshawa]

It is all for the show I guess...but I watch the 500 because it is the 500, and I watch it when I like the racing. I find if they are going 220 or 240, it wont matter if they cant pass each other.

[Easy Drifter]

I know the cars have gone faster at Indy but at some stage the drivers cannot take it.
Remember what happened at Texas with CART.
The combined lateral and vertical (compression) G forces were causing the drivers to black out, some quicker than others.
That point has not been reached elsewhere and at Indy the speeds have been highter than at present.
The thing is that there is a very fine line between safe and disaster and extremely little is really known about exactly where that point is.
Dr. Steve Olvey goes into it in depth in his book but it caught every one totally unprepared when it happened. Even the US military had never run across it.
I do not know how closely IC are monitoring G loadings or if they even are but it has to be in the back of peoples' minds.
It is also quite possible the threshold for drivers who have had concussion might be lower. Concussion is better understood now than it was just a few years ago but there is still a long way to go.

[SarahFan]

Reading between the lines it sure seems folks assume faster speeds mean pot racing

Yet history has shown the exact opposite

[SarahFan]

I know the cars have gone faster at Indy but at some stage the drivers cannot take it.
Remember what happened at Texas with CART.
The combined lateral and vertical (compression) G forces were causing the drivers to black out, some quicker than others.
That point has not been reached elsewhere and at Indy the speeds have been highter than at present.
The thing is that there is a very fine line between safe and disaster and extremely little is really known about exactly where that point is.
Dr. Steve Olvey goes into it in depth in his book but it caught every one totally unprepared when it happened. Even the US military had never run across it.
I do not know how closely IC are monitoring G loadings or if they even are but it has to be in the back of peoples' minds.
It is also quite possible the threshold for drivers who have had concussion might be lower. Concussion is better understood now than it was just a few years ago but there is still a long way to go.

Very realm concern.... But g-loads are going to be a concern much much sooner at the cookie cutter d-shaped ovals much sooner than at Indy

[Chamoo]

Those high banked ovals are the most susceptible to drivers blacking out. Indy will be fine, especially if they do 250 down the straights, and 150 in the corners. It is the cornering speed that is the problem everywhere, going in a straight line is no concern.

[SarahFan]

Those high banked ovals are the most susceptible to drivers blacking out. Indy will be fine, especially if they do 250 down the straights, and 150 in the corners. It is the cornering speed that is the problem everywhere, going in a straight line is no concern.

not just the cornering speeds, but a combination of the straight speeds and the relatively short straights that do not allow the blood to flow correctly...

its the high corner g's and not enough time between them to aloow the body to recover..

wont be a problem at indy .......at least for a long while

[Easy Drifter]

It is/was to quite an extent the length of time in a high G loading with both vertical and horizontal loadings at the same time.
I think Indy itself is fairly far away from a problem but nobody really knows. It has only happened the once and the IC cars do not approach the danger zone at Texas.
The thing is if they allow the cars to break the lap record at Indy do they have to run a different configuration elsewhere or do they reach the danger zone at other tracks. Running different spec packages gets expensive.
The last thing IC needs is something like what happened at Texas.

[Hoop-98]

Here is a look at a 235 MPH corner at Indy.

http://i54.tinypic.com/71timx.jpg

Some of the G Loads from Texas over the year. The vertical load was much higher at Texas, almost 3 G's vertical at 230.

http://i56.tinypic.com/rvvqqo.jpg

No DF is needed to run 230 at Texas.

With no downforce the corner speeds at Indy would be around 170.

rh

[Chris R]

Hoop, what numbers are comparing apples to apples from the two charts??

[Mark in Oshawa]

Reading between the lines it sure seems folks assume faster speeds mean pot racing

Yet history has shown the exact opposite

Where do you have the proof in that? I am not saying you are wrong or right, but show me how the racing was better and I can also point to it being the glory days of CART where you also had 20 strong cars and a wing package that allowed guys to draft at a place like Michigan...and meanwhile the crowds THERE were getting smaller and smaller.

I am not totally against going faster, but I think if the qualifying speeds at Indy were 10 Mph, it wouldn't translate to better races. There are a lot of factors in allowing cars to be more racy with each other...

[Hoop-98]

Hoop, what numbers are comparing apples to apples from the two charts??

Here are both tracks at 231 Turn Speed. The Downforce is an approximation of how much is needed to make the turns, this is a reasonably close idea of how they compare.

http://i54.tinypic.com/9uolew.jpg

http://i52.tinypic.com/zlw39l.jpg

As mentioned above, at Texas their was very little recovery time between peak G's.

BTW, unless we add rocket boosters you can't come off the corner at 150, accelerate to 250 and slow to 150 for the next turn. Not realistic by any stretch of the imagination.

rh

[Hoop-98]

Oops, corrected the weight

http://i54.tinypic.com/23stet2.jpg

[Easy Drifter]

Thanks Hoop. I should have expected you to have the comparisons!
My concern, which I did not express well, is that a configuration used at Indy might create problems at other tracks.
Every different areo package is extremely costly so they should be kept to a minimum.
Then again a small team just might trip over something!

[fan-veteran]

No DF is needed to run 230 at Texas.
WTF :confused: Well, it seems that with 24 deg banking and this incredible grip of 1,41 it is possible ... AMAZING!!!
As for Indy, maybe we need more draft options. They were artificially got in late 90's in CART with so called Handford device. What if the top speeds hit 250 mph (instead of 230 now), but corner left to be 220-225 as now? I have also risen the point in the past - no tyres which leave marbles on the track, it ruins racing!

[SarahFan]

Where do you have the proof in that? I am not saying you are wrong or right, but show me how the racing was better and I can also point to it being the glory days of CART where you also had 20 strong cars and a wing package that allowed guys to draft at a place like Michigan...and meanwhile the crowds THERE were getting smaller and smaller.

I am not totally against going faster, but I think if the qualifying speeds at Indy were 10 Mph, it wouldn't translate to better races. There are a lot of factors in allowing cars to be more racy with each other...


The weekend Gil went 241 CART saw a record number of passes for the lead and passes period throughout the race .... And I believe the fastest race ever for the IRL was also at Fontana ... Cautionless? Or a single caution I believe. It also had a record nber of passes for the lead in an irl race

Now we all may not agree on exactly what makes a PERFECT race.... But speed and passes certainly makes for an disputably good race

[SarahFan]

The weekend Gil went 241 CART saw a record number of passes for the lead and passes period throughout the race .... And I believe the fastest race ever for the IRL was also at Fontana ... Cautionless? Or a single caution I believe. It also had a record nber of passes for the lead in an irl race

Now we all may not agree on exactly what makes a PERFECT race.... But speed and passes certainly makes for an indisputably good race

..sorry, kust wanted to change that to 'indisputably'

[call_me_andrew]

I had no idea stuckness could be measured.

[Hoop-98]

When I invented it I included the units!