New car news!!

[chuck34]

Is that what was happening prior to the last track record? Cause prior to the last track record they were allowed to race to infinity and beyond.

Really? They never reduced the wing size prior to '96? They never reduced the tunnel size prior to '96? They never reduced the allowable boost prior to '96? They never reduced engine displacement prior to '96? Heck they never outlawed wheel coverings either? You are seriously going to stake out the position that IndyCars have never been slowed down? That there have never been rules put in place specifically to slow them down?

You are serious when you say "they were allowed to race to infinity and beyond"?

[chuck34]

So clearly you don't understand my point of view! ;)

Please enlighten me/us. It sure seems that you have been saying over and over again that you want faster speeds, all else be damned especially safety. If that is not your point of view, please do explain it in a rational, reasonable, and calm way.

[zzatz]

Hey Sarahfan, maybe these guys are all right, maybe we should slow the cars down....

Who are these guys that you are talking about? I've haven't seen anyone advocate slowing the cars down. You're either arguing with imaginary people, or misrepresenting what real people actually said.

What I am saying is that speed is only one part of racing. When I look at the problems that IndyCar racing has in attracting sponsors and fans, "the cars are too slow" is not at the top of the list. It's not even at the bottom of the list. It doesn't make the list at all. It's not a problem right now. Current speeds are fast enough. They don't need to go down, and they don't need to go up.

What does need to change? What works? The answers are the same for all sports: recognizable stars, connection with a team, rivalries, thrilling competition.

Fans won't follow drivers, won't consider them like other sports heroes, unless the driver plays a bigger role in the results. That means ending pack racing, ending 100% throttle racing. Watching cars follow each is boring. Watching one driver pass another by going deeper into a turn is exciting. That means that the rules and the tracks need to ensure that the drivers need to lift going into turns. Similarly, the driver who gets back into the throttle too soon needs to suffer - preferably something visible, like getting twitchy or sideways, but at least pushing offline or spinning tires. The driver's control of the car should have visible results.

Connecting with a team is more difficult. Other sports have teams connected to a city. But we do have teams, we used to have different manufacturers, and we're getting back to different engine makers. NASCAR built itself on a Ford vs Chevy rivalry. Every F1 race in my lifetime has brought out Ferarri fans, win or lose. IndyCars needs that sort of rivalry. It may be some time before the economics improve enough to allow multiple chassis, but I hope we get there someday.

Better competition: that's what most of us have been focusing on, and trying to get you to admit that it's competition between cars on the track on the same day that matters, not this year versus last year. One driver leading the whole race, with everyone else following in a line, is boring. Even if he goes faster than last year! If that's the kind of racing you like, go to Bonneville: one car at a time against the clock. I don't care about the clock, I care about one driver outdriving, outracing the other drivers. Driving and racing aren't the same. That's why I never like Danica, among others. She's a good driver in that given a good car, properly set up, she can circle the track with good lap times. But she's a lousy racer. She's poor at passing, poor at taking advantage of the mistakes of others, poor at sensing when to move in for the kill. In other words, boring to watch. Marco, again among others, is the other extreme. He's too willing to move in for kill, pouncing when he should be stalking. At least that's more exciting to watch, if infuriating.

So, why are dodging my question? Should IndyCars go to bodywork that covers the wheels? It could make the cars faster. It could lead to lower lap times. You've said that you want faster cars, so I assume that you want IndyCars to look like LeMans cars.

I can live with the current speeds. I can live with higher speeds if it can be done safely. I can live with lower, but not much lower, speeds if it results in better racing. See, I want more competition, not more speed. Bonneville is all about speed, going faster than last year. When you have a bunch of cars on the track at the same time, it's about beating the other guy. Lap times from previous years may be useful, but they're tools, not the goal. The goal is to be the first across the finish line THIS year.

[DBell]

Why can't it be the third option? That the speeds are fairly safe right where they are now, 220-230 at Indy, but any faster becomes dangerous. So let's keep the speeds where they are, or there about, a little slower this year could very well (and most likely will) become a little faster next year. And at the same time make the racing better, by bringing the driver back into the equation, and eliminating pack racing.


Why can't this be an option? Because that's not what Indycar is about anymore. They are trying to do the Nascar approach where everyone has the same car that is regulated to the hilt. Any advantage one of the engine makers come up with will be quickly neutered so it doesn't have an advantage over the others. This has already happened from what I've read. Lotus claims their engine is 20 pounds lighter than the other 2. IndyCar has already said that they will have to add 20 pounds of ballast to compensate. IndyCar has also stated that the engines will have the same amount of HP. Going back to the chassis, the specs are set with no development allowed except possibly different wing packages in the future. So I don't see how your scenario is going to happen. I could accept your scenario if that were the case, but from what I've read from IndyCar, that isn't what they are trying to do. I see this year as the same as last year, just with a newer car.

You can argue with Ken and Loneranger on the merits of speed and track records, but I think they are clearly right about this- what IndyCar is doing now will do nothing to attract a bigger audience. No more than the DP-01 did anything for CC other than give it a new car that was around the same performance level as the one it replaced.

If we are trying new slogans for IndyCar, then how about this? "IndyCar - same as it ever was"

[DBell]

I have to ask this. Why do some think that the currant car is going to be the end of pack racing? It's going to have less HP on ovals, everyone is going to have the same car, and all indications are it's going to be every bit the momentum car as the last one was. I don't see this as package that is going to end pack racing.

[Loneranger]

Please enlighten me/us. It sure seems that you have been saying over and over again that you want faster speeds, all else be damned especially safety. If that is not your point of view, please do explain it in a rational, reasonable, and calm way.


hE4vdzM6PHA

[BDunnell]

You can argue with Ken and Loneranger on the merits of speed and track records, but I think they are clearly right about this- what IndyCar is doing now will do nothing to attract a bigger audience. No more than the DP-01 did anything for CC other than give it a new car that was around the same performance level as the one it replaced.

I fail to see why any of this matters, to be honest. Other formulae undergo significant change — take F1 in recent years — without any diminution in the audience. Maybe the mentality of said audience is, in part, what's at fault.

[Loneranger]

I have to ask this. Why do some think that the currant car is going to be the end of pack racing? It's going to have less HP on ovals, everyone is going to have the same car, and all indications are it's going to be every bit the momentum car as the last one was. I don't see this as package that is going to end pack racing.

You are right it makes no sense what so ever, but these guys all seem to think it is the solution. Go figure. Makes you wonder who you are actually conversing with........actually, no it doesn't, I already know who I am conversing with! ;)

If I understand these guys, which unless somebody is going to come in here and say point blank I am wrong and explain to me how I am wrong, these guys want to see a car that you have to lift off the throttle instead of being able to drive flat out through a corner. It's like these guys only seem to think there is one race track next year that we are talking about when in actuality there are only what? Three ovals next year, so for the rest of the year, their flat out scenario doesn't apply.

So somehow they want these guys to need to lift off the throttle and magically make it a more difficult car to drive.

I would love to hear how they propose you accomplish that.

[BDunnell]

You are right it makes no sense what so ever, but these guys all seem to think it is the solution. Go figure. Makes you wonder who you are actually conversing with........actually, no it doesn't, I already know who I am conversing with! ;)

If I understand these guys, which unless somebody is going to come in here and say point blank I am wrong and explain to me how I am wrong, these guys want to see a car that you have to lift off the throttle instead of being able to drive flat out through a corner. It's like these guys only seem to think there is one race track next year that we are talking about when in actuality there are only what? Three ovals next year, so for the rest of the year, their flat out scenario doesn't apply.

So somehow they want these guys to need to lift off the throttle and magically make it a more difficult car to drive.

I would love to hear how they propose you accomplish that.

I have come to the conclusion that your earlier promise to leave this discussion was what is known as a 'flounce'.

[Loneranger]

I have come to the conclusion that your earlier promise to leave this discussion was what is known as a 'flounce'.

So you really can't read and really don't understand........I said my conversation with YOU was done!


I'm done with this conversation as far as you are concerned.

[chuck34]

Why can't this be an option? Because that's not what Indycar is about anymore. They are trying to do the Nascar approach where everyone has the same car that is regulated to the hilt. Any advantage one of the engine makers come up with will be quickly neutered so it doesn't have an advantage over the others. This has already happened from what I've read. Lotus claims their engine is 20 pounds lighter than the other 2. IndyCar has already said that they will have to add 20 pounds of ballast to compensate. IndyCar has also stated that the engines will have the same amount of HP. Going back to the chassis, the specs are set with no development allowed except possibly different wing packages in the future. So I don't see how your scenario is going to happen. I could accept your scenario if that were the case, but from what I've read from IndyCar, that isn't what they are trying to do. I see this year as the same as last year, just with a newer car.

You can argue with Ken and Loneranger on the merits of speed and track records, but I think they are clearly right about this- what IndyCar is doing now will do nothing to attract a bigger audience. No more than the DP-01 did anything for CC other than give it a new car that was around the same performance level as the one it replaced.

If we are trying new slogans for IndyCar, then how about this? "IndyCar - same as it ever was"

On this point I would agree 100%. IndyCar needs to allow competition between chassis and engines. But that is not what is being argued right now. Speed, pure unadulterated speed, is what is being talked about. You can have competition between chassis, engines, and drivers with or without speed. Speed in-and-of-itself will not attract fans.

"IndyCar: Look we can go really fast, all in a single file line"

[chuck34]

I have to ask this. Why do some think that the currant car is going to be the end of pack racing? It's going to have less HP on ovals, everyone is going to have the same car, and all indications are it's going to be every bit the momentum car as the last one was. I don't see this as package that is going to end pack racing.

The stated goal of the current car is to end pack racing. Increased HP with less DF. Whether that pans out or not is yet to be seen. But that is (or at least was) the goal.

How would pure speed end pack racing? Perhaps that is a question best directed at LR and SF as I am not sure you are on the "pure speed and nothing but speed" bandwagon they are on.

[DBell]

I fail to see why any of this matters, to be honest. Other formulae undergo significant change — take F1 in recent years — without any diminution in the audience. Maybe the mentality of said audience is, in part, what's at fault.

Why it matters? Let see, a series that gets worse tv ratings than infomercials, can't get fans to attend oval races even when they give away 80,000 free tickets, and a series where the teams have go after ride buyers to stay afloat. A series where good drivers who should get rides on their talent are passed by because the teams can't actually afford to have to pay drivers for their services. A series that has a lot of trouble attracting sponsors because the ROI is woefully short of the cost it requires. A series that will eventually have to shut down if things don't improve. I'd say it matters.

[chuck34]

You are right it makes no sense what so ever, but these guys all seem to think it is the solution. Go figure. Makes you wonder who you are actually conversing with........actually, no it doesn't, I already know who I am conversing with! ;)

If I understand these guys, which unless somebody is going to come in here and say point blank I am wrong and explain to me how I am wrong, these guys want to see a car that you have to lift off the throttle instead of being able to drive flat out through a corner. It's like these guys only seem to think there is one race track next year that we are talking about when in actuality there are only what? Three ovals next year, so for the rest of the year, their flat out scenario doesn't apply.

So somehow they want these guys to need to lift off the throttle and magically make it a more difficult car to drive.

I would love to hear how they propose you accomplish that.

Point blank you are wrong.

You have clearly never driven a race car. Or even probably your street car in any sort high speed environment. If you had you would know that a car that is hard to drives means that you MUST lift off the throttle. And if you hadn't been so busy coming up with clever little pictures and YouTube clips, maybe you would have actually had time to read, and understand, our posts. That way you would know that we all want to see drivers more in control of their races. That means the guy that lifts off/brakes the latest going into a corner, and hits the throttle the earliest coming out of a corner. THAT is racing, not who can save the most push to passes for the end, or who can set the latest track record.

[BDunnell]

Why it matters? Let see, a series that gets worse tv ratings than infomercials, can't get fans to attend oval races even when they give away 80,000 free tickets, and a series where the teams have go after ride buyers to stay afloat. A series where good drivers who should get rides on their talent are passed by because the teams can't actually afford to have to pay drivers for their services. A series that has a lot of trouble attracting sponsors because the ROI is woefully short of the cost it requires. A series that will eventually have to shut down if things don't improve. I'd say it matters.

Again, some people here seem to struggle with the nuances, and with dealing with all the points put to them. Why is the IndyCar audience so fickle compared with the F1 audience?

[chuck34]

So Loneranger, are you still sticking to your guns that prior to 1996 IndyCars could go as fast as they wanted all the time? Or since you have CLEARLY ignored that point do you concede that in fact sanctioning bodies have been limiting speeds for decades?

[chuck34]

Again, some people here seem to struggle with the nuances, and with dealing with all the points put to them. Why is the IndyCar audience so fickle compared with the F1 audience?

But then we don't get to talk about Neeeeew Traaaack Reeeeecords!

[BDunnell]

But then we don't get to talk about Neeeeew Traaaack Reeeeecords!

It leads me to wonder who the 'dumbed-down' ones are — those to whom such records are the be-all and end-all, the only indicators of a decent racing series, or the millions of enthusiasts of series all over the world who don't care two hoots about such things except as statistical curiosities.

[chuck34]

Why it matters? Let see, a series that gets worse tv ratings than infomercials, can't get fans to attend oval races even when they give away 80,000 free tickets, and a series where the teams have go after ride buyers to stay afloat. A series where good drivers who should get rides on their talent are passed by because the teams can't actually afford to have to pay drivers for their services. A series that has a lot of trouble attracting sponsors because the ROI is woefully short of the cost it requires. A series that will eventually have to shut down if things don't improve. I'd say it matters.

And a new track record fixes that, exactly how?

[Loneranger]

Point blank you are wrong.

You have clearly never driven a race car. Or even probably your street car in any sort high speed environment. If you had you would know that a car that is hard to drives means that you MUST lift off the throttle. And if you hadn't been so busy coming up with clever little pictures and YouTube clips, maybe you would have actually had time to read, and understand, our posts. That way you would know that we all want to see drivers more in control of their races. That means the guy that lifts off/brakes the latest going into a corner, and hits the throttle the earliest coming out of a corner. THAT is racing, not who can save the most push to passes for the end, or who can set the latest track record.

Point blank I am wrong? Do you even read before you start responding.

What am I wrong about? I said you guys want to see guys need to lift and not be able to drive flat out. How am I wrong about that? I think you need to take some of your own medicine.

!@#$%, I really am on the short bus.....

[chuck34]

Point blank I am wrong? Do you even read before you start responding.

What am I wrong about? I said you guys want to see guys need to lift and not be able to drive flat out. How am I wrong about that? I think you need to take some of your own medicine.

!@#$%, I really am on the short bus.....

You are wrong because you seem to think that somehow because a driver must lift (ie use his/her skill) that is somehow easy to drive. You are wrong because you think this only applies to Indy. You are wrong because you think that the only thing fans care about are new records.

You are right though ... You do ride the short bus. :rolleyes:


How about those speeds going on un-controlled pre-1996 though. Those times were great, weren't they?

[nigelred5]

Again, some people here seem to struggle with the nuances, and with dealing with all the points put to them. Why is the IndyCar audience so fickle compared with the F1 audience?

Because fans have that over hyped and marketed alternative to Indycar... NASCAR.

[ShiftingGears]

So somehow they want these guys to need to lift off the throttle and magically make it a more difficult car to drive.

I'm not sure what you're struggling so hard with here. If we take your logic, then you are saying that driving a car through a corner isn't going to be harder than driving a car on a straight. That makes no sense at all.


I would love to hear how they propose you accomplish that.

Less aerodynamic grip, so the cornering speeds have to be lower. Easy.

[garyshell]

Penske and Lola, and everybody else I listed didn't spend millions of dollars trying to be faster then the current competition, they spent millions of dollars trying to go faster than they did the year before. It was a quest, it was a journey, it was an attempt to keep going faster and faster to beat your competitors to the finish line.

Absolute,unadulterated BS. Do you have any definitive proof of this assertion? Of course not. The all spent that money to beat the competition. That's why they were all there. The proof of that fact is in the very nature of the rewards offered by the santioning bodies to the participants. Those rewards all revolved around one concept BEATING THE COMPETITION. Once again there are only two sanctioning bodies I know of that offer rewards for pure speed and they both hold their events at Bonneville. What possible motivation would ANY of the parties you mentioned have to focus solely on the speed.

Gary

[garyshell]

Hey Sarahfan, maybe these guys are all right, maybe we should slow the cars down.......I had a bunch of buddies that stayed home this year instead of going to the Milwaukee race and they said they didn't go cause the cars were just to fast and getting to be far too dangerous. I'm starting to think maybe everybody else is right, maybe I am the problem. Maybe I am the one that is wrong.

Please show me one example of where I said the cars NEED to be slowed down. I and others in this argument have NOT called for the cars to be slowed down. Now follow along I am going to present this one last time very slowly point by point.

1. We think 100% throttle racing is NOT, I repeat not, racing.
2. We think the cars need MORE, I repeat more, horsepower.
3. We think the cars need LESS, once again that is less, horsepower.
4. We think this will result in the drivers having to lift entering the corners. That means the have to take their right foot off the floor and maybe even apply pressure to the brake pedal.
5. We think if that results in a slightly slower over all lap time that is ok. Note again we did NOT say we want it to cause a slower lap time, which you are fixated on thinking we are saying. We said we don't want it, but are willing to accept it. You understand the difference between wanting something to happen and accepting that it might happen, right?
6. We are not calling for any substantive slowing of the cars like the ridiculous numbers you and Ken throw around 240 down to 220 down to 200. We are not CALLING for ANY slowing at all, merely accepting that if there is a small slowing it is ok as long as the goal of removing the 100% throttle "racing".

OK does that get through are are YOU the one who "rides the short bus"?

[garyshell]

Please enlighten me/us. It sure seems that you have been saying over and over again that you want faster speeds, all else be damned especially safety. If that is not your point of view, please do explain it in a rational, reasonable, and calm way.


Good luck with that.

Gary

[Andrewmcm]

I wonder what the absolute human limit of "faster speeds" and "neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeew traaaack record!" is for Indy? When do we reach the point (as in Texas with CART) that humans simply can't tolerate the forces exerted on them by their machines? And if we do get to that point, what do certain elements of the fan base in here do? Simply walk away from the series because their desire for increased speed cannot physically be satisfied? Or do they just enjoy the racing, regardless of what the absolute speed is?

[beachbum]

Sooooo What is racing anyway? I would like to know from the experts here - most of whom apparently have never raced themselves

Going fast or beating the other competitors, regardless of speed?

[fan-veteran]

I wonder what the absolute human limit of "faster speeds" and "neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeew traaaack record!" is for Indy?
The Absolute human limit? About 260mph at corners when the lateral G-force exceeds 5 G, as it was in Texas 2001 CART qualifications. But the safety limit is somewhere lower than 230mph.

There is also a well known limit of around 9 G in aviation (although some acrobatic pilots can reach even more) but it is a g-force pointed down the seat, not lateral. Cornering at 9 G at Indy should happen at 340mph, but i highly doubt than human body could sustain such a lateral g-force.

So, if we take cornering with 245mph and top speed of about 280mph (which is still feasible with around 1500 HP engine and modern tyres) we get around 265 mph average, that should be the limit. :)

But, hey, if you just accelerate the TV-record play with a factor of 1,1-1,2 - the result will be almost the same. :p

[BDunnell]

But, hey, if you just accelerate the TV-record play with a factor of 1,1-1,2 - the result will be almost the same. :p

Like it.

[BDunnell]

I wonder what the absolute human limit of "faster speeds" and "neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeew traaaack record!" is for Indy? When do we reach the point (as in Texas with CART) that humans simply can't tolerate the forces exerted on them by their machines? And if we do get to that point, what do certain elements of the fan base in here do? Simply walk away from the series because their desire for increased speed cannot physically be satisfied? Or do they just enjoy the racing, regardless of what the absolute speed is?

I couldn't agree more. I fear, though, that these points will go largely unresponded-to.

I also note the extreme difficulty some contributors to this thread have in relating to any mention of how F1 enthusiasts have never been over-concerned by outright speeds.

[BDunnell]

Sooooo What is racing anyway? I would like to know from the experts here - most of whom apparently have never raced themselves

Going fast or beating the other competitors, regardless of speed?

I am sure there is a perfectly good dictionary definition. I don't think either of your ideas quite hack it.

[SarahFan]

Indycar isn't F1 NASCAR world rally v8 supercst etc

Just sayin

[BDunnell]

Indycar isn't F1 NASCAR world rally v8 supercst etc

Just sayin

And?

[beachbum]

I am sure there is a perfectly good dictionary definition. I don't think either of your ideas quite hack it.
Ok, if it is neither, then what is it?

When I was racing, it was all about winning. That meant going faster than the rest of the competitors, but not just going "fast".

[BDunnell]

Ok, if it is neither, then what is it?

When I was racing, it was all about winning. That meant going faster than the rest of the competitors, but not just going "fast".

Winning is the object of the exercise, but one can still race and not win, surely.

I agree completely with you about just going 'fast' not being a definition.

[garyshell]

Sooooo What is racing anyway? I would like to know from the experts here - most of whom apparently have never raced themselves

Going fast or beating the other competitors, regardless of speed?

The only expertise I have is watching races for the past 50+ years, but clearly it is beating the competition, regardless of speed.

Gary

[BDunnell]

The only expertise I have is watching races for the past 50+ years, but clearly it is beating the competition, regardless of speed.

But, as I said above, this is the object of racing, not a definition of 'racing' itself, surely?

[SarahFan]

And?

I thinks it's pretty clear but you will miss the point just the same

[BDunnell]

I thinks it's pretty clear but you will miss the point just the same

Why not explain?

[Loneranger]

You are wrong because you seem to think that somehow because a driver must lift (ie use his/her skill) that is somehow easy to drive. You are wrong because you think this only applies to Indy. You are wrong because you think that the only thing fans care about are new records.

You are right though ... You do ride the short bus. :rolleyes:


How about those speeds going on un-controlled pre-1996 though. Those times were great, weren't they?

You are cracked.......show me where on earth I said just cause you needed to lift that it was easy. Show me!!! I asked you if I was wrong in my understanding of what you guys are looking for and you completely failed to address that and instead are now making things up like I said it was easy if you need to lift. You are completely out to lunch.

It's the bloody twilight zone in here.

[Loneranger]

Please show me one example of where I said the cars NEED to be slowed down.

You said you were okay with slower speeds. I never said you said you wanted slower cars. I'm arguing with you that slower cars is a bad thing, you are arguing slower cars is a good thing if it meets your goal of eliminating 100% throttle racing. Are you following along???



1. We think 100% throttle racing is NOT, I repeat not, racing.

Guess what, I agree!


2. We think the cars need MORE, I repeat more, horsepower.

Guess what? I agree!


3. We think the cars need LESS, once again that is less, horsepower.

Now I am confused......I am going to assume you meant to say downforce! Correct? If so, guess what, I agree!


4. We think this will result in the drivers having to lift entering the corners. That means the have to take their right foot off the floor and maybe even apply pressure to the brake pedal.

Guess what? I agree!


5. We think if that results in a slightly slower over all lap time that is ok. Note again we did NOT say we want it to cause a slower lap time, which you are fixated on thinking we are saying. We said we don't want it, but are willing to accept it.

This is where I disagree. You need to do all that without reducing overall lap times which means straight line speed entering corners needs to be higher then where we are at now. You can't sacrifice lap times in an effort to achieve those goals, you just said you yourself that you don't want that! You don't want it. Which means you aren't happy about it, but you are accepting of it. I get it, I understand, what you aren't understanding is that you are in the minority. The majority of fans aren't accepting. The proof is the millions of fans that have walked away from the sport over the years. Slowing cars even more will only further turn fans away, and it will turn them away because you just admitted that slower cars is not what you want so how can you expect millions of fans to either A want to see slower cars, or B be accepting of slower cars simply because it means they need to "lift" in corners.

People want to see a spectacle. Controlling/navigating/RACING super fast cars is what creates that spectacle.

Otherwise, like I said, which all you guys fail to keep addressing is why not come out with the simplest cheapest solution which is to mandate Firestone make a less effective tire that falls off making the car harder to drive. That is what F1 does with Pirelli! It's artificial BS!


You understand the difference between wanting something to happen and accepting that it might happen, right?

Sure I do but you guys didn't seem to get that when you were all piling on about the safety and death issues! ;)



6. We are not calling for any substantive slowing of the cars like the ridiculous numbers you and Ken throw around 240 down to 220 down to 200. We are not CALLING for ANY slowing at all, merely accepting that if there is a small slowing it is ok as long as the goal of removing the 100% throttle "racing".

Like I said, if you want to get rid of 100% throttle racing, start racing with a crummier tire. You don't need new engines, new chassis and millions of new investment spent by all these teams, just mandate Firestone to make a tire that falls off quicker. Why not do that, that will give you non 100% throttle racing. Case closed, problem solved.

The only reason you would not want to do that is that it would guarantee slower speeds. And you know deep down inside that is a bad thing.


OK does that get through are are YOU the one who "rides the short bus"?

I know you are but what am I.....can you guys not come up with something more clever then throwing the shortbus comment back at me. Come on. Weak sauce!

Gary, face it, you know slower speeds are a bad thing, you've admitted to it in this post. You said you don't want to see them. There is a reason you don't want to see them. Just because you are accepting of it doesn't make it the right direction.

The early nineties offered high horsepower cars that you couldn't drive flat out and guess what, lap times were quicker then they are now, that is what we need a return to. It worked because you were pushing the boundaries. The boundaries of physics, the unknown, the undeveloped are what limited speeds. So you were able to have skill separate great drivers from the good ones.

You aren't going to attain that with a car that is slower than the current one.

I'm done. If you can't get that if all your cronies can't understand that, then you are all just interested in trying to be right then trying to have a conversation and understanding each others view point. And don't even begin any of you to try and argue that I haven't attempted to understand your viewpoints, because I have repeatedly by asking you why not just race Indy Lights, or why not race with a harder tire, if my understanding of what you want is correct etc.

So enjoy your 15 race schedule next year with slower cars, I'm sure you will see a gigantic spike in attendance and TV viewership.

Peace out, word to your motha!

[chuck34]

You are cracked.......show me where on earth I said just cause you needed to lift that it was easy. Show me!!! Otherwise you need to STFU and quit making things up. I asked you if I was wrong in my understanding of what you guys are looking for and you completely failed to address that and instead are now making things up like I said it was easy if you need to lift. You are completely out to lunch.

It's the bloody twilight zone in here.

post #520

So somehow they want these guys to need to lift off the throttle and magically make it a more difficult car to drive.

Twilight Zone indeed.

[Blancvino]

This thread is turning into piss and vinegar. I hope you are nicer at your family gatherings this holiday season.

[chuck34]

Lonranger let's take this out to the logical conclusion. IndyCar sees things your way and "let's 'em loose" for 2012. We see track records fall. At indy they go 245+. Then in 2013 they come back, and are going 255+. What happens in 2014 when we've reached the human limit on G-force?



Oh yeah, and I still haven't heard about how great things were back pre-'96, you know before any sanctioning body put any rules in place to limit speeds. Boy that really was great wasn't it? :D

[chuck34]

Just went and re-looked at pole times from Indy and compared them to viewership. And boy were you guys right.

Pole in 1978 was Tom Sneva at 202.156. Then in 1979 they limited the boost to 50in (wait they wouldn't do that, right Lonerange), and the pole time dropped to 193.736 by Mears. Boy oh boy did the fans run away in droves that year. I mean I don't have the actual attendance numbers, but they MUST have stormed the ticket office and demanded their money back, right guys.

Or how about '92-'93 when the pole time fell from 232.482 all the way down to 223.967. Boy I remember the riots that year.

[SarahFan]

Gary Please rank 1-3

Super Bowl
Motley Crüe
Beatles

[garyshell]

Gary Please rank 1-3

Super Bowl
Motley Crüe
Beatles

Danger, Will Robinson. Danger. Non Sequitor alert. Danger, Will Robinson.

Gary

[BDunnell]

Just went and re-looked at pole times from Indy and compared them to viewership. And boy were you guys right.

Pole in 1978 was Tom Sneva at 202.156. Then in 1979 they limited the boost to 50in (wait they wouldn't do that, right Lonerange), and the pole time dropped to 193.736 by Mears. Boy oh boy did the fans run away in droves that year. I mean I don't have the actual attendance numbers, but they MUST have stormed the ticket office and demanded their money back, right guys.

Or how about '92-'93 when the pole time fell from 232.482 all the way down to 223.967. Boy I remember the riots that year.

Another of those posts that will, sadly, go unanswered — possibly even un-comprehended — by those who ought to respond to it. And yet they have the nerve to suggest that we are the 'dumbed-down' ones?

Maybe anyone can answer one of my questions. Am I missing the point of US open-wheel racing somewhat, in that, to me as a European, numbers of lead changes and similar statistics are unimportant other than as statistical curiosities?

[garyshell]

You said you were okay with slower speeds. I never said you said you wanted slower cars. I'm arguing with you that slower cars is a bad thing, you are arguing slower cars is a good thing if it meets your goal of eliminating 100% throttle racing. Are you following along???

In that narrow context of what has transpired in this thread we are close to agreement. But what you seem to have trouble grasping is the nuanced difference in what I am saying about slower cars. You say slower cars are a bad thing. I am not saying they are a good thing, I am saying they are an acceptable thing. There is a difference.



Now I am confused......I am going to assume you meant to say downforce! Correct? If so, guess what, I agree!

Yes, I meant downforce.


This is where I disagree. You need to do all that without reducing overall lap times which means straight line speed entering corners needs to be higher then where we are at now. You can't sacrifice lap times in an effort to achieve those goals, you just said you yourself that you don't want that! You don't want it. Which means you aren't happy about it, but you are accepting of it. I get it, I understand, what you aren't understanding is that you are in the minority. The majority of fans aren't accepting. The proof is the millions of fans that have walked away from the sport over the years. Slowing cars even more will only further turn fans away, and it will turn them away because you just admitted that slower cars is not what you want so how can you expect millions of fans to either A want to see slower cars, or B be accepting of slower cars simply because it means they need to "lift" in corners.

And this is where we part ways. What makes you think YOU know why those millions of fans left? You don't have any idea why they did. You THINK you do so because it would appear to make a case for your argument. I could just as easily say that they left because the cars were too damn fast. That assertion is equally as ridiculous as yours and I don't believe either. No exit poll was ever taken of those fans and without such you are in total speculation mode here in a lame attempt to prove your point. It proves NOTHING.


People want to see a spectacle. Controlling/navigating/RACING super fast cars is what creates that spectacle.

Drop the word "super" and I agree. One of the most spectacular races I ever saw was the old "Le Car" series at Mid Ohio. Thirty or more street legal "Le Cars", many driven to the track that day, nose to tail, lifting the front inner tire as they came thru the Carousel. I don't recall ever seeing so many fans on their feet cheering at the top of their lungs there. People talked about those races for years thereafter. These cars would never be called super fast, hell they were barely able to be called fast.



Like I said, if you want to get rid of 100% throttle racing, start racing with a crummier tire. You don't need new engines, new chassis and millions of new investment spent by all these teams, just mandate Firestone to make a tire that falls off quicker. Why not do that, that will give you non 100% throttle racing. Case closed, problem solved.

Trouble is that horse is already out of the barn. We have a new chassis and engines. Deal with it.


Gary, face it, you know slower speeds are a bad thing, you've admitted to it in this post. You said you don't want to see them. There is a reason you don't want to see them. Just because you are accepting of it doesn't make it the right direction.

I admitted no such thing. All I said was I didn't want slower speeds, I never said they were bad. Just because I don't want something does not make it bad.


The early nineties offered high horsepower cars that you couldn't drive flat out and guess what, lap times were quicker then they are now, that is what we need a return to. It worked because you were pushing the boundaries. The boundaries of physics, the unknown, the undeveloped are what limited speeds. So you were able to have skill separate great drivers from the good ones.

And nowhere in that equation is the NEED to include higher and higher speeds each year. You THINK it does but time and again this and other series have proved that wrong. Cars have been slowed down as a consequence of rules changes and the ability to readily discern talented drivers from hacks has not been diminished.


You aren't going to attain that with a car that is slower than the current one.

Why not? If the car is harder to drive, because of higher horsepower and less downforce, do you really think that all the drivers will look alike? I don't need to add HIGHER speed to the equation to make that happen.


I'm done.

I doubt that.


If you can't get that if all your cronies can't understand that, then you are all just interested in trying to be right then trying to have a conversation and understanding each others view point. And don't even begin any of you to try and argue that I haven't attempted to understand your viewpoints, because I have repeatedly by asking you why not just race Indy Lights, or why not race with a harder tire, if my understanding of what you want is correct etc.

So enjoy your 15 race schedule next year with slower cars, I'm sure you will see a gigantic spike in attendance and TV viewership.

Peace out, word to your motha!

Your demonstration of trying to understand our point is asking a ridiculous question about Indy Lights? Wow, I am impressed by your empathy. Don't pat yourself on the back so hard.

Gary

[BDunnell]

Drop the word "super" and I agree. One of the most spectacular races I ever saw was the old "Le Car" series at Mid Ohio. Thirty or more street legal "Le Cars", many driven to the track that day, nose to tail, lifting the front inner tire as they came thru the Carousel. I don't recall ever seeing so many fans on their feet cheering at the top of their lungs there. People talked about those races for years thereafter. These cars would never be called super fast, hell they were barely able to be called fast.

In that case, I am sure you may enjoy this. A fiercer race in desperately unpromising cars you will hardly ever see.

BBC Rally Sprint 1983 - Race - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8G_sS011854)

Now don't let anyone say that that wasn't racing, simply because it wasn't by a long way the fastest thing out there.

[garyshell]

In that case, I am sure you may enjoy this. A fiercer race in desperately unpromising cars you will hardly ever see.

BBC Rally Sprint 1983 - Race - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8G_sS011854)

Now don't let anyone say that that wasn't racing, simply because it wasn't by a long way the fastest thing out there.

Enjoy it, I did! Cheers!

Thanks,
Gary

[DBell]

Just went and re-looked at pole times from Indy and compared them to viewership. And boy were you guys right.

Pole in 1978 was Tom Sneva at 202.156. Then in 1979 they limited the boost to 50in (wait they wouldn't do that, right Lonerange), and the pole time dropped to 193.736 by Mears. Boy oh boy did the fans run away in droves that year. I mean I don't have the actual attendance numbers, but they MUST have stormed the ticket office and demanded their money back, right guys.

Or how about '92-'93 when the pole time fell from 232.482 all the way down to 223.967. Boy I remember the riots that year.

What was the pole time 3 years after '79? 3 years after '93? That's the difference from then and now. Back then there was development and competition among chassis and engines. The rules were open to developing both. That is not the case today. No development allowed.

What do you think would have happened in '79 if they had introduced a spec chassis that would've been used for next 8 years and speeds stayed around 193 -198 mph during that time? Do you think it would've had an effect on the crowds and excitement at Indy? I can't believe it wouldn't.

Is a track record at Indy going to change everything? No. There was a lot more to the old formula than that. But in IndyCar, speed was a part old formula and dismissing it as unimportant misses the mark with a portion of the old fan base.

@BDunnell Comparing the fans of F1 to IndyCar fans is an apples and oranges comparison. F1 hasn't done to itself what IndyCar did to itself in the last 20 years. By comparison, F1 is very stable and has been able to pull itself out of the nosedive it occasionally finds itself in. IndyCar didn't and has been a smoldering wreckage since. If F1 fans have to endure a 12 year civil war that bitterly divides it's fan base and becomes stagnant series that uses the same spec car for nearly a decade, then it's time to compare notes. Different life experiences will create different perspectives.

[chuck34]

What was the pole time 3 years after '79? 3 years after '93? That's the difference from then and now. Back then there was development and competition among chassis and engines. The rules were open to developing both. That is not the case today. No development allowed.

What do you think would have happened in '79 if they had introduced a spec chassis that would've been used for next 8 years and speeds stayed around 193 -198 mph during that time? Do you think it would've had an effect on the crowds and excitement at Indy? I can't believe it wouldn't.

Is a track record at Indy going to change everything? No. There was a lot more to the old formula than that. But in IndyCar, speed was a part old formula and dismissing it as unimportant misses the mark with a portion of the old fan base.

@BDunnell Comparing the fans of F1 to IndyCar fans is an apples and oranges comparison. F1 hasn't done to itself what IndyCar did to itself in the last 20 years. By comparison, F1 is very stable and has been able to pull itself out of the nosedive it occasionally finds itself in. IndyCar didn't and has been a smoldering wreckage since. If F1 fans have to endure a 12 year civil war that bitterly divides it's fan base and becomes stagnant series that uses the same spec car for nearly a decade, then it's time to compare notes. Different life experiences will create different perspectives.

If you want to shift this debate to the need for competition between chassis and engine manufacturers then I'll be right there on your side. I do think that is what this series needs. Next year qe get part of that with three engine manufacturers. Hopefully we will also get aero packages in 2013. And hopefully the league takes a fairly "hands off" approach to regulating them during the season (although I think I'll be disappointed on that)

But this debate so far has been about SPEED plain and simple. That is a very different argument than the one you are making.

[call_me_andrew]

No development allowed.

We just developed two engines from scratch with a third on the way. How many do you need?

[champcarray]

Re: BBC Rally Sprint -- Awesome race and announcer. If only IndyCar could find an announcer even half this good.

[DBell]

We just developed two engines from scratch with a third on the way. How many do you need?

Lotus has said their engine is lighter by 20 pounds. IndyCar says it will have to add ballast to offset that. Horsepower is going to be kept at certain levels. So if Chevy, for instance, develops an improvement that gains horsepower, then IndyCar will do something something to put them back to where they are at the level desired by IndyCar. So where is the incentive for development of the engine? That is what I'm talking about. 3 engines is great, but if they are set to not exceed certain parameters, then all it is for the manufacturers is a marketing deal. They have no incentive to make improvements if the series will negate that work.

[fan-veteran]

Let view things in that way - is there a need for an ultimately fast racing cars series? One of these is Formula1. But i think some kind of alternative (to F1) is needed; in some aspects to NASCAR also. This is exactly what attracted an interest to CART in early 90s - an alternative, to fulfill things which F1 (back then, but now also) lacks, to present something different or supplementary. CART cars were powerful (a little bit more than F1), racing on street circuits (in F1 back then only two street races - Monaco and Adelaide), and with lightning speed on ovals - something F1 would never do.

[beachbum]

So where is the incentive for development of the engine? Power delivery and torque curve. The max HP may be the same, but if one engine has a wider power range or a smoother torque curve, it will be faster on any track. Grand-Am is a perfect example. The engines are limited to a HP number, but some are better than others because of the torque curve.

Fuel economy. An engine that burns less fuel has more options for fuel strategy. Many races have been won on fuel strategy

Cooling. An engine with better cooling can run different aero setups such as larger blockers for the radiators. That adds speed on ovals and in qualifying.

Weight distribution. Even if every engine weights the same, the weight may be higher or lower based on design. That is one advantage everyone suggests for the Lotus as the ballast will probably be very low.

Reliability. If you find a way to make more HP, you can detune the engine a bit, perhaps improving reliability. Development will also likely involve making lighter rotating parts and friction reduction. Neither may increase HP but should increase acceleration.

Lost of incentive for development. The engine that has the best compromises in all areas will be the one to have, even if that means its peak HP may not be the best

[call_me_andrew]

Lotus has said their engine is lighter by 20 pounds. IndyCar says it will have to add ballast to offset that.

So they built an engine 20 pounds lighter, despite the fact that they're going to get a weight handicap? Either the people at Lotus are really dumb (which I doubt), or you're making these handicaps out to be worse than they really are.

[garyshell]

So they built an engine 20 pounds lighter, despite the fact that they're going to get a weight handicap? Either the people at Lotus are really dumb (which I doubt), or you're making these handicaps out to be worse than they really are.

Ah, but that's twenty pounds that the race engineers get to decide where they want it to go.

Gary

[BDunnell]

@BDunnell Comparing the fans of F1 to IndyCar fans is an apples and oranges comparison. F1 hasn't done to itself what IndyCar did to itself in the last 20 years. By comparison, F1 is very stable and has been able to pull itself out of the nosedive it occasionally finds itself in. IndyCar didn't and has been a smoldering wreckage since. If F1 fans have to endure a 12 year civil war that bitterly divides it's fan base and becomes stagnant series that uses the same spec car for nearly a decade, then it's time to compare notes. Different life experiences will create different perspectives.

Thank you for a very eloquent response, DBell. I may not agree with all that you say, but at least you frame your arguments more than properly.

[BDunnell]

If you want to shift this debate to the need for competition between chassis and engine manufacturers then I'll be right there on your side. I do think that is what this series needs. Next year qe get part of that with three engine manufacturers. Hopefully we will also get aero packages in 2013. And hopefully the league takes a fairly "hands off" approach to regulating them during the season (although I think I'll be disappointed on that)

But this debate so far has been about SPEED plain and simple. That is a very different argument than the one you are making.

I agree completely.

[vintage]

Ah, but that's twenty pounds that the race engineers get to decide where they want it to go.

Gary

I believe it will be placed on the engine, so some limitations. Still probably better than the alternative.

[Mad_Hatter]

So, lots of pics and a few videos floating around from testing today. But, what exactly are they shrouding here?


panther site (http://www.pantherracing.com/multimedia/photos.cfm?gid=6964)

Cooling arrangements?

[Civic]

Who's the cute Panther engineer?

[shazbot]

My god that car is ugly, and what a dreary livery.

[beachbum]

Who's the cute Panther engineer?
Mechanic Anna Chatten.

[chuck34]

So, lots of pics and a few videos floating around from testing today. But, what exactly are they shrouding here?


panther site (http://www.pantherracing.com/multimedia/photos.cfm?gid=6964)

Cooling arrangements?

The only thing I saw that could be thought of as a "shroud" was a blanket they had over the engine. They do that to warm it up. Blanket with a salamander blowing hot air over the engine. But maybe you're talking about something else??

[Chris R]

not to continue to beat a dead horse - but I STILL can't get into this new car - it just doesn't look right - the "hips" are just too much - it just does not look "fast" or "right" - I know that is my opinion only but I am trying really are to like this thing.....

On the bright side - great to see so many cars out testing so early. I actually like the solid red Target car - anything solid seems to help hide those hideous side pods......

[SarahFan]

Any times?

[nigelred5]

I read yesterday in the report about the wind tunnel test that the ramps on the sidepods had been revised to produce less drag. Lets hope they were revised A LOT.

[jimispeed]

Here's a vid....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jYcS9lVHl4

[jimispeed]

Hard at work......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ukWzH8waSI&feature=player_embedded

[anthonyvop]

Any times?

Most people are reporting the best times at around 53.5. My contact up there backs that up.

53.5 on the Sebring Short course is slow.......Really Slow.

[chuck34]

Most people are reporting the best times at around 53.5. My contact up there backs that up.

53.5 on the Sebring Short course is slow.......Really Slow.

Shock, horror, an unsubstatiated TEST time coming from someone who is fairly critical of the new car in particular and IndyCar in general. Let's cancel the season now. Pack it in, it's over. NASCAR on Memorial Day from now on. :rolleyes:

[SarahFan]

It had better RACE fantastic

[Anubis]

Most people are reporting the best times at around 53.5. My contact up there backs that up.

53.5 on the Sebring Short course is slow.......Really Slow.

Oh come on. It's a test. New cars, new crews, new engines, some of which had barely even run at that point, let alone in anger, not to mention a totally green track with no rubber down whatsoever and you're wanting lap records? You can't read anything into the times whatsoever. Of course, had they gone all out for times and blown the motors to pieces you'd be on here telling us they were unreliable...

[anthonyvop]

Shock, horror, an unsubstatiated TEST time coming from someone who is fairly critical of the new car in particular and IndyCar in general. Let's cancel the season now.

Other people are reporting the same times.

IndyCar Series - Drivers, teams breathe sigh of relief after Sebring test - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/racing/indycar/story/_/id/7479345/indycar-series-drivers-teams-breathe-sigh-relief-sebring-test?eleven=twelve)

:)


Pack it in, it's over. NASCAR on Memorial Day from now on. :rolleyes:

Nope.... The GP of Monaco is the biggest race that day....By a Huge margin.

[anthonyvop]

Oh come on. It's a test. New cars, new crews, new engines, some of which had barely even run at that point, let alone in anger, not to mention a totally green track with no rubber down whatsoever and you're wanting lap records? You can't read anything into the times whatsoever. Of course, had they gone all out for times and blown the motors to pieces you'd be on here telling us they were unreliable...

The New Dallara has been seen more than a few laps at Sebring and the Course is well rubbered in. Sebring, like most major Florida Tracks, gets heavy use. Especially in the winter.

A 53+ second lap on the short course is slow. a sub 50 is the target. I would have been happy with a 51.5. Heck a 52 would have been respectable.

[chuck34]

Other people are reporting the same times.

IndyCar Series - Drivers, teams breathe sigh of relief after Sebring test - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/racing/indycar/story/_/id/7479345/indycar-series-drivers-teams-breathe-sigh-relief-sebring-test?eleven=twelve)

:)



Nope.... The GP of Monaco is the biggest race that day....By a Huge margin.

The sky is falling, the sky is falling, everybody run .... oh wait


And the unanimous reaction from everyone present was of positive relief.

"But now that I've had a chance to see and hear the car going around the track, I'm pumped," he added. "I'm excited to go racing with these things."

oh and way to completely miss this little gem there Tony

No official timing and scoring was in operation, but Scott Dixon's best lap of roughly 53.0 seconds in the Honda-powered Target Ganassi Racing car on the first day was already quicker than a good time around Sebring for the outgoing car

And I love this quote from Rick Mears (someone who's opinion I respect immensely)

"So it's not planted and completely stable," Mears said. "Haven't we been complaining that the outgoing car was too planted and stable? That my ex-wife's mother-in-law could jump in one and keep up with the pack?

"The new car really brings the teams back into the equation in a big way," Mears continued. "Some of these teams have never gone through the hard work of developing a new car. You can call it teething troubles or new car blues or whatever. We used to experience it all the time when we brought out a new car every year. The biggest teams aren't always going to be the ones that get it right and there could be some surprising results.

"It's going to shake things up and make IndyCar a lot more interesting."

But you keep on with your sky is falling stuff. I prefer to live in the real world.

[chuck34]

The New Dallara has been seen more than a few laps at Sebring and the Course is well rubbered in. Sebring, like most major Florida Tracks, gets heavy use. Especially in the winter.

Rubber isn't rubber. The fact that something has been running there doesn't mean squat. In fact it might hurt. Sometimes when there are two series at an event on different tires, one compound makes the track really slick for another.

But I'm not saying that the track being rubbered in or not had anything to do with this test. I would have to be there to know the actual condition of the track. I will not speculate one way or the other from here.


A 53+ second lap on the short course is slow. a sub 50 is the target. I would have been happy with a 51.5. Heck a 52 would have been respectable.

So the fact that the new car, right out of the box, with basically no tuning time, is already faster than the old car isn't good enough for you? What would make you happy? Braking the sound barrier?

It's TESTING on a brand new car. Your expectations are ridiculous.

[BobGarage]

So the fact that the new car, right out of the box, with basically no tuning time, is already faster than the old car isn't good enough for you? What would make you happy? Braking the sound barrier?

It's TESTING on a brand new car. Your expectations are ridiculous.


not ridiculous really...

The DP-01 was doing 52.7's right out of the box during the first session of the first multi-team test at Sebring. By the end of the three day test it was doing 50.7's....

Just saying.... ;-)

[garyshell]

The sky is falling, the sky is falling, everybody run .... oh wait




oh and way to completely miss this little gem there Tony


And I love this quote from Rick Mears (someone who's opinion I respect immensely)


But you keep on with your sky is falling stuff. I prefer to live in the real world.

Can I get an amen brothers and sisters?

[DanicaFan]

Not sure if this was brought up about the new car but I wasnt going to sift thru 30 pages....lol

This new car design will make it harder for the rear tire changers now during pitstops. They will have to come straight in with the tire instead of swinging it on like they normally do.

[nigelred5]

Not sure if this was brought up about the new car but I wasnt going to sift thru 30 pages....lol

This new car design will make it harder for the rear tire changers now during pitstops. They will have to come straight in with the tire instead of swinging it on like they normally do.

Just like a tire changer on every sports car team. It's not like Indycar pitstops are anywhere near F1 or even DTM pit stop speeds. I'm all for making things more of a challenge. I'm sure they will be practicing. It's the same for everyone. It's another change that is the same for everyone.

[Anubis]

The New Dallara has been seen more than a few laps at Sebring and the Course is well rubbered in. Sebring, like most major Florida Tracks, gets heavy use. Especially in the winter.

A 53+ second lap on the short course is slow. a sub 50 is the target. I would have been happy with a 51.5. Heck a 52 would have been respectable.

So what's the alternative? Take a new car and quite possibly new drivers, team members, mechanics, crew chiefs and whatever else and just go out looking for a headline time? Other than keeping you happy, what would that actually achieve? It's a test, a data gathering exercise. Go out, turn laps, crunch the numbers, turn more laps, check systems are working as anticipated (on the car or otherwise), make adjustments to see how they impact things. It's about turning laps rather than setting times. If the thing is dog slow come the first race they you can come back and say "I told you so", but I don't see how you can read anything into a pre-season test where more or less everything is new to everyone?

Interesting how you pick out the time from that ESPN article, but ignore the driver comments regarding their objectives for the test.


It's coming along, especially the engines," said 2008 IndyCar Series champion Dixon. "Almost everything I've done so far has been manufacturer testing, and I'm looking forward to getting out there in 'team' mode to see what effect putting our little touches on the car will have.



Castroneves, who ran both days in the blue-and-white car Chevrolet used for manufacturer testing, was also eager to come to grips with the new machine -- even if it meant breaking some old habits.

"I'm learning the new systems," said the three-time Indianapolis 500 winner. "Now the clutch is on the steering wheel, so I'm using my left foot to brake after braking with my right foot for my entire career.

"It's interesting to adapt, but that's why we're testing. It's kind of fun, like a go-kart. Everything that is new always goes through a change. You have to work to find the best balance. That's what makes teams have a good connection -- the engineers, the drivers -- because you're developing something together."


Another positive that came from the Sebring test was the debut of the Lotus engine. De Silvestro relentlessly pounded around Sebring, cranking out hundreds of consistent (if not particularly fast) laps as Lotus attempted to put 1,000 miles on an engine right off the bat.

Nobody was out there to run blazing numbers, they were out there to turn laps, bed things in and get a baseline on the car.

[Anubis]

Some quotes from Graham Rahal :-


The car is fun as hell to drive,” Ganassi’s Graham Rahal told SPEED.com. “It’s pretty wicked—it clearly has a lot of potential on road courses and has plenty of grip. For sure, the car will be quicker at Sebring. It’s a tough, bumpy place. The car has a lot of room to improve, and the track conditions weren’t ideal. Everyone is in the first stages of figuring the car out, so it’s not like we all know the cars and what makes them tick. That’s gonna take some time


We’re close to the quickest I’ve ever gone in the old car already, and we haven’t done much running, so that says a lot about how much is left to come, I think

Doesn't exactly smack of the sky is falling doom and gloom some are trying to paint.

[FIAT1]

I know that speed will go up and with open competicion cars will look better but most of all I'm looking for is what team -driver combo will best develop the car. I think it will be interesting season.

[jimispeed]

Another.......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6adMt7OQarQ

[tillyvick14]

Does anyone know for sure if the new car has power steering?

[Civic]

At least the 2012 F1 cars will be uglier!

[SoCalPVguy]

Does anyone know for sure if the new car has power steering?

No need now that Danica is gone.

[Dr. Krogshöj]

The more pictures I look at, the more I like this car. I'm sure the percieved "uglyness" of the car by some fans will be a non-issue once wee see 26 of these things in motion, with proper paintjobs, come St. Pete! Plus, everyone, inlcuding Dallara, will have the option to come up with an aerokit that is both faster and better-looking in 2013.

[Mad_Hatter]

http://www.latphoto.co.uk/thumbnails/2012/01/30/LAT20120130297698_PVW.jpg?1327940141

I'm with the good Dr. on this. The paintjobs/liveries are all the difference. I liked the Target car I posted awhile back too...

[jimispeed]

Look at that front wing!!! Anyone care to tell us what he said??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FE5AtE5Grlw

[jimispeed]

Not bad at all!!!

Twitpic - Share photos and videos on Twitter (http://twitpic.com/8e1fs6)

[FIAT1]

Sweeeeet, sound. Ugly looks on the back side.

[shazbot]

Look at that front wing!!! Anyone care to tell us what he said??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FE5AtE5Grlw

Only thing I picked out was that he likes pie and mash at 1:22.

[FIAT1]

Abbording to Miller's latest it will be yellow season with new engines.

[garyshell]

Abbording to Miller's latest it will be yellow season with new engines.

Huh? What is he saying? Got link?

Gary

[FIAT1]

Huh? What is he saying? Got link?

Gary

Today, mailbag at speed. Can't make link work for some reason.

[garyshell]

Here it is:

AUTO RACING - INDYCAR: Miller's Mailbag, 2.8 (http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/indycar-millers-mailbag-28/)

Gary

[call_me_andrew]

Of course there are reliability problems. Perhaps I should have picked a more blunt title like "V6 engines suck."

Splash & Go: The Worst of Both Worlds - Racing-Reference.info (http://www.racing-reference.info/showblog?id=913)

[Mad_Hatter]

Of course there are reliability problems. Perhaps I should have picked a more blunt title like "V6 engines suck."

Splash & Go: The Worst of Both Worlds - Racing-Reference.info (http://www.racing-reference.info/showblog?id=913)

That seems like a reasonable article. But, they were given the option of four cylinders too. If the reasons in the article deem v6s unwise decisions why wouldn't they have gone with 4cyls?

[call_me_andrew]

I would guess that IndyCar pushed for the V6 because it makes a better noise and decided that it would be less expensive for all parties if they only had to police one engine formula.

[nigelred5]

Wasn't it Honda and to a lesser extent Chevy that pushed the V6 because of reliability concerns with a 4 cyl hitting the target HP and durability levels, not Indycar? Isn't a 4 cylinder still legal if someone wanted to go that route.

[Chris R]

Of course there are reliability problems. Perhaps I should have picked a more blunt title like "V6 engines suck."

Splash & Go: The Worst of Both Worlds - Racing-Reference.info (http://www.racing-reference.info/showblog?id=913)

Back in the day when F-1 allowed turbos - the 6 cylinders "won the war" - the BMW and Hart were powerful but, IIRC they blew up more often - so I am not 100% sure the article is right in a practical sense (for reasons unknown to me...)

[jimispeed]

Interesting stuff from Kanaan

Servia, Hildebrand, Kanaan preview 2012 season | More Front Wing (http://morefrontwing.com/2012/02/17/servia-hildebrand-kanaan-preview-2012-season/)

Interesting info on the oval package.....

Report: DW12 making strides in oval testing | February (http://www.indyracingrevolution.com/2012-articles/february/report-dw12-making-strides-in-oval-testing.html)


Still wish they could lose the bunghole.

[jimispeed]

No push to pass?

Racin (http://www.racintoday.com/archives/33073)

[Jag_Warrior]

No push to pass?

Racin (http://www.racintoday.com/archives/33073)

Very informative article, Jimi. Thanks! :up:

[FIAT1]

Tomorrow is D-day for oval package. Testing in Texas.

[garyshell]

Tomorrow is D-day for oval package. Testing in Texas.

D-Day? It is an important milestone, no doubt. But there is a lot of time before the first oval race to continue testing beyond what occurs tomorrow.

Gary

[garyshell]

No push to pass?


– “Push to Pass” – Not to start 2012 season

Apparently only at the start of the season. Implying it is a possibility later if deemed necessary.

Gary

[FIAT1]

D-Day? It is an important milestone, no doubt. But there is a lot of time before the first oval race to continue testing beyond what occurs tomorrow.

Gary

Ok, but I like my way better.

[Hoop-98]

Conway went .6 under last years pole (70.74) at Barber yesterday.

rh

[chuck34]

Conway went .6 under last years pole (70.74) at Barber yesterday.

rh

That simply can not be, you must have read the stop watch wrong. Anthonyvop has spoken and he says that the new car is a dog. How can it possibly go any faster than the old car?

[garyshell]

And we patiently await anthonyvop's response.

cue the crickets chirping...

Gary

[Hoop-98]

Well I know Anthony is the expert but some guy who probably doesn't know much says:


"Franchitti was one of several drivers participating in Monday's test. He said the new car will definitely break the Barber track record of 119.213 mph set in 2009 by Will Power.
"We're going to see significantly faster lap times here at Barber," he said. "Some of that is lighter weight, more downforce, engines producing more power with having Honda, Chevy and Lotus. I definitely expect it to be faster on the road courses."

[garyshell]

Hoop is back!!!! Nice to see you here again.

Gary

[DBell]

Anyone see Kanaan's new livery?

AUTO RACING - PHOTOS: Tony Kanaan 2012 IndyCar Livery (http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/photos-tony-kanaan-2012-indycar-livery/)

:dozey:

[Hoop-98]

Rahal got into the 69's (last years pole was about 71.3), I would guess thre will be in the 68's or better come race time.

(well we actually have some factual news lol )


rh

[chuck34]

Anyone see Kanaan's new livery?

AUTO RACING - PHOTOS: Tony Kanaan 2012 IndyCar Livery (http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/photos-tony-kanaan-2012-indycar-livery/)

:dozey:

Looks almost like an old school Menards car.

[SarahFan]

Well it's not pretty ... But I'm pretty stoked to hear about the barber times

[jimispeed]

Finally some oval incar/oncar.......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjs_hDkjen8

[FIAT1]

Looks almost like an old school Menards car.

Looks like lezard to me.

[FIAT1]

Love shots from the camera on the pavement in Phoenix.

[jimispeed]

Another video perspective of the car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0g_HTJ6_AY

[FIAT1]

Rear bumper I can't digest, everything else I could live with. My opinion. Nice picks ,thanks.

[Alfa Fan]

But lets face it, as hideous as it looks, there is a reasonable chance Dan Wheldon would be lining up for AGR this season had the old car had it.

[FIAT1]

But lets face it, as hideous as it looks, there is a reasonable chance Dan Wheldon would be lining up for AGR this season had the old car had it.

I can't make statement like that because nobody knows. There were accidents and crashes through the years in racing with all formulas and cars that we drive with and without bumpers , but we continue to drive and racing goes on. Only thing we can do is learn and make it better. This is racing it is never safe therefore we pray and hope for safe season for drivers and fans.

[Nem14]

But lets face it, as hideous as it looks, there is a reasonable chance Dan Wheldon would be lining up for AGR this season had the old car had it.Yes, lets face that issue.

We haven't seen this car tested in a real world crash yet.

The front tire of a Indy car going faster than 100 miles per hour could still climb that bumper and get a launch.

The canopy argument seems to totally disregard what happens to a canopy when a car gets upside down at over 100 mph and gets ground down by the pavement, or starts to melt in a fire. Since Dan's car first hit the fence support at the footbox there is some degree of possibility a canopy may have been ripped off his car had it had one. Don't forget, the roll hoop was ripped off the car.

The outcome of that incident in Las Vegas would have likely been different had it started 1/2 a second sooner, or 1/2 a second later, or if Dan's car was an inch further to either side when he made contact with the other car and got launched.

I keep thinking how the same 1/2 second sooner/later, or 1/2 inch left or right type of thing would have resulted in a different outcome at the 1996 F3000 incident at Magny-Cours that took Marco Campos from us.

It is always a chain of events that lead to the outcome, not just 1 thing.

[jimispeed]

Infineon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Kjzs-Gm1S4

[Anubis]

I keep thinking how the same 1/2 second sooner/later, or 1/2 inch left or right type of thing would have resulted in a different outcome at the 1996 F3000 incident at Magny-Cours that took Marco Campos from us.

It is always a chain of events that lead to the outcome, not just 1 thing.

Plenty of examples like that - Viso also at Magny-Cours, Conway at Indy, Henry Surtees at Brands and indeed Massa at Hungaroring. As for canopies, I just don't think they belong on a car with no other means of escape or safety crew access.

[FIAT1]

Infineon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Kjzs-Gm1S4

Sweet sound, Can't wait for season to start.Thanks!

[Hoop-98]

Running a 77.4 on blacks on a green track versus a 72.8 Pole on a rubbered track with reds portends well for the new car's potential. It is far from sorted but I think we will see some new track records in it's future, at least on Road/Street courses and maybe short ovals.

rh

[jimispeed]

Another from Infineon...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsU9p-yGJ98

[jimispeed]

Great in car @ Infineon!!

AUTO RACING - VIDEO: Rubens Barrichello Infineon In-Car (http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/video-rubens-barrichello-infineon-raceway-in-car)

[jimispeed]

More good footage with a little surprise......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU2i91ndnSU

[FIAT1]

Symphony to my ears.Thanks!

[DBell]

Dallara is testing new rear wheel guards to used for Indy and Fontanna. Idea is to reduce drag on the component.

Dallara tweaks rear wheel guards design for Indianapolis and Auto Club Speedway - IndyCar news - AUTOSPORT.com (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/97725)

[FIAT1]

Perhaps removal of the guards would help. Just a wishful thinking.

[garyshell]

Perhaps removal of the guards would help. Just a wishful thinking.

Some of us think they are a GOOD thing. Not pretty, but good nonetheless. I want car launching to fade to a distant memory.

Gary

[FIAT1]

Some of us think they are a GOOD thing. Not pretty, but good nonetheless. I want car launching to fade to a distant memory.

Gary

Agree to some degree. There is more to flying cars then bumpers(Mario at Indy practice lap). How good they really are is to be found out. I'm all for safety, but pack racing on high banked oval is the bigger enemy, as there was not big epidemic of flying cars in 90's with much faster speeds. Some of us see things differently. I hope that magic bumper is a solution, but is still hideous looking and perhaps could be designed better. Just my opinion.

[DBell]

Perhaps removal of the guards would help. Just a wishful thinking.

I'm with you. Eliminate pack racing and keep the cars open wheel. But since I don't see the end to pack racing under current specs, then it's probably necessary.

And I don't think these things would've made any difference in Wheldon's case. He didn't launch because he ran over another car's rear wheel.

[Nem14]

Unfortunately, even sedans get launched.

Watch a few YouTube racecar crash compilations.

[garyshell]

Unfortunately, even sedans get launched.

Watch a few YouTube racecar crash compilations.

Sure, but what is the most common cause of launching in open wheel cars? The very thing these bumpers try to address.

Gary

[Mark in Oshawa]

Well the new car isn't a beauty, it seems Dallara just cant build a beautiful race car but it isn't as ugly as the old one...so I will take it. The sound says race car though...and THAT to me is more important. The old Honda's just didn't work for me.

[Mad_Hatter]

Has anyone seen any mention on development/testing/etc on the JDampers?

[chuck34]

Has anyone seen any mention on development/testing/etc on the JDampers?

I saw a brief mention somewhere, perhaps Racecar Engineering magazine, but other than that, nothing. I would be very interested to hear more.

The conspiracy theorist in me says that's probably a good bit of the reason that Penske is still on top. :D

As I am a car lover so i am very excited about the cars because some new cars (http://http://www.cardekho.com/) are ready to arrive in the market like audi q3,mitsubishi colt,chevrolet enjoy and I know that just like me many of the people are waiting for the same eagerly.

[Mad_Hatter]

Some time ago I believe I posted a link to the same article. But since then I've not heard or read anything.

The J-damper was at the back of my mind when I read some of the quotes from the drivers too. Also, unless I'm mistaken Penske shocks are spec. But, if they were Ohlins, Koni, whatever it wouldn't make too much of a difference. Penske employs top talent(even though I rarely cheer them on and hate to admit it) and has the resources to use it well...

[nigelred5]

I saw a brief mention somewhere, perhaps Racecar Engineering magazine, but other than that, nothing. I would be very interested to hear more.

The conspiracy theorist in me says that's probably a good bit of the reason that Penske is still on top. :D

I don't think there's any conspiracy. Penskes advantage with shock technology has been well known for probably close to 20 years now.

[jimispeed]

Good view of paint schemes and cars on track......drivers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylTO_n-iwQs

[chuck34]

I don't think there's any conspiracy. Penskes advantage with shock technology has been well known for probably close to 20 years now.

Yeah, I realize that, hence my big 'ole grin. I guess my sarcasm doesn't work so well in computer form sometimes.

[jimispeed]

The car looks good and bad. Sounds great!! Drivers are great!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AYmEexP6rs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyDttjqGMNM

[FIAT1]

Sorry, but I can't say whoa... I have to learn to like it.

[jimispeed]

A real good look at the cars in action! They sound a bit more like ALMS then the indycars I used to know, but certainly better than what the IRL put out!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_X_L3LfqFg

[FIAT1]

...a peace of good news, Dallara will not build IndyCar aero kits for 2013 - Autoweek (http://www.autoweek.com/article/20120313/INDYCAR/120319942)

[champcarray]

Ugly, but sooo much better sounding. Hallelujah!

[anthonyvop]

...a peace of good news, Dallara will not build IndyCar aero kits for 2013 - Autoweek (http://www.autoweek.com/article/20120313/INDYCAR/120319942)

Why is that good news?

[jimispeed]

Drivers opinions of the car.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wy_uclZ2tJ4

[FIAT1]

Why is that good news?

Best news so far this season. Why? Dallara, self explanatory.

[jimispeed]

More great stuff!!!

VIDEO: 2012 Dallara DW12 Indy Car Tech Review Pt. 1 (http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/video-2012-dallara-dw12-indy-car-tech-review-pt-1)

[anthonyvop]

Best news so far this season. Why? Dallara, self explanatory.

When the Dallara chassis was chosen one of the big selling points would be the availability of different bodywork kits so the cars wouldn't all look the same and hide the fact that it is a Spec Chassis series.

As of today with that announcement the cars will all look the same for the next 2 years.

Not good news in my opinion,

[FIAT1]

When the Dallara chassis was chosen one of the big selling points would be the availability of different bodywork kits so the cars wouldn't all look the same and hide the fact that it is a Spec Chassis series.

As of today with that announcement the cars will all look the same for the next 2 years.

Not good news in my opinion,

My understanding is that Dallara will not build bodywork kits therefore others will build their own starting 2013. We are in 2012 that would mean next year. I did not hear any other news.

[garyshell]

As of today with that announcement the cars will all look the same for the next 2 years.

What was today's announcement?

Gary

[numanoid]

When the Dallara chassis was chosen one of the big selling points would be the availability of different bodywork kits so the cars wouldn't all look the same and hide the fact that it is a Spec Chassis series.

As of today with that announcement the cars will all look the same for the next 2 years.

Not good news in my opinion,

What announcement came out today?

I got this from the article:



Instead, Chevrolet, Honda, Lotus and perhaps other companies that IndyCar is talking to will build the kits that will make the Dallara cars different in appearance and performance. Teams will be limited to two different kinds of kits, but most figure to use the ones produced by the manufacturer that builds their engines.

[anthonyvop]

What was today's announcement?

Gary


No announcement.

I am just saying that as of today there is no official announcement of a bodykit

[FIAT1]

I love sports car prototype, but open wheel should be just that, open wheel at least on road and street tracks. Back of the car is f ugly. I just had to say that. There must be a better way. Now let's race. Go Graham!!!

[jimispeed]

Some electrical issues reeking havoc in the first race. Sounds familiar!! I remember the same type of thing happening with the DP01. It cost Bourdais his win!! It was sorted out pretty quickly though.........

[FIAT1]

INDYCAR: Tech Bosses Provide Updates On Engines, Electronics, Aero Kits (http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/indycar-tech-bosses-provide-updates-on-engines-electronics-aero-kits/)


Good news. Looks like next year will be extremely competitive on all levels.

[Jag_Warrior]

This question has probably already been asked & answered. But why does the new car have a typical airbox? Wasn't the decision to go with turbo engines made long before the design of the car came together? I realize that the roll hoop is probably incorporated into the inlet. But... :confused:

[FIAT1]

This question has probably already been asked & answered. But why does the new car have a typical airbox? Wasn't the decision to go with turbo engines made long before the design of the car came together? I realize that the roll hoop is probably incorporated into the inlet. But... :confused:

Airbox is there to draw away attention from lawnmower design side pods. I think that car would look much better without it. I'm all for safety,but there is way to make car look much better. Function of the airbox is none, and many would differ, but there is no need for it.

[call_me_andrew]

This question has probably already been asked & answered. But why does the new car have a typical airbox? Wasn't the decision to go with turbo engines made long before the design of the car came together? I realize that the roll hoop is probably incorporated into the inlet. But... :confused:

The answer Tony Cottman keeps giving has to do with making sure no turbocharger is any more efficent than the others.

[Marbles]

In regards to the airbox, I thought I read somewhere that the reasoning was that atmospheric air has to get to the Turbo\engine (cooling?) and this was more efficient than the way it was done in the CART days. But I agree with most here, it would be a site for many sore eyes, and visually set Indycar apart from virtually all other open wheel series if they returned to the once traditional roll hoop. But we are only the hardcore and we are only the majority of the hardcore (which probably translates to the majority of viewers) so our opinions matter little.

[FIAT1]

With new oval package , car looks like mini deltawing. I'm gona say one more time, I hate back of the car and bumpers. There must be better design for this.

http://www.indycar.com/News/2012/April/4-3-Indy-tests-new-aero

[Civic]

The DW12 looks smaller overall compared to the previous Dallara. I haven't seen any side by side pics. I would think it's similar in size to the DP01, which was smaller than the Lolas and Reynards.

I did quick search on pole times. I'm not sure if the St. Pete course has changed since the last Champ Car race there but if it hasn't, then Will Power's qualifying would've placed him second to Bourdais in the Champ Car race.

[FIAT1]

The DW12 looks smaller overall compared to the previous Dallara. I haven't seen any side by side pics. I would think it's similar in size to the DP01, which was smaller than the Lolas and Reynards.

I did quick search on pole times. I'm not sure if the St. Pete course has changed since the last Champ Car race there but if it hasn't, then Will Power's qualifying would've placed him second to Bourdais in the Champ Car race.

You are correct, but Bourdais had obout 200hp more in Champcar.

[jimispeed]

Those rear wings are different!! I wonder how they are for drafting. Honestly, I think they look badass though!!

April 4 Indianapolis 500 test gallery - Racer.com (http://www.racer.com/april-4-indianapolis-500-test-gallery/slideshow/687/)

Jim

[Jag_Warrior]

Those rear wings are different!! I wonder how they are for drafting. Honestly, I think they look badass though!!

April 4 Indianapolis 500 test gallery - Racer.com (http://www.racer.com/april-4-indianapolis-500-test-gallery/slideshow/687/)

Jim

Well, now... I think the word of the day is "funky". :up:

[garyshell]

Those rear wings are different!! I wonder how they are for drafting. Honestly, I think they look badass though!!

April 4 Indianapolis 500 test gallery - Racer.com (http://www.racer.com/april-4-indianapolis-500-test-gallery/slideshow/687/)

Jim

I think they look pretty damn cool! The side view of the Sonny's car is killer!

Gary

[FIAT1]

....looks like some of my frends here, did go for extra expense on those special glasses that make things appear better. Car looks like is designed by Toro.

[garyshell]

....looks like some of my frends here, did go for extra expense on those special glasses that make things appear better. Car looks like is designed by Toro.

You tomato. I saw tomahto. Sorry, but I DO really like the look in oval trim a lot, even with my glasses off.

Gary

Thanks for sharinghttp://www.camcorderdcr.com

[jimispeed]

Aero Kit Test at IMS - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1B1mwXfHk-I)

[Marbles]

The last time I saw a rear wing that low was on Carpentier's Formula Atlantic at Road America in the mid-nineties.

Andretti - "flat-out through turn one".

Hmm... don't know if I like the sound of that.

[garyshell]

The last time I saw a rear wing that low was on Carpentier's Formula Atlantic at Road America in the mid-nineties.

Andretti - "flat-out through turn one".

Hmm... don't know if I like the sound of that.

I know I DON'T like the idea of ANYONE being able to go flat out on any oval corner. I want them to have to lift, due to more HP and less downforce. Flat out on an oval corner is just flat out unacceptable, period.

Gary

[FIAT1]

There is no metaphor or analogy that is going to make these cars look better or faster. To bad for great opportunity missed .

[Marbles]

I know I DON'T like the idea of ANYONE being able to go flat out on any oval corner. I want them to have to lift, due to more HP and less downforce. Flat out on an oval corner is just flat out unacceptable, period.

Gary

I agree and what worries me is that these cars were so inherently unstable out of the box on ovals that they may have had to bolt on enough aero or reduce horsepower to keep them straight that they will all be running around in one... what's that word I'm looking for... Pack! To be fair, Andretti also said "it wasn't pretty in traffic" -- keeping in mind that Marco isn't known for being a set-up king.

However, I believe it's too early for concern. Perhaps that bulbous rear end will result in some nice drafting.

[nigelred5]

I actually think they look pretty cool with the Indy version rear aero. Can one of the Photoshop aces remove that airbox on the Sonnys car for me please. Honestly, with out hte airbox and goofy side pods, the car might not be so terribly bad looking.

BTW- what does Dallara and ICS actually call the karbashians? It's been so long now since anyone used a read term I can't honestly remember.

[Civic]

Some MS Paint quickies. Original, followed by three chopped pics. I didn't put much effort into it. The end results sort of remind me of the F3000-based Indy Lights Lola introduced in 1997.
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a222/HybridsRacing/1104969_article_img_large1.jpg
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a222/HybridsRacing/dw12rollhoop.jpg
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a222/HybridsRacing/dw12rollhoop1.jpg
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a222/HybridsRacing/dw12rollhoop1bw.jpg

[FIAT1]

Much better, thank you. Looks like a race car not lawnmower. That would be a good starting point for next year updates.

[garyshell]

Much better, thank you. Looks like a race car not lawnmower. That would be a good starting point for next year updates.

IMHO, meh. I just don't see that it makes that much difference.

Gary

[nigelred5]

Not knowing exactly where the engine lies under the cowling, I'd drop the cowling down lower to the energizer logo, then loose the stupid sidepods for a more traditional sidepod like the Dallara roadcourse concept sidepods.

[Chris R]

It actually looks better with the rear bumper.... To me the biggest ugly on the car is the side pods - fix those and the rest is ok. I'd prefer no air box - but it is ok....

At this point, I'll be happy to see what the aero kits bring us next year - the things race pretty well so I guess you can't have everything....

[Marbles]

Some MS Paint quickies. Original, followed by three chopped pics. I didn't put much effort into it. The end results sort of remind me of the F3000-based Indy Lights Lola introduced in 1997.
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a222/HybridsRacing/dw12rollhoop1bw.jpg

Nothing separates Indycar from the rest of the open wheel world like a roll hoop (and lower engine cowling).

Lost on everybody but us. Funny huh...

[Phoenixent]

It actually looks better with the rear bumper.... To me the biggest ugly on the car is the side pods - fix those and the rest is ok. I'd prefer no air box - but it is ok.....

http://i361.photobucket.com/albums/oo56/skarnes128/Name%20That%20Car/2012Rahal.jpg

Is this what you mean Chris....... :D

[Civic]

That's a good photochop!

[FIAT1]

http://i361.photobucket.com/albums/oo56/skarnes128/Name%20That%20Car/2012Rahal.jpg

Is this what you mean Chris....... :D

Thank you! Much,much better looking car, what if they remove a bumper and move a wing little bit forward than maybe incorporate some safety bar in the back as a part of the wing assembly. Car would look better and it would add safety. Just thinking out loud.

[FIAT1]

Depends on what moving the wing forward would do to the aerodynamic balance of the car. I'll take faster over prettier any day.

That woud be good argument if these cars where fast , but fact to date is that no records where broken so far.

[garyshell]

Depends on what moving the wing forward would do to the aerodynamic balance of the car. I'll take faster over prettier any day.


That woud be good argument if these cars where fast , but fact to date is that no records where broken so far.

It's still a good argument, unless the purpose is to make the cars slower. And I don't think you are suggesting that.

Gary

[FIAT1]

So it's OK to potentially make them slower?

Hm, potentially! Means what ? That you don't know or...I don't understand what you traying to say. I have posted statement obout car looking better without air box and a wing been moved farward a little as thinking out loud, and as a fan that remembers days of fast and beatiful racing cars ,not as mechanical engineer. I'm not traying to pick on anyone's engineering skills or devoted love of ugly bumpers , it was a more of a question , and definitely I'm not sure like you are that would be faster or slower than a car that broke the sound barrier at Indy two days ago. Please!

[FIAT1]

[quote="Starter"]I wasn't trying to pick a fight with you. I was just responding to your post:

There is never fighting by posting here as far as I'm concerened, only discussion obut topics we are passionate obout, as we all want sport of Indycar racing to be as best it could be, nothing is ever personal.

[Phoenixent]

Talked to a current ICS driver/former ChampCar driver at Long Beach today about the DW12. He said that they were still working on it but it's slow going. When I asked him how it compares to the DP-01 he smiled and said now that was a car really fast and handled well. He sure missed that car.... :)

[jimispeed]

Well here is some oval video finally, but still haven't seen these cars in a pack.............

New Indy Cars Set Up For Ovals During a Test At Texas Motor Speedway on May 7 2012 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRv9TW5pOdc)

[jimispeed]

So seems to me that once they're in the race and packing up, the speeds should be closer. But eventually it will be just as fast on the ovals. It should be fine. Hopefully the cars race on the ovals well!!

[Marbles]

Those cars look funky and they're kind of growing on me. They look like they punch a big hole in the air.. sling shot drafting?
Video: Watch highlights from Opening Day at IMS (http://indycar.com/News/2012/05-May/5-12-Video-Watch-highlights-from-Opening-Day)

Aero kits still coming in 2013!
Evolution continues in 2013 with multiple aero kits (http://indycar.com/News/2012/05-May/5-12-Aero-kit-regulations-on-the-way)

[Jag_Warrior]

Those cars look funky and they're kind of growing on me. They look like they punch a big hole in the air.. sling shot drafting?
Video: Watch highlights from Opening Day at IMS (http://indycar.com/News/2012/05-May/5-12-Video-Watch-highlights-from-Opening-Day)

Aero kits still coming in 2013!
Evolution continues in 2013 with multiple aero kits (http://indycar.com/News/2012/05-May/5-12-Aero-kit-regulations-on-the-way)

I like the aesthetics of the rear wing. I really do. I'm still not a fan of the rear wheel guards though - they look incredibly awkward, IMO.

http://img150.imagevenue.com/loc165/th_019384551_IndyCar5_12_Aerokit_Rules_Announcemen t_Std_122_165lo.jpg (http://img150.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=019384551_IndyCar5_12_Aerokit_Rules_ Announcement_Std_122_165lo.jpg)

And for the airbox, I think they could have easily done what Mercedes did on their previous F1 car.

http://img261.imagevenue.com/loc2/th_019183608_rosberg_barca_122_2lo.jpg (http://img261.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=019183608_rosberg_barca_122_2lo.jpg)


Or even better, what Lotus did on the gorgeous Lotus 78

http://img238.imagevenue.com/loc357/th_019251733_lotus78_122_357lo.jpg (http://img238.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=019251733_lotus78_122_357lo.jpg)

But that's just a personal preference.

[jimispeed]

Aerokits anyone??

Aero kit program moves forward for next season (http://www.indycar.com/News/2012/05-May/5-24-Aero-kits-for-2013-moving-forward)

[Phoenixent]

Aerokits anyone??

Aero kit program moves forward for next season (http://www.indycar.com/News/2012/05-May/5-24-Aero-kits-for-2013-moving-forward)

After look over what can be changed and what can be changed this is the dumbest idea I have ever heard of. The one piece front wing can't be touched and the ugly dallara nose can not be re-skinned. you get to mess with the side pods,engine cover and wing end plates. So we have a barnhart dallara that we are stuck with and nascar type smoke and mirrors to think you see something different.....

[Phoenixent]

BB screws ICS and the teams making the deal with dallara. The cars cost about 750,000.00 instead of about 350,000.00 that they were promised. Plus they have to buy all the small parts that can be fabricated in their shops from dallara.. What a royal screwing everyone is getting on the DW12 between the cost and parts then add the mickey mouse aero kits rules...

[Chris R]

Wow, $750k instead of $350k? That is huge (stating the obvious, i know). no wonder the owners are up in arms.... I thought the price was set/capped???

[SarahFan]

So it's more expensive weighs the same and you could have rolled out the old one and say on pole at the 500

Hmmmm

[Phoenixent]

Wow, $750k instead of $350k? That is huge (stating the obvious, i know). no wonder the owners are up in arms.... I thought the price was set/capped???

I think the only one that knew the true cost and other items in the deal was BB( Penske's Pet in the ICS). BB shafted everyone with this deal after he made sure that even after all the proposals from other makers dallara was it. He should be tared and feathered and run out on a rail.

[Phoenixent]

Um, which BB are you speaking of? There was an old BB and now a new, quite different, BB.

Thanks Starter.. I forgot we have a new BB :D Okay it Brian I am a Penske guy Barnhart......