Massage to Indy brass...

[FIAT1]

...it's the CARS stupid. Build it and they will come!

[geosin1945]

This will rub them up the wrong way!!

[Chris R]

This will rub them up the wrong way!!

you beat me too it!!

Seriously, I do not think it is the cars, at least not in a way that the series itself can 'solve" (i.e. - even an exciting spec is still spec and you cannot MAKE people build great cars)....

Also, this car has most certainly delivered in terms of good racing. Sure it is not a looker (although I would argue that it is pretty slick in speedway trim) - but do you "marry" a performance "10" who runs off with every race she finds (often the case in F1 or even in the days of CART chassis competition) or a performance "7" that give you a great race almost every time???

I think the problem is much more comprehensive than the car and honestly, it has much less to do with anything that Indycar can actually control than anybody seems to be willing to believe.....

[FIAT1]

you beat me too it!!

Seriously, I do not think it is the cars, at least not in a way that the series itself can 'solve" (i.e. - even an exciting spec is still spec and you cannot MAKE people build great cars)....

Also, this car has most certainly delivered in terms of good racing. Sure it is not a looker (although I would argue that it is pretty slick in speedway trim) - but do you "marry" a performance "10" who runs off with every race she finds (often the case in F1 or even in the days of CART chassis competition) or a performance "7" that give you a great race almost every time???

I think the problem is much more comprehensive than the car and honestly, it has much less to do with anything that Indycar can actually control than anybody seems to be willing to believe.....

Same tracks, same players, same tradition, what is the problem. Ok is not a car. What else there. What they can sell me? Ride on ferris wheel. F1 and CART speak for themself in numbers of fans, media, tv etc. I guess 0.2 is happy with today spec racing. I don't see F1 suffering and I don't see 10 as you, I see perfection of motor racing on every level. Millions agree and pay to see it. I see 7 as good as how many yellows come out. I still believe Indycars problem is the spec product that is hard to sell. My opinion.

[Chris R]

Same tracks, same players, same tradition, what is the problem. Ok is not a car. What else there. What they can sell me? Ride on ferris wheel. F1 and CART speak for themself in numbers of fans, media, tv etc. I guess 0.2 is happy with today spec racing. I don't see F1 suffering and I don't see 10 as you, I see perfection of motor racing on every level. Millions agree and pay to see it. I see 7 as good as how many yellows come out. I still believe Indycars problem is the spec product that is hard to sell. My opinion.

The spec product is absolutely part of the issue - but I don't see an easy solution for it - I cannot imagine anyone lining up to build a unique team car for the series anymore.

One of the problems you cited was the yellows - that is not the car - that is a series worried about lawsuits and American's feelings about people getting hurt etc. For better or worse AOWR has been running scared since/because of the Krosnoff, Rodriguez, Moore, Zanardi, DaMatta, Renna, Dana and Wheldon accidents and it shows.... Formula 1 has been "lucky" that Senna was the last fatality and their procedures, rules and officiating show a certain amount of confidence due to that fact...

Also, really, the heyday of CART was not THAT diverse - for a while most everything was MArch, then a Lola, then a Reynard.... yes there was opportunity and that made things interesting for us fans - but I am not entirely convinced it pulled in more fans in and of itself.....

I think the heyday of CART had much more to do with a convergence of advertising opportunities that either no longer exist (tobacco) or have been surpassed in value by "new" media. CART was popular because it had a ton of corporate support that used the series as a marketing event either for lack of any other alternative (tobacco) or because it provided the best pre-internet advertising value....

Also, Formula 1 has been and continues to be similar in size in the market in question - the United States (I do not think TV ratings have improved that much for F1 in years if at all). The reason F1 is so big is that they have purposefully cultivated a much larger market and the core of that market (Europe) is and always has been much more interested in motorsports than the core American market. Indycar has always gone for the core US market and taken anything else it gets as a bonus....

I understand where you are coming from and I agree that an open spec would be way cool - but I just do not think it will make enough difference. With the exception of the very beginning of cars, the brief era of CART and the current NASCAR juggernaut (which is slowing quite a lot) auto racing has always been a well respected niche market in this country and even NASCAR is still barely grasping at "mainstream" relative to the stick and ball sports....

Indycar needs to do what it can with what it has and focus on being the best niche sport it can be so that the next time events converge to allow it to "go mainstream" it is healthy enough to grow to accommodate the situation.....

[FIAT1]

The spec product is absolutely part of the issue - but I don't see an easy solution for it - I cannot imagine anyone lining up to build a unique team car for the series anymore.

One of the problems you cited was the yellows - that is not the car - that is a series worried about lawsuits and American's feelings about people getting hurt etc. For better or worse AOWR has been running scared since/because of the Krosnoff, Rodriguez, Moore, Zanardi, DaMatta, Renna, Dana and Wheldon accidents and it shows.... Formula 1 has been "lucky" that Senna was the last fatality and their procedures, rules and officiating show a certain amount of confidence due to that fact...

Also, really, the heyday of CART was not THAT diverse - for a while most everything was MArch, then a Lola, then a Reynard.... yes there was opportunity and that made things interesting for us fans - but I am not entirely convinced it pulled in more fans in and of itself.....

I think the heyday of CART had much more to do with a convergence of advertising opportunities that either no longer exist (tobacco) or have been surpassed in value by "new" media. CART was popular because it had a ton of corporate support that used the series as a marketing event either for lack of any other alternative (tobacco) or because it provided the best pre-internet advertising value....

Also, Formula 1 has been and continues to be similar in size in the market in question - the United States (I do not think TV ratings have improved that much for F1 in years if at all). The reason F1 is so big is that they have purposefully cultivated a much larger market and the core of that market (Europe) is and always has been much more interested in motorsports than the core American market. Indycar has always gone for the core US market and taken anything else it gets as a bonus....

I understand where you are coming from and I agree that an open spec would be way cool - but I just do not think it will make enough difference. With the exception of the very beginning of cars, the brief era of CART and the current NASCAR juggernaut (which is slowing quite a lot) auto racing has always been a well respected niche market in this country and even NASCAR is still barely grasping at "mainstream" relative to the stick and ball sports....

Indycar needs to do what it can with what it has and focus on being the best niche sport it can be so that the next time events converge to allow it to "go mainstream" it is healthy enough to grow to accommodate the situation.....

I understand what u saying but if you own a steak house wouldn't be good idea to have a good steak first. Perhaps it won't matter much if things continue as they are.

[Nem14]

A front of the pack F1 car costs what - something like 5 or 6 times more than an Indy car?

Indy car desperately needs management stability (a benevolent dictator), and a freaking plan. (No. Not tony george)

[zako85]

Formula 1 is immensely popular. But I don't think it's just the cars. For example, there is one dimension to Formula 1 that IndyCar completely lacks. And that is TEAM COMPETION. Formula 1 has a constructor's championship. Of course, some teams are poor and others are rich. One way to offset this and have a sport where even weak team can sometimes score points and even podiums is to have TWO CARS PER TEAM. point. Cars of the same team use the same LIVERIES, which make it clear that cars belong to the same team. A lot of people are used to root for one team, regardless of who is driving it. The Tifosi support Ferrari. The British tend to root for McLaren and Williams, etc. IndyCar has none of this.

However, cars do add a lot of excitement and unpredictability to F1. Some teams start a season with a good car, score podiums, then let their development slide by the end of year, and have a hard time fighting for points finishes. Sometimes the reverse happens when a team (specially rich team) starts season slow and improves the car considerably during the season. However, it's not clear how Indycar can afford this. A good compromise would be to allow the idea of customer chassis or aero kits bolted on the current Dalara chassis.

[Starter]

Formula 1 is immensely popular. But I don't think it's just the cars. For example, there is one dimension to Formula 1 that IndyCar completely lacks. And that is TEAM COMPETION. Formula 1 has a constructor's championship. Of course, some teams are poor and others are rich. One way to offset this and have a sport where even weak team can sometimes score points and even podiums is to have TWO CARS PER TEAM. point. Cars of the same team use the same LIVERIES, which make it clear that cars belong to the same team. A lot of people are used to root for one team, regardless of who is driving it. The Tifosi support Ferrari. The British tend to root for McLaren and Williams, etc. IndyCar has none of this.
Some good points. It would be difficult though for most teams to field identical liveried cars since only two teams have the same sponsor for both cars.

[00steven]

The casual fan doesn't give a rats ass about the cars. They care about what's trending, shove it there face and they will watch.

[Chris R]

Formula 1 also has a national competition element that a US series cannot have - England vs. Italy is a big deal over there - New Jersey vs. Kansas - not so much.....

I agree the two car teams with identical liveries have always been an integral part of F1 (at least in modern times) and it really helps create identities for teams, sponsors and drivers..... I think this is a place where NASCAR is starting to lose it - the different color schemes used for different sponsors on the same car throughout the year seem to fuel die cast sales to hard core fans - but I don't watch Cup racing that much and I just find it confusing and it does not really help me to decide to patronize a sponsor....

[FIAT1]

The casual fan doesn't give a rats ass about the cars. They care about what's trending, shove it there face and they will watch.

Interesting you said that. Roger Penske said a same thing when he switched to irl. Well ,what happened from that point on. I guess there is more casual fans than you think.

[FIAT1]

[quote="Chris R"]Formula 1 also has a national competition element that a US series cannot have - England vs. Italy is a big deal over there - New Jersey vs. Kansas - not so much.....QUOTE]

There is little of that ,but if you make F1 spec it would be done also.

[zako85]

Well, I know IndyCar can not be made into some kind of a national Formula 1 copy. How about CART? What can IndyCar can learn for 1980s CART which I hear was very successful?

[FIAT1]

Well, I know IndyCar can not be made into some kind of a national Formula 1 copy. How about CART? What can IndyCar can learn for 1980s CART which I hear was very successful?

Self serving Championship Auto Racing Teams are live and well in today Indycar. What today IndyCar can learn from 80s and 90s? THE CARS AND SPEED MATTERS!!!

[garyshell]

Self serving Championship Auto Racing Teams are live and well in today Indycar. What today IndyCar can learn from 80s and 90s? THE CARS AND SPEED MATTERS!!!

And that budgets have shrunk precipitously since tobacco money is no longer an option. Cars and speed cost $$$. Where do you propose the funds for "CARS AND SPEED MATTERS" would come from?

Gary

[FIAT1]

And that budgets have shrunk precipitously since tobacco money is no longer an option. Cars and speed cost $$$. Where do you propose the funds for "CARS AND SPEED MATTERS" would come from?

Gary

Ok then, what you saying it's cheaper to run slow crappy looking cars that only 0.2 watches and for how long.

[F1boat]

I think that the new Indycars are pretty and cool, but the championship has lost so much momentum, that recovery will be very tough and I am not sure that it is possible :(

[Starter]

Ok then, what you saying it's cheaper to run slow crappy looking cars that only 0.2 watches and for how long.
Yes, that's correct. It's easy to spend other people's money.

There is not enough commercial support now for the teams to replace their equipment yet again. They just spent a bundle on the new car and spares. That investment needs to be amortized over several years. Until you can come up with a viable source for all the teams to get the capital to replace all of that equipment, again, you are wasting everyone's time with that sort of post. It's the real world and, like it or not, we live in it.

[Rex Monaco]

It is about the cars. But more specifically, it is about the cars that race at Indy. You can't fix the Indycar series, until you fix Indy itself. Indy should once again be like Le Mans, and stop trying to be like Daytona. It should be the place where the worlds greatest auto makers come to race against each other putting to the test, and proving to the world, the merits of their latest 'green' technologies. Unless the track is sold to someone who understands what made Indy great in the first place and why they were called Indycars, there will be no way to rebuild what should never have been destroyed in the first place.

I know the IRLista arguments for staying the course on this failed experiment. The economy sucks, there is no money anymore, nobody would build a car, blah, blah, blah... And yet Le Mans has no problem attracting top automakers developing expensive technology for a single race. Maybe an easy solution would be to adopt their engine formula so last years Le Mans engine can end up in an Indycar in front of American audiences the following year.

But that's all wishful thinking on my part. So is my hope that when Indycar dies, F1 takes to the track again in Long Beach. Although that scenario is more likely to happen.

[Rex Monaco]

And why is this at the bottom of this page? Is this intended to target the Indycar demographic?

Visitors found this page by searching for:
erotic massage new haven

[FIAT1]

Yes, that's correct. It's easy to spend other people's money.

There is not enough commercial support now for the teams to replace their equipment yet again. They just spent a bundle on the new car and spares. That investment needs to be amortized over several years. Until you can come up with a viable source for all the teams to get the capital to replace all of that equipment, again, you are wasting everyone's time with that sort of post. It's the real world and, like it or not, we live in it.

Wrong. They have a product that sucks I'm just stating the fact, and if you think that my post is waste of time then why reply.

[garyshell]

No, I am saying that the sort of money required to fullfill your vision of what the series should be is a pipe dream. How do you propose to make this all happen? I keep hear about what needs to be done, but I have yet to hear how it CAN be done.

Gary

[garyshell]

It is about the cars. But more specifically, it is about the cars that race at Indy. You can't fix the Indycar series, until you fix Indy itself. Indy should once again be like Le Mans, and stop trying to be like Daytona. It should be the place where the worlds greatest auto makers come to race against each other putting to the test, and proving to the world, the merits of their latest 'green' technologies. Unless the track is sold to someone who understands what made Indy great in the first place and why they were called Indycars, there will be no way to rebuild what should never have been destroyed in the first place.

You seem to be under the impression that Le Mans is a one off race and that the manufacturers flock to this one race spending bucket loads of money for one race. That just is not the case, Le Mans like the Indy 500 is the cornerstone event of a series. A series where teams build cars that they can race at multiple venues and amortize the development costs over that series of races.

Your call for fixing Indy while ignoring the Indycar series is a non starter. I'll ask the same question of you that I asked Fiat1, where do you propose to come up with the money to build a car to run at one race, the Indy 500? Without a series there is no Indy 500, teams simply can't afford to spend the development dollars to build a car and only race it one time a year. No sponsor will put up enough money for one day of exposure.

Again I hear what needs to be done, but I see no financial prospectus or business plan as to HOW to do it.

Gary

[garyshell]

Self serving Championship Auto Racing Teams are live and well in today Indycar. What today IndyCar can learn from 80s and 90s? THE CARS AND SPEED MATTERS!!!


Wrong. They have a product that sucks I'm just stating the fact, and if you think that my post is waste of time then why reply.

And you are stating more than the fact, you are suggesting what needs to be changed. All starter and I are saying is you are suggesting what but ignoring the how. We are replying because we are trying to get the point across that without the "how" the "what" is a waste of time.

Gary

[FIAT1]

And you are stating more than the fact, you are suggesting what needs to be changed. All starter and I are saying is you are suggesting what but ignoring the how. We are replying because we are trying to get the point across that without the "how" the "what" is a waste of time.

Gary

I'm not suggesting anything but my opinion that cars and speed are reason why people watch this type a racing. They can replace co every year,they can make czars,they can replace owners,presidents,drivers end everything else,but nothing will change before they move away from spec. Ugly ,slow bumper cars won't do anymore ,but you and all aur 0.2 frends know that already.

[FIAT1]

It is about the cars. But more specifically, it is about the cars that race at Indy. You can't fix the Indycar series, until you fix Indy itself. Indy should once again be like Le Mans, and stop trying to be like Daytona. It should be the place where the worlds greatest auto makers come to race against each other putting to the test, and proving to the world, the merits of their latest 'green' technologies. Unless the track is sold to someone who understands what made Indy great in the first place and why they were called Indycars, there will be no way to rebuild what should never have been destroyed in the first place.

I know the IRLista arguments for staying the course on this failed experiment. The economy sucks, there is no money anymore, nobody would build a car, blah, blah, blah... And yet Le Mans has no problem attracting top automakers developing expensive technology for a single race. Maybe an easy solution would be to adopt their engine formula so last years Le Mans engine can end up in an Indycar in front of American audiences the following year.

But that's all wishful thinking on my part. So is my hope that when Indycar dies, F1 takes to the track again in Long Beach. Although that scenario is more likely to happen.

excellent post!!!

[bricarr2]

I agree that IndyCar is not in a position where they can make the teams buy new equipment.

However, they should allow more development on the equipment they already have, and seek to encourage more participation. For example, IndyCar could allow production based engines to compete against the race engines built by Honda and Chevy. Obviously, rules would need to be figured out, but anything to encourage more participation is good.

[FIAT1]

I agree that IndyCar is not in a position where they can make the teams buy new equipment.

However, they should allow more development on the equipment they already have, and seek to encourage more participation. For example, IndyCar could allow production based engines to compete against the race engines built by Honda and Chevy. Obviously, rules would need to be figured out, but anything to encourage more participation is good.

Exactly, give them current skeleton,rule book and good luck. Open competition ,it would be good start and something to look forward to.

[bricarr2]

Exactly, give them current skeleton,rule book and good luck. Open competition ,it would be good start and something to look forward to.

Fiat:

Skeleton is the perfect word. Start with a DW12 and the engine specs and allow SOME innovation.

I also think the production engine alternative is something worth exploring. It got a bad rep back in the day, but people forget that was largely a CART/USAC issue. With the the series now back under one roof it can be managed better.

[Rex Monaco]

You seem to be under the impression that Le Mans is a one off race and that the manufacturers flock to this one race spending bucket loads of money for one race. That just is not the case

You're right. Sometimes these one offs are entered at Sebring to ensure they are ready for Le Mans. Or in the case of the Deltawing, it was entered at Atlanta in an attempt to prove what it didn't get a chance to prove at Le Mans. The need to shake things down was why the month of May was a month.


(W)here do you propose to come up with the money to build a car to run at one race, the Indy 500?

The role of the management at Indy was never to fund the building of a race car. That came about when a megalomaniac became jealous of the France family. The role of the management at Indy was, and is, to protect the legacy of the event and to ensure that it lasts for another 100 years. That requires a reverence for it's past and acknowledgement of how this event earned amd maintained it's place amongst the greatest races in the world.


Without a series there is no Indy 500, teams simply can't afford to spend the development dollars to build a car and only race it one time a year. No sponsor will put up enough money for one day of exposure.

You keep forgetting that the Indy 500 came first. The prestige of winning that single event, was what eventually allowed the creation of what is now called the Indycar series.


Again I hear what needs to be done, but I see no financial prospectus or business plan as to HOW to do it.

It requires an engine and chassis rules package for Indy that is separated from any current or future series that may or may not bear it's name. I'd be happy to provide you with a much more detailed turnaround plan. How much will I be compensated for my effort?

[Rex Monaco]

YI'll ask the same question of you that I asked Fiat1, where do you propose to come up with the money to build a car to run at one race, the Indy 500?

If you created rules for Indy that allowed new technology to share the track with the spec series, then I guarantee that Penske, Ganassi, et al would go over that new rule book with a fine tooth comb. And if they thought a diesel or a hybrid would give them even the slightest competitive advantage, you can be sure they would find the money to enter one in the Indy 500.

Build it and they will come. They aren't coming now. So what's to lose?

[bricarr2]

If you created rules for Indy that allowed new technology to share the track with the spec series, then I guarantee that Penske, Ganassi, et al would go over that new rule book with a fine tooth comb. And if they thought a diesel or a hybrid would give them even the slightest competitive advantage, you can be sure they would find the money to enter one in the Indy 500.

Build it and they will come. They aren't coming now. So what's to lose?

Agreed. A lot of people would moan about rich teams buying a win, but I'm not one of them. This is suppose to be competition at the highest level, not some forum to champion the egalitarian ideal.

When Penske brought the pushrod Mercedes to Indy in 94, they dominated, but I loved it. They thought outside the box, and we're willing to invest huge resources in winning the race. People making that sort of investment enhnaces the event. It adds to the prestige of winning.

While I know these teams are strapped for cash, some innovations should be allowed. Further, these innovations would encourage others to participate, something that would increase further interest.

[FIAT1]

Agreed. A lot of people would moan about rich teams buying a win, but I'm not one of them. This is suppose to be competition at the highest level, not some forum to champion the egalitarian ideal.

When Penske brought the pushrod Mercedes to Indy in 94, they dominated, but I loved it. They thought outside the box, and we're willing to invest huge resources in winning the race. People making that sort of investment enhnaces the event. It adds to the prestige of winning.

While I know these teams are strapped for cash, some innovations should be allowed. Further, these innovations would encourage others to participate, something that would increase further interest.

Agreed!!! That's my thinking exactly
.

[Starter]

If you created rules for Indy that allowed new technology to share the track with the spec series, then I guarantee that Penske, Ganassi, et al would go over that new rule book with a fine tooth comb. And if they thought a diesel or a hybrid would give them even the slightest competitive advantage, you can be sure they would find the money to enter one in the Indy 500.

Build it and they will come. They aren't coming now. So what's to lose?
I can see the pole row now. Unfortunately I can't see rows two through eleven. It will make the six car F1 event look over subscribed.

[Rex Monaco]

Unfortunately I can't see rows two through eleven.

They run Offys, Fords, Cosworths, Judds, or anything else made to spec like they always have.

More than likely, it'd be filled with Indycars. There is still a series to try and save. Which I think also includes Indycar changing to small displacement turbo V8's.

[garyshell]

I can see the pole row now. Unfortunately I can't see rows two through eleven. It will make the six car F1 event look over subscribed.


They run Offys, Fords, Cosworths, Judds, or anything else made to spec like they always have.

More than likely, it'd be filled with Indycars. There is still a series to try and save. Which I think also includes Indycar changing to small displacement turbo V8's.

Check the calendar, it's not 1965 anymore. The days of mom and pop teams being able to afford to build an Indy car are a thing of the past. Look I love the idea of an open series. It would be great to see a mixture of engines and chassis. But I think we are dreamin'. I still have not heard an answer from any of you calling for this on where the money is going to come from. As Starter said under this proposal you will have a small (read VERY small) field of cars starting the Indy 500. And without a series to go along with it, you will have NO cars at all. It's just too expensive now. I live in Cincinnati and the Hoffman family lives in a small town nearby, they ran a car every year at Indy from the time I was a kid till it became expensive for them to compete.

We have the reality of barely being able to field 33 cars at Indy now, and that is with a car that does not require the teams to spend massive amounts of money on engineering and testing. Under your proposal that cost will rise exponentially. How would the teams afford that?

Gary

[Rex Monaco]

I still have not heard an answer from any of you calling for this on where the money is going to come from.

The money for the 1st entries under the new rules comes from Audi as they try to be the first modern entry to use a Diesel to win the Indy 500. The following year Toyota decides to join Audi. The third year, seeing the rise in popularity of the event, GM develops an hybrid under the Volt brand. And it continues to snowball, year after year. And thus the Indy 500 begins it's slow climb back up to it's place as a preeminent motorsports event.


As Starter said under this proposal you will have a small (read VERY small) field of cars starting the Indy 500. And without a series to go along with it, you will have NO cars at all.

The Indycar series produces the rest of the 33 car field. The Indycar series is not going away. So why do you keep saying there will be no cars? Do you expect the Indycar series to die after one small rule change at Indy? As an equivalency formula, it's designed to keep the Indycar's competitive. It does not guarantee that an Audi Diesel would win. It just guarantee's that an Audi Diesel would be able to make an attempt to qualify for the race.

This proposal is about returning the halo back to the Indy 500 and using that restored halo to shine light onto the series. The halo is completely gone right now. Forget about casual fans at the moment. To most dedicated racing fans the Indy 500 is just another track for the struggling series called Indycar. The Indy 500 needs to shine again for any series racing at the Indy 500 to survive, let alone thrive. This would increase the value for their sponsors.



It's just too expensive now.

It's not that it's too expensive. It's that the investment into the series for a sponsor does not produce a good return on it's investment. Bringing international media hype back to the cornerstone event at Indy would go along way to elevating the exposure that sponsors get.



Under your proposal that cost will rise exponentially. How would the teams afford that?

Every major auto maker in the world could afford it. A few would even spend the money if they felt there was some marketing advantage to winning the Indy 500. When the Chinese automakers come to the US, don't you think they'd find value in being the first Chinese auto maker to win the Indy 500?

And how much more expensive would it be for Audi to run it's own engines at Indy verses developing an engine that has to be sold at a fixed price and serviced to X number of teams? And other than Indycar rules, who says Audi couldn't sell or lease those engines to other teams once they are developed?

The track and the series were placed into a very narrowly defined box as an experiment. By all measures, that experiment has failed. And it's failure has diminished the value of both the race and the series. It's time to go back to what built the track in the first place. Because saving the race is much more important to the success of Indycars that trying to save the series.

Indy came first. It attracted automakers for roughly 9/10ths of it's 100 year history. It's time to put Indy first again and fix the damage that's been done to the race over the last 15 years.

It's either that or in 100 years the tracks legacy race will be the Brickyard 400 with the Indy 500 remembered only as a historical footnote.

[FIAT1]

Check the calendar, it's not 1965 anymore. The days of mom and pop teams being able to afford to build an Indy car are a thing of the past. Look I love the idea of an open series. It would be great to see a mixture of engines and chassis. But I think we are dreamin'. I still have not heard an answer from any of you calling for this on where the money is going to come from.

We have the reality of barely being able to field 33 cars at Indy now, and that is with a car that does not require the teams to spend massive amounts of money on engineering and testing. Under your proposal that cost will rise exponentially. How would the teams afford that?

Gary

Ok, who will pay for it? First start with the owners of the series to make investment in to the product that people want to buy, and hire pr company to flood the media with it in every posible way. Than open competition where common industry(in this case car industry) wants to participate and use the product for promotion of their own goods and that would bring the money with them. Now that requires opening the rules and go away with spec. Why people race LeMans? To see three wide go for hrs with spec engine, or to see something spetacular laping everyone twice to change history with new inovation and at same time intrigues and invites others to compete? That's what Indy needs, understand who is their fan base and that new generation of tech aficionados and car buffs is waiting for something with wow factor.They need to come back to what they always been, track and series of inovation with in rules. Now, when you have the good product you can raise ticket price as people like me are willing to pay more for better. I can't see Indycar making it with spec series and club type a racing, as we know that market and money is gone and why bother. Cars make stars not the other way oround. I do understand that tobaco is gone therefore playground needs to change to acomodate new players ,but you have to move on from mom and pop racing club mentality also, and that one spec ugly dallara is not way to go in the future. I would say to those who say it's easy to spend others money, that I'm only loyal fan, who still spend his own money to see crap product with a hope for better, and I still support those who took this sport down, just because of that little hope it will come back by taking right direction. When it comes to spending we all know how much was wasted and spend in to nothing since 96 without our help and opinion. Where is everyone? Yes gone.Why? Cars,that's why. They want better than .2 than they need to and should spend their money to invest in to best product posible or close the shop, after all it's their product and we are consumers.

[Starter]

I appreciate your enthusiasm, but the practicality is missing:


Ok, who will pay for it? First start with the owners of the series to make investment in to the product that people want to buy, and hire pr company to flood the media with it in every posible way.
It's been pretty much proven that the owners (the family) are NOT willing to sink more millions of dollars into what they perceive as a bottomless pit.


Than open competition where common industry(in this case car industry) wants to participate and use the product for promotion of their own goods and that would bring the money with them. Now that requires opening the rules and go away with spec.
It is not true that all car companies see racing, of any type, as a desirable platform to promote their products. That narrows the field of potential participants quite a bit.


Why people race LeMans? To see three wide go for hrs with spec engine, or to see something spetacular laping everyone twice to change history with new inovation and at same time intrigues and invites others to compete? That's what Indy needs, understand who is their fan base and that new generation of tech aficionados and car buffs is waiting for something with wow factor.They need to come back to what they always been, track and series of inovation with in rules.
Couple of things here:

First, people, and therefore sponsors, go where the most people watch. LeMans, yes, it still has the worldwide attention as does F1. IndyCar lost it during the split. There is no appreciable audience for sponsors to play to. The series would need to gain a following before companies start spending major advertising dollars here. It's a chicken & egg thing.

Second, there is no "new generation of tech aficionados". The car generation is over. Younger people these days do not have the same interest in autos and speed that there was before. Two reasons for that - you essentially can't work on your own car anymore and there are many other things, mostly electronic, to get into. Are there some folks still into motorsport? Of course there are. Just not enough. Of the people who attended races, motorheads were NEVER in the majority. It was the casual fan who made up the crowds, as I stated earlier. They go to "big" events and IndyCar is not one these days.


Now, when you have the good product you can raise ticket price as people like me are willing to pay more for better.
Yeah, but there are not anywhere close to enough people like us to make a difference.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to have faster, more interesting, cars; higher output motors; the whole deal. The reality is that the economics are not there at this time. Maybe they never will be there again, I don't know. In the meantime, I'll enjoy what we have for as long as it lasts.

Oh, and don't dismiss club racing. You'll see some of the best racing anywhere at club races. You should take a few in.

[FIAT1]

First, people, and therefore sponsors, go where the most people watch. LeMans, yes, it still has the worldwide attention as does F1. IndyCar lost it during the split. There is no appreciable audience for sponsors to play to. The series would need to gain a following before companies start spending major advertising dollars here. It's a chicken & egg thing.



Agree that people and sponsor go where most people watch therefore wouldn't it be good idea to go in direction of LeMans and F1 as little as they could now with new engine and kits to get some interest. Why have a spec car and spec type of racing when sponsors and manufacturers have that in nascar. I believe you are wrong in regards to a new generation of car and speed enthusiasts . There is nothing to get their interest except boring yellows and ugly cars that sound like vacuum cleaners. I could agree with a rest of your post,but if they don't invest in new developement and no future plan then as fans we both lose and posting here is waste of time. I still like to believe they will change direction ,because they are not all blind at a main office.They have to see that formula car is special breed of a machine that matters. Hope for the best.

[Starter]

Agree that people and sponsor go where most people watch therefore wouldn't it be good idea to go in direction of LeMans and F1 as little as they could now with new engine and kits to get some interest. Why have a spec car and spec type of racing when sponsors and manufacturers have that in nascar. I believe you are wrong in regards to a new generation of car and speed enthusiasts . There is nothing to get their interest except boring yellows and ugly cars that sound like vacuum cleaners. I could agree with a rest of your post,but if they don't invest in new developement and no future plan then as fans we both lose and posting here is waste of time. I still like to believe they will change direction ,because they are not all blind at a main office.They have to see that formula car is special breed of a machine that matters. Hope for the best.
You've just gone in a circle. Where do the funds come from for that??? You also added engines to the mix. What do you think Honda and Chevy will do if you toss their motors? They are about the only two major companies supporting the series now.

[FIAT1]

You've just gone in a circle. Where do the funds come from for that??? You also added engines to the mix. What do you think Honda and Chevy will do if you toss their motors? They are about the only two major companies supporting the series now.

Honda and Chevy,aren't they competing already and would like more players.More players more money, more sponsors more fans etc. Ok national championship runoffs then.Enjoy!

[zako85]

I don't think a lot of teams will afford to be in IndyCar if cars are not spec. I personally have no issues with the current car, other that all cars look alike. A nice compromise would be to finally allow the custom aero kits. And realistically, custom aero kits is the best we can get in the near future as far as cars go. Unfortunately, teams voted against this.

[nigelred5]

The casual fan doesn't give a rats ass about the cars. They care about what's trending, shove it there face and they will watch.

Everytime I hear something is "trending" I want to vomit.

[00steven]

Interesting you said that. Roger Penske said a same thing when he switched to irl. Well ,what happened from that point on. I guess there is more casual fans than you think.
Why is NASCAR successful than?

[00steven]

Everytime I hear something is "trending" I want to vomit.
That's the thought process now days.

[nigelred5]

I totally agree. They could start with opening up the engine rules to the 500 itself. They are running what, in the neighborhood of 550 hp at Indy? You can't tell me there aren't at least a dozen engines out there in that HP range that could fit in a Dallara for the 500 if they allowed. They need to allow several alternative fuels and mild hybrids. Hybrids and electric cars aren't going away. There is still an opportunuty to prove the performance of these emerging technologies and fuels. I love that aspect of LeMans competetion. It will never happen, but is 500 miles really an endurance challenge anymore? Maybe it's time to raise the basket, move the foul line, add 200 miles... something to make it a challenge. Make it 500 LAPS instead of 500 miles.

[FIAT1]

Why is NASCAR successful than?

I don't follow nascar regularly ,but it's a "trend" for some now days I guess. I was referring to sophisticated open wheel fans that have left after their sport was destroyed as they don't like dumb down spec formula and fixed yellow shows.

[FIAT1]

I totally agree. They could start with opening up the engine rules to the 500 itself. They are running what, in the neighborhood of 550 hp at Indy? You can't tell me there aren't at least a dozen engines out there in that HP range that could fit in a Dallara for the 500 if they allowed. They need to allow several alternative fuels and mild hybrids. Hybrids and electric cars aren't going away. There is still an opportunuty to prove the performance of these emerging technologies and fuels. I love that aspect of LeMans competetion. It will never happen, but is 500 miles really an endurance challenge anymore? Maybe it's time to raise the basket, move the foul line, add 200 miles... something to make it a challenge. Make it 500 LAPS instead of 500 miles.

Not to worry ,we can always count on pace car to be fastest thing at Indy nowadays.

[Rex Monaco]

Make it 500 LAPS instead of 500 miles. Or add fuel economy to the equation. If an all electric can run 500 miles at 200mph without a battery change, then that would go along way towards convincing a skeptical public that it would be good for a 50 mile round trip commute too.

[Rex Monaco]

Why is NASCAR successful than?

Why is NASCAR changing it's template rules for 2013? They also went too far by trying to be a spec series. NASCAR fans, and more importantly the manufacturers, don't want a spec series either.

[Rex Monaco]

Second, there is no "new generation of tech aficionados". The car generation is over. Younger people these days do not have the same interest in autos and speed that there was before. Two reasons for that - you essentially can't work on your own car anymore and there are many other things, mostly electronic, to get into.

And yet these kids modify their electronic tech gadgets by jail breaking their iPhones and cracking their X-Boxes. So obviously they want innovation and openness and are opposed to closed spec environments. Add to that their focus on 'saving the planet' and going green at Indy with the latest in technology is really the only way to grab then as fans.

[Rex Monaco]

I don't think a lot of teams will afford to be in IndyCar if cars are not spec.

Indycar can remain a spec series if it chooses. But the Indy 500 should be opened to alternative technology through an equivalency formula.

[Nem14]

Indycar can remain a spec series if it chooses. But the Indy 500 should be opened to alternative technology through an equivalency formula.That would be like trying to herd cats. :biglaugh:

[Rex Monaco]

That would be like trying to herd cats. :biglaugh:

Actually it's just the opposite. It'd be like letting the herded cats go free so they could roam as nature intended.

[bricarr2]

Certainly, history shows us equivalency formulas don't work. Still, that does not mean you cannot find ways of encouraging others to participate.

I still think the route is production engines. Production engines could be encouraged to compete along side race engines. Obviously some sort of rules would have to be ironed out, but manufacturers would be encouraged by the chance to sell a car that carried the winning Indy 500 engine.

[Starter]

Certainly, history shows us equivalency formulas don't work. Still, that does not mean you cannot find ways of encouraging others to participate.

I still think the route is production engines. Production engines could be encouraged to compete along side race engines. Obviously some sort of rules would have to be ironed out, but manufacturers would be encouraged by the chance to sell a car that carried the winning Indy 500 engine.
Personally, I prefer a "run what ya brung" formula, with the only regulations being standards for safety. I believe there is more potential to bring back the casual fan or even the non fan. Production engines alone, not so much. Wasn't the original IRL essentially based on production engines? Look at how well that flew.

The kicker in that is getting there from here. Only two teams have the resources to throw away cars and spares and the two who could would definitely not look on the idea kindly. The only two engine suppliers have invested large amounts of money in the new motor. Any idea how well they will take to the idea? I'd be willing to bet that they would say "bye bye" should their investment be negated. It's always possible that one or two major companies might look at Indy only as a promotional tool. The rest of the grid (if any) would be made up of also rans and nobodys. The effect of that on the popularity of Indy, and therefor the series, would be a final death blow. Even the (potential) one or two major players would quickly lose interest as Indy fell further off the radar screen.

Solve those issues with something other than wishful thinking and we'll talk some more.

[bricarr2]

Smokey:

A few things:

1. Any change would of course, have to be done in conjunction with the two existing manufacturers.

2. While I would love a "run what you brung," formula that is simply not realistic nowadays.

3. My suggestion of production engines is in addition to what we already have, not a series of exclusively production engines. The worst thing for IndyCar right now is reinvesting in new equipment.

4. All of this presumes the HG family and IMS have any sort of clue with regard to building IndyCar. The last few decades would indicate that is not the case.

[zako85]

What IndyCar needs is nurturing a set of high caliber _EVENTS_. Many sports have such events, like the Olympic games, Superbowl, 24 hours of LeMans, Indy 500, etc. I think even Formula 1 bras understand the importance of each GP meeting the highest standards ever. You no longer see the likes the historic Dallas, Las Vegas, or Phoenix GP on F1 calendar. No amount of fancy shmancy cars and Senna vs Prost type rivalries could make such events succeed. To state this more bluntly, there is no free lunch. You can't suddenly declare a race on a run out of the mill race track, with no good layout, no good facilities, no good location, and no good history, and then expect many people to take a great interest in this.

IndyCar should identify maybe 6-7 events a year which should be held to a very high standard of organization, promotion, great spectacle on and off track, and once things get going eventually hold all events to this standard. Perhaps they could get started with Indy500, Sonoma, Monterey, Texas, Long Beach, Detroit, and may be one more. There should also be a good consistency in when and where events are held. Someone complained about the awesome Fontana race not attracting too many spectators but I think this is a good example of what I am talking about. You can't build a big fan base for an event that comes and goes year after year on an ad hoc basis. For a struggling motor sport, IndyCar is having way too many ad-hoc changes in its calendar.

[anthonyvop]

shove it there face and they will watch.

If that is true than every TV would be successful. Every Movie would bring in big Box Office and every new product would be successful as long as they market it.

And we all know that is not true.

I have said it before and I will say it again. No amount of marketing will cure IndyCar's ills. The problem is the product.

[EagleEye]

I just want to state, that we did have gorgeous cars, that set records like Gil did at Fontana...but there was no one watching on TV or the stands. So, with all due respect, that is not going to solve the problem (s). We did build it and no one came...

The racing last year was quite good, but we had good racing for years in Atlantics, and no one watched.

Watch it, and they might build it, again.

[FIAT1]

I just want to state, that we did have gorgeous cars, that set records like Gil did at Fontana...but there was no one watching on TV or the stands. So, with all due respect, that is not going to solve the problem (s). We did build it and no one came...

The racing last year was quite good, but we had good racing for years in Atlantics, and no one watched.

Watch it, and they might build it, again.

WRONG! Everyone was watching before dumb down cars and irl. Racing with slow cars is not good and numbers prove that. Glad you like that amateur spec club.

[garyshell]

WRONG! Everyone was watching before dumb down cars and irl. Racing with slow cars is not good and numbers prove that. Glad you like that amateur spec club.

Which begs the question, got numbers? I have long been in the camp of "top speed does not matter, exciting racing matters". Sure there are limits as to how slow you get before you loose the excitement. But a train of cars circling Indy at 250 MPH is not gonna get folks in the stands or at home interested.

Gary

[FIAT1]

Which begs the question, got numbers? I have long been in the camp of "top speed does not matter, exciting racing matters". Sure there are limits as to how slow you get before you loose the excitement. But a train of cars circling Indy at 250 MPH is not gonna get folks in the stands or at home interested.

Gary

I see , people like those awful looking side pods ,useless air duct , ugly bumpers and they don't care about development,and speed.
Like what you see? Enjoy it then.

[Starter]

I see , people like those awful looking side pods ,useless air duct , ugly bumpers and they don't care about development,and speed.
Like what you see? Enjoy it then.
I don't know about Gary, but I do. ;)

[EagleEye]

WRONG! Everyone was watching before dumb down cars and irl. Racing with slow cars is not good and numbers prove that. Glad you like that amateur spec club.

2000 GDF set the close course record in 2000 at Fontana, and I was there and you can see in the video, there was hardly anyone in the stands. I doubt many would argue that the cars then were gorgeous!

Quals:

2000 CART Fontana - Gil de Ferran's Closed Course Record - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DF8GTL0_rMA)

Race:

CART 2000 - Fontana Highlights - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaEKknerRaw)

The race was on ESPN, not ABC, and someone can correct me but I recall a .6 rating.

So not everyone was watching. But, there were certainly more then for the race, than we had last year......

[FIAT1]

2000 GDF set the close course record in 2000 at Fontana, and I was there and you can see in the video, there was hardly anyone in the stands. I doubt many would argue that the cars then were gorgeous!

Quals:

2000 CART Fontana - Gil de Ferran's Closed Course Record - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DF8GTL0_rMA)

Race:

CART 2000 - Fontana Highlights - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaEKknerRaw)

The race was on ESPN, not ABC, and someone can correct me but I recall a .6 rating.

So not everyone was watching. But, there were certainly more then for the race, than we had last year......

We still talk about it after all these years don't we?

[EagleEye]

We do, the few that are left.

But, we were hurting then too, so let's not kid oursleves....

Now show me some CART/Indy 500 races from 1990-1995....and it makes me want to bang my head against the wall. Huge crowds and we were like rock stars! Those, were the best of times times, no doubt.

[garyshell]

WRONG! Everyone was watching before dumb down cars and irl. Racing with slow cars is not good and numbers prove that. Glad you like that amateur spec club.


Which begs the question, got numbers? I have long been in the camp of "top speed does not matter, exciting racing matters". Sure there are limits as to how slow you get before you loose the excitement. But a train of cars circling Indy at 250 MPH is not gonna get folks in the stands or at home interested.

Gary


I see , people like those awful looking side pods ,useless air duct , ugly bumpers and they don't care about development,and speed.
Like what you see? Enjoy it then.


Where are the numbers you said prove that speed is required to get folks to watch? You now mvoing to a whole different point, but I'll address it while I wait for your numbers.

I do not necessarily like the looks of the side pods or the bumpers, but I do very much like what they did for the racing last year, namely they brought back some real passing which in my mind is MUCH more important than terminal velocity.

Gary

[garyshell]

We still talk about it after all these years don't we?


Only when someone brings up the point that speed is what is needed to get butts in seats again. When that happens, of course the conversation turns to the apogee of speed reached in the sport, and as can be seen in the video it did NOT put butts in seats. Yet there are those who claim that the numbers prove it, yes? Where are those numbers? Where is that proof?

I still think competitive racing is what draws people in. I have said for many many years, give me more horsepower and less downforce and make that LARGE doses of both. I want at least a 50% increase in one and reduction in the other. I want to see LOTS of braking into corners and lots of oversteer. THAT is what will bring back butts in seats. And no, I don't CLAIM to have any numbers to back it up. Just a gut feeling,but I am honest about it being northing analytical.

Gary

[FIAT1]

Where are the numbers you said prove that speed is required to get folks to watch? You now mvoing to a whole different point, but I'll address it while I wait for your numbers.

I do not necessarily like the looks of the side pods or the bumpers, but I do very much like what they did for the racing last year, namely they brought back some real passing which in my mind is MUCH more important than terminal velocity.

Gary

Hmm, numbers man? What numbers you looking for? 80s ,90s or after 96 when genius started all this mess, or better yet .2 current numbers. Do you want me to give you numbers of 1993 RA race or Milwaukee race in comparison to last year in speed and attendance. Numbers you want? Numbers of people in this forum who don't give a ..... anymore one way or the other? Anyway you look the numbers, they suck in comparison to past, therefore it must be the product. I know that you and dr feelgood that's lurking around here spreading the good news are trying your best to put positive spin an crap product that no one is buying. Good racing? Oh please, are the standards came to be that low? Well, like I said ,if you like it enjoy it and good luck with it! PS ,I will buy ticket and attend the race close to my city and support the series but I hate direction where this is going and despise spec racing in Indycar , and only purpose of my displeasure is for Indycar to wake up and open competition and development and come be top level formula where they belong, nothing more.

[Starter]

Hmm, numbers man? What numbers you looking for? 80s ,90s or after 96 when genius started all this mess, or better yet .2 current numbers. Do you want me to give you numbers of 1993 RA race or Milwaukee race in comparison to last year in speed and attendance. Numbers you want? Numbers of people in this forum who don't give a ..... anymore one way or the other? Anyway you look the numbers, they suck in comparison to past, therefore it must be the product.
I think he is asking for the numbers YOU refered to in your post #63 in this thread. You said numbers don't lie, yet you can't seem to produce those "truthful" numbers.


I know that you and dr feelgood that's lurking around here spreading the good news are trying your best to put positive spin an crap product that no one is buying. Good racing? Oh please, are the standards came to be that low?
If you don't think that the actual on track racing this past season was pretty good, perhaps the best in a long time, that I suggest that you don't have a clue what real racing is.


Well, like I said ,if you like it enjoy it and good luck with it! PS ,I will buy ticket and attend the race close to my city and support the series but I hate direction where this is going and despise spec racing in Indycar , and only purpose of my displeasure is for Indycar to wake up and open competition and development and come be top level formula where they belong, nothing more.
Still waiting for those who, like you, are calling for new faster cars and motors are going to also tell us how the teams are going to pay for them. Talk is cheap among those who don't have to actually write checks that won't bounce. A lot of verbiage here, but no actual ideas on how to pay for all these new and fast cars. Reminds me a lot of small kids in the toy store crying "I want, I want". Somebody needs to come up with a financial plan before that's gonna happen.

[FIAT1]

I think he is asking for the numbers YOU refered to in your post #63 in this thread. You said numbers don't lie, yet you can't seem to produce those "truthful" numbers.


If you don't think that the actual on track racing this past season was pretty good, perhaps the best in a long time, that I suggest that you don't have a clue what real racing is.


Still waiting for those who, like you, are calling for new faster cars and motors are going to also tell us how the teams are going to pay for them. Talk is cheap among those who don't have to actually write checks that won't bounce. A lot of verbiage here, but no actual ideas on how to pay for all these new and fast cars. Reminds me a lot of small kids in the toy store crying "I want, I want". Somebody needs to come up with a financial plan before that's gonna happen.

Some of us are content with spec racing and .2 and some of us are not. Enjoy!!!

[Nem14]

If Brian Barnhart becomes CEO as rumored, all the above arguments will become moot.

[Starter]

If Brian Barnhart becomes CEO as rumored, all the above arguments will become moot.
Too true.

[NY2IA]

Nem14 or Starter, could you elaborate about Brian Barnhart? Thanks.

[Loneranger]

2000 GDF set the close course record in 2000 at Fontana, and I was there and you can see in the video, there was hardly anyone in the stands. I doubt many would argue that the cars then were gorgeous!

Quals:

2000 CART Fontana - Gil de Ferran's Closed Course Record - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DF8GTL0_rMA)

Race:

CART 2000 - Fontana Highlights - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaEKknerRaw)

The race was on ESPN, not ABC, and someone can correct me but I recall a .6 rating.

So not everyone was watching. But, there were certainly more then for the race, than we had last year......

That's because by the time 2000 came around the split had damaged the sport and teams, drivers, sponsors and fans were divided between two series which dilute everything.

Had the split not occurred, the path that was charted through 1994 was proving very successful. The slowly fell apart as time went on for a number of different reasons.

For 76 years at the Speedway cars went ever and ever faster. The evolution of speed has sat dormant now for practically 20 years.

[EagleEye]

That's because by the time 2000 came around the split had damaged the sport and teams, drivers, sponsors and fans were divided between two series which dilute everything.

Had the split not occurred, the path that was charted through 1994 was proving very successful. The slowly fell apart as time went on for a number of different reasons.

For 76 years at the Speedway cars went ever and ever faster. The evolution of speed has sat dormant now for practically 20 years.


I have said many times, it would have been great to see how the cars would have evolved if there were no split.

Thesplit never should have happened. It wasa disgrace….

[garyshell]

Hmm, numbers man? What numbers you looking for? 80s ,90s or after 96 when genius started all this mess, or better yet .2 current numbers. Do you want me to give you numbers of 1993 RA race or Milwaukee race in comparison to last year in speed and attendance. Numbers you want? Numbers of people in this forum who don't give a ..... anymore one way or the other? Anyway you look the numbers, they suck in comparison to past, therefore it must be the product. I know that you and dr feelgood that's lurking around here spreading the good news are trying your best to put positive spin an crap product that no one is buying. Good racing? Oh please, are the standards came to be that low? Well, like I said ,if you like it enjoy it and good luck with it! PS ,I will buy ticket and attend the race close to my city and support the series but I hate direction where this is going and despise spec racing in Indycar , and only purpose of my displeasure is for Indycar to wake up and open competition and development and come be top level formula where they belong, nothing more.

I want the numbers YOU said prove that faster cars are what is needed to bring back the fans. I am still waiting for them. I don't like the fact that the cars are 100% spec any more than you do. But I don't see any proof that faster cars will help.

And yes the racing was better this year than we've had in a long time. Can you honestly say it was not better than what we have seen in at least the past five years? Can you say there was no improvement at all?

Where do you see the money coming from to open up development? Because we all know development equal dollars and we're talking dollars in very large boatloads. We no longer have tobacco money or beer money to count on and we've watched budgets decline ever since their loss. Its very easy to say we need mutiuple chassis and open development, but its just empty talk if you offer no method for getting us there. Hell, I'd love to have what you are calling for. I am realistic enough to know its a pipe dream.

Gary

[garyshell]

For 76 years at the Speedway cars went ever and ever faster. The evolution of speed has sat dormant now for practically 20 years.

There is a limit to that evolution, a business model requiring faster and faster cars year after year after year is not sustainable, both from a cost and safety aspect. And before you (or anyone else) starts, spare me the "racing is supposed to be dangerous" nonsense.

Gary

[EagleEye]

Spot on Gary!

Some seem to have forgot Vegas....

The nice thing with Turbos is we should seee them dial up HP, now that they have gone with the lower downforce package on ovals.

[FIAT1]

I want the numbers YOU said prove that faster cars are what is needed to bring back the fans. I am still waiting for them. I don't like the fact that the cars are 100% spec any more than you do. But I don't see any proof that faster cars will help.

And yes the racing was better this year than we've had in a long time. Can you honestly say it was not better than what we have seen in at least the past five years? Can you say there was no improvement at all?

Where do you see the money coming from to open up development? Because we all know development equal dollars and we're talking dollars in very large boatloads. We no longer have tobacco money or beer money to count on and we've watched budgets decline ever since their loss. Its very easy to say we need mutiuple chassis and open development, but its just empty talk if you offer no method for getting us there. Hell, I'd love to have what you are calling for. I am realistic enough to know its a pipe dream.

Gary

Some of us are content with spec racing and .2 and some of us are not. Enjoy!!!

[EagleEye]

Some of us are content with spec racing and .2 and some of us are not. Enjoy!!!



But we can't, not right now. You failed to answer Gary's question: Where are you going to come up with the money??? Remember, the owners just fought tooth and nail to save $50K/entry. The Series has had layoffs….

I hate to repeat myself, but you keep referring to a time when we had multiple major sponsorships, four engine manufactures pumping technology and money in, multiple chassis manufacturers, and healthy TV ratings! New chassis/electronics/etcevery year! We had a lot of money to spend ($10-20 Million coming in for each entry).

You have said that faster/non-spec cars would bring fans back, and I showed you it didn't. You say the spec cars drove fans away, and I say the Split drove fans away. CART still had great looking fast cars…but it could not survive on looks and speed alone.

Because ofthe split;

We now we have a few major sponsors, two engines, one chassis and no TV ratings (save for Indy). We now take in about $3-5million/entry. It would take up too much space to list all the sponsors that are gone.

What we have now is a huge compromise, as a result of the Split. And when you have such a compromise, you can’tkeep everyone happy.

I think we need to work on thinking about how WE can help the TV ratings, because if we can help move this up, we’ll get a lot of the things back that we all miss and want!!!

The good news: We have a TV contract for all races through 2018 (ish). We have 25 entries heading into 2013 as of today. We do have turbo engines (which does allow for us to increase HP). We had eight different winners last year. We had an American win the championship. There were several others who could have won last year.

This is all a bit like poker. We’d all like to have a Royal Flush, but for now we have to play with the cards that we’ve been dealt.

[FIAT1]

You failed to answer Gary's question:

Oh yeah, the numbers. Sure ,1994 RA race 70.000 people came to see Indycar race. 2013 and 79.000 twitter followers. I don't know was it bratwurst or the cars they came to see. Oh please, stop this bs, we all know what Indycar fans want and would pay double to see it again. Spec racing? Thanks, I can watch that on local freeway for free all day long.Three wide, yippee!

[EagleEye]

Oh yeah, the numbers. Sure ,1994 RA race 70.000 people came to see Indycar race. 2013 and 79.000 twitter followers. I don't know was it bratwurst or the cars they came to see. Oh please, stop this bs, we all know what Indycar fans want and would pay double to see it again. Spec racing? Thanks, I can watch that on local freeway for free all day long.Three wide, yippee!

I think we were looking for the numbers for the 2000 Fontana race...you know, when the non-spec cars were there setting a closed course record?

And the fans certainly were not paying double to be at the race, or even watching ESPN for free..........

You also continue to fail and recognize the current economics.

I agree with you 100% that it would have been great to not have a Split and we could have carried on from 1994/1995. Review my posts from early 2000, and you might see I was banging the same drumb you are now.

[FIAT1]

I think we were looking for the numbers for the 2000 Fontana race...you know, when the non-spec cars were there setting a closed course record?


.

It is sad, that comparison needs to be made from qualifying day in 2000 to same number of people on the race day now days isn't it? Product is not selling and it's not me as I already have tickets to see another sad Milwaukee Indy lights race with other few that are left. Instead you should remind you friends in the pits why things suck. Good day!

[EagleEye]

Instead you should remind you friends in the pits why things suck. Good day!

I think everyone agrees with you....but no one has the money to change where we are at now. I'm glad you are going to Milwaukee....

[garyshell]

I want the numbers YOU said prove that faster cars are what is needed to bring back the fans. I am still waiting for them. I don't like the fact that the cars are 100% spec any more than you do. But I don't see any proof that faster cars will help.

And yes the racing was better this year than we've had in a long time. Can you honestly say it was not better than what we have seen in at least the past five years? Can you say there was no improvement at all?

Where do you see the money coming from to open up development? Because we all know development equal dollars and we're talking dollars in very large boatloads. We no longer have tobacco money or beer money to count on and we've watched budgets decline ever since their loss. Its very easy to say we need mutiuple chassis and open development, but its just empty talk if you offer no method for getting us there. Hell, I'd love to have what you are calling for. I am realistic enough to know its a pipe dream.

Gary


Some of us are content with spec racing and .2 and some of us are not. Enjoy!!!

That's it? That's your answer? In other words you have no numbers, you have no idea how to accomplish this pipe dream of expanded development and you don't think the racing was better last year than the previous five, right?

Gary

[garyshell]

WRONG! Everyone was watching before dumb down cars and irl. Racing with slow cars is not good and numbers prove that. Glad you like that amateur spec club.


Oh yeah, the numbers. Sure ,1994 RA race 70.000 people came to see Indycar race. 2013 and 79.000 twitter followers. I don't know was it bratwurst or the cars they came to see. Oh please, stop this bs, we all know what Indycar fans want and would pay double to see it again. Spec racing? Thanks, I can watch that on local freeway for free all day long.Three wide, yippee!

I am still waiting for the numbers you talked about in the first post quoted above. Where are the numbers that show SPEED is the missing ingredient. Because that is what you said and the numbers shown re: RA don't prove that assertion at all. When you say "we all know what Indycar fans want and would pay double to see it again", what exactly is the "it" you are referring to?

Gary

[FIAT1]

I am still waiting for the numbers you talked about in the first post quoted above. Where are the numbers that show SPEED is the missing ingredient. Because that is what you said and the numbers shown re: RA don't prove that assertion at all. When you say "we all know what Indycar fans want and would pay double to see it again", what exactly is the "it" you are referring to?

Gary

Sorry you right, must of been bratwurst then.

[garyshell]

I am still waiting for the numbers you talked about in the first post quoted above. Where are the numbers that show SPEED is the missing ingredient. Because that is what you said and the numbers shown re: RA don't prove that assertion at all. When you say "we all know what Indycar fans want and would pay double to see it again", what exactly is the "it" you are referring to?

Gary


Sorry you right, must of been bratwurst then.

So you are just going to continue to ignore questions to points you raise, and instead post silly answers? I still have no idea what the pronoun "it" referred to in the sentence quote above. And I still have no idea why you think SPEED was the reason there were 70,000 people at RA. I think it had a LOT more to do with competitive racing than just pure speed. I have suggested for years that no fan can tell a difference of 5 MPH from one year to the next at the same venue, without the use of a stop watch. I do think that they can easily tell the difference in a 50% increase in HP and 50% reduction in total downforce. Those two things combined would likely result in a reduction in lap speed, but an marked increase in racing excitement. And to me THAT is the missing piece.

Gary