New car news!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SarahFan

The series has had the same car for a decade and the roll out a slower one

---

It baffles me how anybody in their right mind thinks that is a good strategy. From the top, right on down to Garyshell, how the hell anybody thinks replacing a dog of a car with an even slower one is somehow going to fix things is just beyond comprehension. It's simply moronic! I don't care if it looks cooler, if its less expensive, if its racier, if it shoots fireworks out the tail pipes, how on earth can anybody think that a car that's known as and legacy will be that of a CRAPWAGON, thinks that a car that is slower is going to be miraculously better for everybody.........................here's your sign!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

If it's the latter, honestly I don't have any real issue. If it's the former, in my mind it's a fool's errand.

Gary

---

What was it you said.....oh ya......according to YOU!

What shallow fans US open-wheel racing seems to have attracted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

So what is the end game in this eternal quest for speed, an ever escalating "neeeeeeew traaaaaaack record" every year? Or is this a one time "we need it in the first year" sort of thing? If it's the latter, honestly I don't have any real issue. If it's the former, in my mind it's a fool's errand. YMMV.

Gary

---

It was you that said this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

Oh man this is just too easy. They all did it for one reason, to beat the competition and win a championship. It sure as hell wasn't to set a "neeeeeeeeew laaaaaaap record". In case you hadn't noticed there is no racing series that awards a championship to the car with the fastest speed, not even the NHRA. Oh wait, I'm sorry there are two, both run at Bonneville. Those are the SCTA and USFRA.

Gary

---

In an attempt to beat the competition, year after year they were required to GO FASTER!!! So yes, in the eternal quest for speed, you should see cars continuously breaking records, maybe not year after year, but much more frequently than what we now see.

You are simply hung up on the thought that we want to hear a bloody track announcer on a speaker announcing a new record.

I could give a rats arse about "hearing" of any new track record. I care about what a track record represents, which is as you put it the eternal quest for speed, in an effort to try and WIN! That concept seems entirely lost on you though.

Is it lost on you Gary? Do you not get that? Do you not understand? Has the point not been put across well enough or are you purposefully avoiding the point of the argument.

Otherwise, like Ken said, why not just race Indy Lights and kill off Indy Car? Can you answer that? No, I don't think you can....I don't think you will, and I don't think you have the nads to address that point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

No it isn't. Doing something just to get into the headlines is an example of 'dumbing down'. What you describe isn't. I suggest you go and watch drag racing if literally all that matters to you is outright speed.

---

I haven't even remotely suggested that.... Please pay attention

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I suggest you go and watch drag racing if literally all that matters to you is outright speed.

---

Why do you think all that Sarahfan is concerned with is outright speed? You don't understand the point of view.

I think in the name of safety we should slow down the Touring cars. That oughtta make for more interesting racing don't you think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

In an attempt to beat the competition, year after year they were required to GO FASTER!!! So yes, in the eternal quest for speed, you should see cars continuously breaking records, maybe not year after year, but much more frequently than what we now see.

---

I find this obsession with speed and records baffling. Why does it matter? The racing is what counts, surely? I was listening to Allan McNish talking about Le Mans recently, and he made the point that while it was disappointing as a driver when speeds were reduced, he recognised that they simply could not go on rising exponentially for the simple reason that there is a point beyond which those speeds become unsafe. If only all held such enlightened attitudes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SarahFan

I haven't even remotely suggested that.... Please pay attention

---

'This series desperatly needs the headlines right now'. What other interpretation is there to those words?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

Why do you think all that Sarahfan is concerned with is outright speed? You don't understand the point of view.

---

Perhaps not, because I enjoy motor racing for the racing, not, in themselves, the speeds. Increasing speed is not, I have to tell you, the only measure of progress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I was listening to Allan McNish talking about Le Mans recently, and he made the point that while it was disappointing as a driver when speeds were reduced, he recognised that they simply could not go on rising exponentially for the simple reason that there is a point beyond which those speeds become unsafe. If only all held such enlightened attitudes.

---

Bingo. What seems to be mostly forgotten, or completely ignored, in this discussion is that even with advances in safety equipment (SAFER and HANS for example), the human body can not be re-designed to survive more and more severe impacts caused by increasing speed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

In an attempt to beat the competition, year after year they were required to GO FASTER!!! So yes, in the eternal quest for speed, you should see cars continuously breaking records, maybe not year after year, but much more frequently than what we now see.

---

And where does that end? Does it end when we reach a specific speed, does it end when the cars are unsafe? Does it end when the cars are too fast for particular tracks? What is the end game? (Note I am avoiding the hyperbole of asking if we have to wait till someone is killed. But in reality THAT is the REAL elephant in the room.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

You are simply hung up on the thought that we want to hear a bloody track announcer on a speaker announcing a new record.

I could give a rats arse about "hearing" of any new track record. I care about what a track record represents, which is as you put it the eternal quest for speed, in an effort to try and WIN! That concept seems entirely lost on you though.

Is it lost on you Gary? Do you not get that? Do you not understand? Has the point not been put across well enough or are you purposefully avoiding the point of the argument.

---

No it is not lost on me at all. I just think it's a ridiculous notion, plain and simple as that. I've never avoided the argument at all. I have said I think its STUPID. I think chasing track records or what they represent is STUPID. Is that lost on you? Track records (or what they represent, are not required to win Championships. I take note of the fact that you and Ken offered no further explanation when I said a few days ago that the reason "why did Penske waste all his time and resources year after year developing new chassis'? Why did Lola? Why did March? Why did Swift? Why did Reynard?" was to win championships and not to set track records or to even go faster than they did the year before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

Otherwise, like Ken said, why not just race Indy Lights and kill off Indy Car? Can you answer that? No, I don't think you can....I don't think you will, and I don't think you have the nads to address that point.

---

What a specious argument. It doesn't take "nads" to dismiss it as a silly attempt to divert the conversation, but I'll indulge your little game. There is a very valid reason for Indy Lights to be separate and distinct from the main series, namely to provide a training and proving ground for up and coming racers. But you already knew that.

Gary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

If it's the latter, honestly I don't have any real issue. If it's the former, in my mind it's a fool's errand. YMMV.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

What was it you said.....oh ya......according to YOU!

---

Which part of "in my mind" didn't you understand? I never said it was anything other than my opinion, unlike some other folks here who seem to think THEY are the only ones who might be correct.

Gary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I was listening to Allan McNish talking about Le Mans recently, and he made the point that while it was disappointing as a driver when speeds were reduced,

---

That addresses everything right there!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

That addresses everything right there!!!

---

What says rather more is your utterly, blatantly, selective quoting.

And for whose benefit is a racing series staged?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

'This series desperatly needs the headlines right now'. What other interpretation is there to those words?

---

That it needs some positive free press!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

What says rather more is your utterly, blatantly, selective quoting.

And for whose benefit is a racing series staged?

---

Don't blame me if you can't argue.

Alan McNish, a world class championship driver, he himself is disappointed when cars are slowed.

Imagine how the fans must feel.

But nah, you are right, slowing them down is an exciting, awe inspiring, imagination catcher.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

That it needs some positive free press!!!

---

In my book, quick attempts at headline-grabbing generally equate to 'dumbing-down'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I find this obsession with speed and records baffling. Why does it matter? The racing is what counts, surely? I was listening to Allan McNish talking about Le Mans recently, and he made the point that while it was disappointing as a driver when speeds were reduced

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

That addresses everything right there!!!

---

Now isn't that just special, terminating the quote to make it appear as if the statement supported your view, when in reality if the entire quote (provided below) is read, it does no such thing. Priceless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I find this obsession with speed and records baffling. Why does it matter? The racing is what counts, surely? I was listening to Allan McNish talking about Le Mans recently, and he made the point that while it was disappointing as a driver when speeds were reduced, he recognised that they simply could not go on rising exponentially for the simple reason that there is a point beyond which those speeds become unsafe. If only all held such enlightened attitudes.

---

Gary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

Don't blame me if you can't argue.

Alan McNish, a world class championship driver, he himself is disappointed when cars are slowed.

Imagine how the fans must feel.

But nah, you are right, slowing them down is an exciting, awe inspiring, imagination catcher.

---

'The fans'? You speak of them as though they are all united in one point of view. Quite arrogant.

Like I said, there is a certain shallowness coming through here in the view that outright speed is everything. Yes, it is impressive, but, as Allan McNish went on to say if you can bring yourself to read the rest of what I posted, continued increases are also unsustainable in safety terms. This is the more important point, one that you and others seem desperate to ignore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Perhaps not, because I enjoy motor racing for the racing, not, in themselves, the speeds. Increasing speed is not, I have to tell you, the only measure of progress.

---

If the drivers have gotten all so good driving at the current speeds, then you would have to agree the racing sucks! Qualifying times for arguments sake are identical. IDENTICAL. The racers are so freaking identical that Indy Car needed to mandate a new rule FORCING drivers to leave the inside lane wide open because the drivers are driving all so identically that it is impossible to pass conventionally.

So if you love the "racing" so much, the only way to get back to that is increasing the speeds and pushing the boundaries. The only way to know if those boundaries are being pushed is to measure those times against previous ones and if you aren't going faster then obviously you aren't pushing those boundaries!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee Roy

Bingo. What seems to be mostly forgotten, or completely ignored, in this discussion is that even with advances in safety equipment (SAFER and HANS for example), the human body can not be re-designed to survive more and more severe impacts caused by increasing speed.

---

Then guess what......more and more drivers will die.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

Then guess what......more and more drivers will die.

---

And this doesn't trouble you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

And where does that end? Does it end when we reach a specific speed, does it end when the cars are unsafe? Does it end when the cars are too fast for particular tracks? What is the end game? (Note I am avoiding the hyperbole of asking if we have to wait till someone is killed. But in reality THAT is the REAL elephant in the room.)

---

What you fail to comprehend is we are NOW AT THE END GAME!!! And millions of fans have walked away from the sport.

There is no elephant in the room.

Ironically safety has killed this sport!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

What a specious argument. It doesn't take "nads" to dismiss it as a silly attempt to divert the conversation, but I'll indulge your little game. There is a very valid reason for Indy Lights to be separate and distinct from the main series, namely to provide a training and proving ground for up and coming racers. But you already knew that.

Gary

---

Holy !@#$%, that was a nice dodge if I ever saw it. I didn't ask why it should be a seperate and distinct series, I asked why not just eliminate Indy Car and focus entirely on Indy Lights. I guess you don't have the nads. It's a simple question. If speed isn't everything, there should be a very simple case to be made for eliminating the big cars, you know.....THE FASTER ONES, and simply racing the slower ones or the ones known as Indy Lights.

Come on Gary address it instead of avoiding and dancing around it. Mt freaking grandmother has better moves then your tiny two step.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

'The fans'? You speak of them as though they are all united in one point of view. Quite arrogant.

---

Ya, they are all united in one point of view, millions of them have walked away from the sport because they no longer have an interest in it! So yes, fans, by the millions are very united. They have unequivocally made a statement that they aren't buying.

Is that arrogant? Is .1 ratings arrogance? I hardly think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Like I said, there is a certain shallowness coming through here in the view that outright speed is everything. Yes, it is impressive, but, as Allan McNish went on to say if you can bring yourself to read the rest of what I posted, continued increases are also unsustainable in safety terms. This is the more important point, one that you and others seem desperate to ignore.

---

You seem desperate to ignore that nobody is watching Indy Car any longer!!! You also ignored the notion of slowing down the touring cars. You also are changing the conversation now into a safety issue. You are diverting the conversation from this being about fans wanting to see fast speeds or good racing to it being about safety controlling the speeds.

Which is it so I can keep on track? Have you given up on the one angle? Maybe you don't want to have to answer the Indy Lights question either. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

What you fail to comprehend is we are NOW AT THE END GAME!!! And millions of fans have walked away from the sport.

There is no elephant in the room.

Ironically safety has killed this sport!!!



Holy !@#$%, that was a nice dodge if I ever saw it. I didn't ask why it should be a seperate and distinct series, I asked why not just eliminate Indy Car and focus entirely on Indy Lights. I guess you don't have the nads. It's a simple question. If speed isn't everything, there should be a very simple case to be made for eliminating the big cars, you know.....THE FASTER ONES, and simply racing the slower ones or the ones known as Indy Lights.

Come on Gary address it instead of avoiding and dancing around it. Mt freaking grandmother has better moves then your tiny two step.

---

Your arguments lack any sense of depth. No-one is arguing in favour of the replacement of IndyCars as we know them with Indy Lights. That would be too drastic a step. But what is wrong with a small speed reduction? This would in no way eliminate a sense of competition, or efforts at technical advance. Formula One didn't die when the 1.5-litre formula was adopted in 1961.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

And this doesn't trouble you?

---

Should it?

Should I be concerned that a boxer might get knocked out in a fight?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

You also are changing the conversation now into a safety issue.

---

Is this not quite central to the whole thing, though? You seem entirely unconcerned about more drivers dying, so long as the speeds go on increasing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

Should it?

Should I be concerned that a boxer might get knocked out in a fight?

---

No true enthusiast of any sport should ever want to see any of the protagonists being injured or killed.

I am beginning to think that my earlier comment about American open-wheel racing attracting a shallow brand of fan was too mild.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Your arguments lack any sense of depth. No-one is arguing in favour of the replacement of IndyCars as we know them with Indy Lights. That would be too drastic a step. But what is wrong with a small speed reduction? This would in no way eliminate a sense of competition, or efforts at technical advance. Formula One didn't die when the 1.5-litre formula was adopted in 1961.

---

.1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

No true enthusiast of any sport should ever want to see any of the protagonists being injured or killed.

I am beginning to think that my earlier comment about American open-wheel racing attracting a shallow brand of fan was too mild.

---

Why do you guys always make this leap. Show me where I said I want to see people injured or killed. I said I am okay with it. BIG difference.

I didn't want to see Dan killed. I'm perfectly okay with it though.

Let me guess, your only real next response is......go tell that to his wife. Thought so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Is this not quite central to the whole thing, though? You seem entirely unconcerned about more drivers dying, so long as the speeds go on increasing.

---

If you want good racing, you need to push the limits of what is achievable, otherwise everybody can do it. If you want to push those limits inevitably, you are going to dance with the devil pushing those boundaries.

I'm okay with that. Apparently you are not.

Right now, safety is driving this sport, when at one time it was innovation that drove it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

Why do you guys always make this leap. Show me where I said I want to see people injured or killed. I said I am okay with it. BIG difference.

I didn't want to see Dan killed. I'm perfectly okay with it though.

Let me guess, your only real next response is......go tell that to his wife. Thought so.

---

I believe that it is inevitable in motorsport that, very unfortunately, some drivers will be injured or worse. I do not believe that every potential measure should be taken to increase safety to the detriment of spectacle, because risk can never be eliminated completely. But I would never advocate actively wanting to bring about situations, such as continuous speed increases, that render such situations definitively more likely. And I simply do not understand the mentality whereby speed is everything. The Italian Grand Prix in 1971 was the fastest F1 race in terms of average speed for some 30 years. The fact that average speeds thereafter were not as high did not kill the sport stone dead. Maybe the F1 enthusiast of that period was rather more discerning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I believe that it is inevitable in motorsport that, very unfortunately, some drivers will be injured or worse. I do not believe that every potential measure should be taken to increase safety to the detriment of spectacle, because risk can never be eliminated completely. But I would never advocate actively wanting to bring about situations, such as continuous speed increases, that render such situations definitively more likely. And I simply do not understand the mentality whereby speed is everything. The Italian Grand Prix in 1971 was the fastest F1 race in terms of average speed for some 30 years. The fact that average speeds thereafter were not as high did not kill the sport stone dead. Maybe the F1 enthusiast of that period was rather more discerning.

---

.1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

If you want good racing, you need to push the limits of what is achievable, otherwise everybody can do it.

---

Utter nonsense. I have watched much good — some great — racing in all sorts of formulae, from one-make hatchback series upwards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

But I would never advocate actively wanting to bring about situations, such as continuous speed increases, that render such situations definitively more likely.

---

And neither would I.

Please show me where I suggested that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Utter nonsense. I have watched much good — some great — racing in all sorts of formulae, from one-make hatchback series upwards.

---

So I will ask for the third time, why not slow down the touring cars?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

And neither would I.

Please show me where I suggested that.

---

It is inherent in what you wish for, namely ever-increasing speeds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

So I will ask for the third time, why not slow down the touring cars?

---

What do you mean by 'the touring cars'? There is more than one sort of touring car formula, I have to tell you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

What do you mean by 'the touring cars'? There is more than one sort of touring car formula, I have to tell you.

---

Come on, seriously, you are going to be that obtuse........how about any of them, or more specifically the British Touring Car Championship. You should be okay with slowing them down right, provided the racing is still "good".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

It is inherent in what you wish for, namely ever-increasing speeds.

---

No, you are inferring one thing to assume what it is you think I would like.

I don't want to see speeds increased in order to put more lives in danger and that is what you are inferring.