Indycar failure to return to top form

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rex Monaco

Personally, I'm not married to the open wheel aspect of Indycar racing. I could make the argument that there is a niche for streamlined closed wheeled cars on ovals. The streamlined pre-war Audis and Mercedes were some of the most beautiful car's of the era as were the post-war close fendered Mercedes Grand Prix cars. And the pre-war speed runs (at 249mph, faster than any record at Indy) were done on ovals.

There is no way anyone would ever propose such a thing now though. And if they did, it'd be better done with a 10 year gradual move instead of an overnight rule change.

What Indy needs now, in one rule change, is to open the engine rules to allow any auto manufacture to take a stab at winning the Indy 500 without having to commit to running the entire series. At first it would just be the engines, but they need to open chassis rules too. This would go along way towards bringing money and excitement back to the Indy 500.

Akio Toyoda is on record recently acknowledging the lack of pedigree in the Lexus brand. He wants to build excitement into the brand. The Indy 500 of old would have been one of the places for them to establish pedigree. And company such as Hyundai, who might not be willing to commit to the whole series, could do the Indy 500 to be the first Korean company to win Indy (which means less now that they own KIA too).

---

Agree, but to me open wheel formula car is just that. I love seeing the tires and skill of precision of racing that type a car. Regardless, we all know that slow spec car is the problem and needs fixing .

I honestly don't understand what you guys are complaining about. Cars not fast enough? Does anyone really think that 30mph faster speeds would make IndyCar racing a lot more exciting or more popular than it already is? I think faster speeds can only bring more trouble. The human body can cope with Gs only up to some point, and faster speeds will also mean cars smash faster against the wall. Increasing speeds and hp is for the most part worthless. They won't make up for good racing. Cars are already fast enough that there are concerns about slowing them down on some ovals.

Also there is always some whining going on about looks of cars. If you don't like the way car looks then don't watch the series. The looks are entirely subjective. Personally, last year I went to Firestone 500 and it was truly a blast. The cars looked great, were fast enough, and roared so loud that I thought air was shaking. All this fun and excitement for under $100? Awesome.

Let me remind you that 2012 and 2013 IndyCar seasons were a blast to watch, and that without resorting to comedy Pirelli tires or such that are used in F1. The series is already pretty good, and I personally don't care for the fact that I may be alone watching it. IndyCar is making the right moves but at a snail pace. Since 2012 we got much better looking and safer car, Chevrolet engines, and a possibility of using aero kits in future. This new car has delivered a good show already, and there will be more to come. However, for the last 16 moths, I keep only hearing more whining on this board. Some people will never be happy no matter what.

I am also personally strongly against the proposals to open up the IndyCar reglament format to allow teams and manufacturers do crazy stuff but ONLY for Indy 500. Indy 500 is nice, but you know what, I kind of want to watch a good series, not a one off race. Besides, the last three Indy 500 races were already fine as is. What made them great was the tough competition. I really didn't care how many engines and chassis were involved, and most people watching it didn't care either. If you open up the chasis and engine rules for Indy 500, what this will do is reduce the competition to just two teams that will lap the rest of field, who can barely afford even the "cheap" spec Dallara chasis, several times. Oh dear. This sounds really exciting. Sort of what 24 Hours of LeMans is now (LMP1 of course).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zako85

I honestly don't understand what you guys are complaining about. Cars not fast enough? Does anyone really think that 30mph faster speeds would make IndyCar racing a lot more exciting or more popular than it already is? I think faster speeds can only bring more trouble. The human body can cope with Gs only up to some point, and faster speeds will also mean cars smash faster against the wall. Increasing speeds and hp is for the most part worthless. They won't make up for good racing. Cars are already fast enough that there are concerns about slowing them down on some ovals.

Also there is always some whining going on about looks of cars. If you don't like the way car looks then don't watch the series. The looks are entirely subjective. Personally, last year I went to Firestone 500 and it was truly a blast. The cars looked great, were fast enough, and roared so loud that I thought air was shaking. All this fun and excitement for under $100? Awesome.

Let me remind you that 2012 and 2013 IndyCar seasons were a blast to watch, and that without resorting to comedy Pirelli tires or such that are used in F1. The series is already pretty good, and I personally don't care for the fact that I may be alone watching it. IndyCar is making the right moves but at a snail pace. Since 2012 we got much better looking and safer car, Chevrolet engines, and a possibility of using aero kits in future. This new car has delivered a good show already, and there will be more to come. However, for the last 16 moths, I keep only hearing more whining on this board. Some people will never be happy no matter what.

I am also personally strongly against the proposals to open up the IndyCar reglament format to allow teams and manufacturers do crazy stuff but ONLY for Indy 500. Indy 500 is nice, but you know what, I kind of want to watch a good series, not a one off race. Besides, the last three Indy 500 races were already fine as is. What made them great was the tough competition. I really didn't care how many engines and chassis were involved, and most people watching it didn't care either. If you open up the chasis and engine rules for Indy 500, what this will do is reduce the competition to just two teams that will lap the rest of field, who can barely afford even the "cheap" spec Dallara chasis, several times. Oh dear. This sounds really exciting. Sort of what 24 Hours of LeMans is now (LMP1 of course).

---

People are not watching, they don't show up and racing related industry don't care for it. What is the problem then, with this perfection that you have described?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FIAT1

People are not watching, they don't show up and racing related industry don't care for it. What is the problem then, with this perfection that you have described?

---

They're not watching, but neither higher speeds or open formula format will cure this. People aren't watching Grand Am racing either, even though Rolex series teams several chassis and engines. The problem is NOT TECHNICAL. Point. Think about marketing issues. Cultural issues, etc. Ponder this, why can't the National Guard car have one decent North American driver? This has nothing to do with all the issues discussed here.

Exhibit 2: NASCAR cars are FUGLY, use antiquated tech, and go slower than IndyCars. People are still watching this. Like I said. If there is a solution to IndyCar's popularity/ratings problems, it's NOT technical.

Technical built Indy. Spec killed it. End of discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zako85

They're not watching, but neither higher speeds or open formula format will cure this. People aren't watching Grand Am racing either, even though Rolex series teams several chassis and engines.

---

Sportscar racing in American has never had wide support from fans, it has always peaked when tech was front and center. That was true for the Can-Am era and for the IMSA era. And the manufacturers have always flocked to it when the rules allowed them to innovate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zako85

The problem is NOT TECHNICAL. Point. Think about marketing issues. Cultural issues, etc. Ponder this, why can't the National Guard car have one decent North American driver? This has nothing to do with all the issues discussed here.

---

The most famous, and still one of the most widely loved drivers in Indycar history, spoke with an Italian accent and was named Mario. Indycar fans never needed to hear 'Junior' speak with southern accent to make them feel good about themselves and/or their sport. We embraced Graham Hll in the '60's, Emo in the '80's and Jacques in the '90's. You can go all the way back to the 3rd race and find a Frenchman who won. Ironically, during the jingoistic IRL era, we had LESS Americans winning the Indy 500.

But if you truly want American drivers to aspire to compete in Indycar, then you have to position Indycar as F1 lite and not NASCAR lite. Otherwise NASCAR will continue to poach the good Indycar drivers as they have been doing since the failed experiment began.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zako85

Exhibit 2: NASCAR cars are FUGLY, use antiquated tech, and go slower than IndyCars. People are still watching this. Like I said. If there is a solution to IndyCar's popularity/ratings problems, it's NOT technical.

---

When did NASCAR become the model for Indycar? Well we know when that happened. It happened when the megalomaniac wanted to be like Bill France instead of Eddie Rickenbacker. I guess the real question is, when did Indycar fans settle for being the open wheeled version of NASCAR?

If I want to see ugly cars racing on ovals putting on a good show then NASCAR puts on a much better show. What I want to see is diverse manufacturers and diverse drivers compete at the top level of motorsports on diverse tracks that test the skill of those drivers and their cars.

Pikes Peak will have more manufacturer diversity next year than the Indy 500. And with no marketing, you'd have to be a hardcore motorsports enthusiast to even know that race exists.

If Indycar does not do something soon to attract diverse manufacturer participation, the United Sportscar Racing series has the opportunity to take any auto manufacturer money not going to NASCAR away from Indycar. That might be fatal to Indycar.

Someone at a higher pay grade than me can do the root cause analysis. But the final ratings came in and instead of going up, they went down even more - from a 3.8 overnight to a 3.7 final. And please, don't anyone tell me that it's not an "Indy only" problem, but a "big event" problem. That's not true. The Super Bowl, the Daytona 500, the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness all have had very good to excellent TV ratings this year. In years past, Indy used to best the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness. It used to be shoulder to shoulder with the Daytona 500. There's just something very wrong with the script when horses can double up on the viewership of the Indy 500. And part of it (IMHO) is that there is a better job being done at "humanizing" the horses than is being done by the IRL/IMS at humanizing these drivers. Why?! How?!

My guess is, Indy Car has multiple issues that explain why it continues losing fans for even the Indy 500. And to get people interested again, I think they need to address the cars and the stars. Other than when I was into the ALMS, I've never gone to races just to see the cars. Well, once or twice, but I have always been more interested in the personalities driving the cars than the cars themselves. With ALMS, it was a close contest much of the time (cause some of those cars were downright outrageous and beautiful).

As I've said several times recently, I think all that's left for this series is for the people who still enjoy it... they should continue enjoying it. Don't let any of us Debbie Downers rain on your parade. And as Zako85 said, for those who are no longer into Indy Car, well... we should turn the set to another channel. Unfortunately, quite a few people have taken that advice since 1996 - and it looks like the beating is continuing.

My advice to IndyCar/IMS: hire Zak Brown yesterday, go to the bank and borrow about $100 million and then do whatever Zak tells you to do. There's no guarantee that even he can save it or make it grow again. But I feel like the guy who might have the big seat in F1 in his future probably has some smart ideas on how to keep this ship from sinking any further.

indycar needs to take a lesson from nascar and implement green/white/checkered finishes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zako85

Exhibit 2: NASCAR cars are FUGLY, use antiquated tech, and go slower than IndyCars. People are still watching this. Like I said. If there is a solution to IndyCar's popularity/ratings problems, it's NOT technical.

---

Spoken like a true prodigy, the US racing fan seems to care zilch about technology, speeds, or even great driving, how many NASCAR races end up being a lottery due to so many yellow flags?

I also think basketball is one of the most boring sports if you are not on the actual arena, and they get better ratings than hockey, baseball, and soccer in the US, proving that sports are very subjective and personal.