Massage to Indy brass...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FIAT1

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

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!

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FIAT1

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nigelred5

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

---

That's the thought process now days.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 00steven

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nigelred5

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 00steven

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zako85

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rex Monaco

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nem14

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 00steven

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FIAT1

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FIAT1

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. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FIAT1

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

Race:

CART 2000 - Fontana Highlights - YouTube

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......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EagleEye

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

Race:

CART 2000 - Fontana Highlights - YouTube

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?

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FIAT1

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.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

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

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FIAT1

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FIAT1

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FIAT1

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

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!!!

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nem14

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

---

Too true.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EagleEye

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

Race:

CART 2000 - Fontana Highlights - YouTube

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loneranger

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….

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FIAT1

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