The first ACTUAL pic of the DeltaWing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoss Ghoul

Agreed, particularly if a car of this type opened up a new era or innovation and record speeds at Indy...that's what its all about. Indy is Bonneville in its own way.

---

I do find it endlessly amusing how supposed Indy racing fans can get so attached to so-called "evolutionary" designs. Innovation is what made this racing interesting for so many years, and it's been stuck in a rut for at least 2 decades. If the choice is between an updated formula car, or a revolutionary (if controversial) concept, I say go for the revolutionary. To think that the extremely small IRL fanbase really counts for much anymore is naive imo. The IRL could easily lose its entire 400k-strong fanbase, come up with a new crazy design that appeals to a different crowd, and get that fanbase back. And if anything, it will get an uptick in interest to attend local races to see what the talk is about. I'm not at all stuck on this design or any others, but I do think that what the IRL should be about is creative innovation, and not slight formula re-workings of a design that was stale long ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

Was the Turbine car an Indy car? Was Brabham's Cooper in 61 an Indycar? People at the Speedway said no, but both were outside the box thinking. .....

People who dismiss this cannot then turn around and say they want innovation back....because ugly it may be but outside the box it is...

---

Actually, the Cooper was very conventional for the time - in F1. It was a proven and tested design. The first turbine was very different, but the second one wasn't. Even the first wasn't as radical as a car than may have inspired it, the Smokey Yunick "sidecar". But these were built for a very specific race, and while the layouts may have been radical, the suspension geometry and general layouts were not. The "conventional" wisdom of the day was to get all of the weight on the left, and the turbine did that.

You just can't fool physics. How will the front wheels turn? Skinny tires on the front - really? Side impact protection - where?

Thinking outside the box is fine, but don't lose the box. This thing looks like you would buy it in a box - in 1/24 scale.

The Swift is gorgeous, the delta thing is ugly as hell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

Was the Turbine car an Indy car? Was Brabham's Cooper in 61 an Indycar? People at the Speedway said no, but both were outside the box thinking. The Cooper changed the destiny of the Speedway forever, and the Turbine could have if it wasn't outlawed. We shouldn't have any preconceived ideas of what the Indycar should be. THIS innovation and change is why Indy was always a very interesting place to be in May for DECADES leading into the 90's. Whether it was the Junk formula of the 30's, the front wheel drive roadsters, the Offy's laid down sideways, the stock blocks, ground effects Chapparals, or Mercedes OHV design, Indy has had a tradition of innovation.

I don't like the look of his delta wing design, but I resent the idea of anyone saying it isn't an Indycar. Indy cars race at Indy, and if the IRL picked up this design and said it was legal, as long as they didn't say other cars with other designs couldn't race against it, I would be ok with Ganassi showing up with this thing if they could run against more conventional designs. Let the engine specs determine the formula and safety, not just an arbitrary rule.

People who dismiss this cannot then turn around and say they want innovation back....because ugly it may be but outside the box it is...

---

I don't disagree with what you've said Mark, but for me, once you enclose the wheels in body work it ceases to be an open wheel car. Indy car has always meant open wheel cars as long as I've been following and I'm not sure I can get over the fact that this has more in common with a prototype sports car than an open wheel car.

I assume Ben Bowlby knows what he's doing, but I just don't see how that car is going to turn with narrow front tires and a narrow track. I'd also be concerned that the drivers would misjudge the width of the rear of the car and wind up hitting each other when the rear wheels get close to each other.

I suspect most of the reason fo the reaction we're seeing here is that the Delta Wing looks like it is optimized for going in a straight line, and we all know that getting around turns is the essence of Indycar racing.

http://www.anasuya.com/maximilian/delta.jpghttp://www.maximilian.us/delta.jpg

I dunno, if the front wheels are moved outward, it doesn't look all that bad... and would have the needed stability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maximilian

http://www.anasuya.com/maximilian/delta.jpghttp://www.maximilian.us/delta.jpg

I dunno, if the front wheels are moved outward, it doesn't look all that bad... and would have the needed stability.

---

Yeah actually that's what I was expecting to see, although with the front tires a little more closely together (maybe a ft or so). I haven't read articles on it, but I'd be interested to know why Bowlby is so in favor of nearly a single front tire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DBell

I don't disagree with what you've said Mark, but for me, once you enclose the wheels in body work it ceases to be an open wheel car. Indy car has always meant open wheel cars as long as I've been following and I'm not sure I can get over the fact that this has more in common with a prototype sports car than an open wheel car.

---

Hey, I don't disagree with you on that, but my point is we have to be prepared to toss out what we conceive a race car should be if we are going to encourage innovation. I cannot accept the styling of the proposal but I am curious if Bowlby's claims for the car hold up. I am always ready to be proved wrong on this one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beachbum

Actually, the Cooper was very conventional for the time - in F1. It was a proven and tested design. The first turbine was very different, but the second one wasn't. Even the first wasn't as radical as a car than may have inspired it, the Smokey Yunick "sidecar". But these were built for a very specific race, and while the layouts may have been radical, the suspension geometry and general layouts were not. The "conventional" wisdom of the day was to get all of the weight on the left, and the turbine did that..

---

The Cooper was seen as a radical car at Indy. No one in the US was building a rear engined Indy car. I have read the stories of how people there viewed the rear engined revolution and they figured for oval racing the Roadster was the way to go. No American even built anything like the Cooper and they mocked Brabham showing up with a little Climax motor until he was 20mph or better faster in the turns. Indy always had to be shown something worked before the conventional wisdom was changed. Ditto for the Turbine....and now you read the posts on here on why people dump on the delta wing (styling wise I don't like it) but none of us ACTUALLY know if the car will work. Bowlby designs race cars for a living, let's hope he can get one to the track and prove the merits of his design one way or the other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beachbum

You just can't fool physics. How will the front wheels turn? Skinny tires on the front - really? Side impact protection - where?

Thinking outside the box is fine, but don't lose the box. This thing looks like you would buy it in a box - in 1/24 scale.

---

He says he addressed all that....and I agree it is goofy looking...but he is an engineer who has probably thought of all of this. It isn't his first rodeo...so lets hope something is learned...because if these delta's actually put on a really good show racing, I might almost put up with it...

That car is truly hideous.