Printable View
In anticipation of the upcoming chassis announcement, I would like to pole this esteemed group. I have worded the questions to prevent debate related to which chassis is best to stay on topic. Please read and make your selection and explain why your choice best benefits the series as a whole.
1. Should the series develop a set of rules and invite all to participate?
2. Should the series choose more than one chassis manufacturer?
3. Should the series select a single chassis?
I choose either #1 or #3 - I prefer #1 for the long term - but I understand that the economic realities probably preclude #1 for the time being.... At first thought I had chosen #2 - but upon reflection I realize that is just a train wreck waiting to happen as what happens if/when one chassis is clearly superior to the other.....??? I also wonder if they could choose some hybrid of the two - select one chassis as the main supplier and work out some way to allow other manufacturers but only on a team by team basis for now (i.e. - Dallara or Lola or Swift or Delta get all the "customer" business but a team is free to develop its own car but they cannot sell it for a set period of time)...
1 or 2.
I think the problem with #2 is that, in this economy, it is going to be difficult to find a supplier who is willing to invest the money needed to compete with another chassis maker - they simply cannot afford to take the risk.... I think Indycar is in the position of having to offer a chassis manufacturer some sort of deal that provides them security.... as much as I prefer choice #1 - I do not see enough chassis builders answering the bell with sufficient resources to ensure a full field... I think if they offer someone the role of exclusive "customer" chassis and also allow individual teams to go their own route with chassis unique to their own team you might get the best of both worlds.... (this would provide diversity but would also ultimately allow the main chassis producer to actually make money.....)
I understand and agree to what Chris R is saying. I can see the economics in all of this. I would however limit what the teams can do to equalize the field more.
I vote for number 1. Yes, there will be a front runner on ovals and it is possible a different chassis will win on streets/road tracks but this is the best solution for the series as a whole IMO. In year 2 the slower ones will improve or quit.
#3 is the safer bet. But in principle, I prefer #1. My guess is that they'll go with a single supplier chassis, the safer bet.
My thoughts go along with this. By choosing #3 and remaining a spec series, the series will continue to go nowhere. Might as well stick with the ugly, old Dallara if this is the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
1
1
A mute poll, or pole. All bids were based on a single spec chassis, and the winner will match a one of the Kink's all time hits.
so its going to be a "low budget" car??? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleEye
My preference is #1, reality says #3.
Since the bids ARE based on a single spec chassis, there is only one option #3. So, what is the point of this poll?
Gary
The Lola is a single spec, but from what was published the cars will have different body-kits. That's a nice compromise I suppose. The important thing is different engines anyway in my opinion.
You Really Got Me thinking about this post. I mean, I am no Superman, so I am having a hard time seeing your point. It finally came to me - The new cars are going to be made of Celluoid instead of carbon fibre. Yes, they be really Low Budget and in my opinion indycar will be Living on a Thin Line but hopefully the lower costs will cause many teams to Come Dancing at the big race on Sunday Afternoon.... Ultimately such a move could be a real Destroyer but if Randy pulls it off he could become a Well Respected Man and save indycar racing for everyoneQuote:
Originally Posted by EagleEye
Is that what you mean when you are talking about the Kinks??? :D
sorry couldn't resist - I was trying all night to figure how to get "Dallara" out of a kink's song!!
The point of the poll is to get fans opinions of what is best for the series. I said that in the original post.Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
Why do you have to pick apart everyone's posts?
1993/94 Lola 9oo hp turbo would be perfect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris R
What a great post! Truly you are a Superman.
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by dataman1
Well excuuuuuuuuuuuuse me. I just think its silly to ask our opinions on something that clearly is not plausible. The bids were all submitted based on a single spec chassis and your "poll" is asking about options outside of that reality. So what difference does it matter what we want of those three choices, only one of them can ever happen anyway.
It's like me creating this poll:
Which would you rather do:
1. Walk on the Sun.
2. Date Salma Hayek.
3. Eat lunch today.
What the hell difference does it make what you'd rather do, since only 3 is an option.
Gary
thank you, thank you very much :pQuote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
so what is the chassis surprise according to AR1??
They are reporting rumors in Indy and within the Paddock at Watkins Glen that the new chassis will not come from a single manufacturer. ....more to follow as they hear it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris R
I am not sure I'd even put much stock in the official announcement at the moment... It would absolutely be great news but I would be skeptical until all the chassis showed up on the grid.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Great post! I like that! :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris R
Well, one thing's for sure... you're Not Like Everybody Else. You're Not Like Everybody Else! And maybe Father Christmas will bring the IRL a new chassis in December. Hopefully so, cause right now it looks like a Waterloo Sunset. We didn't realize that back in the 80's and 90's we had a Sunny Afternoon, huh?
There's barely enough money to make #3 work. Choices #1 & 2 will cost much more (mid 8 figures) and nobody to step up and spend it. They'll be lucky to get a 2nd engine mftr to commit. Three years from now I think there's +80% chance it's still 1 motor, 1 chassis.
To make it really simple, I think they should ask Kevin Kalkhoven what he would do. Then just do the exact opposite. :dozey:
I will say one. If you cant do that, then shut the doors. No serious fan of racing ever wants to see a Spec series and call it the top of the food chain. Spec series are for minor rungs of the ladder....
I disagree that no serious fan of racing wants to see a spec series. I enjoy many spec series from GP2 to Spec Miata.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa
I do agree that a top series cannot be taken seriously if "spec"
No top International or National series is Spec.
F-1
WRC
WTCC
BTCC
DTM
LeMans
V8 Supercars...ect.
Even NASCAR, while is mostly a Spec series, they go to great effort to prevent that from becoming common knowledge.
I wouldn't go that far. CART for long stretches was a defacto spec chassis series. Not dictated by rules mind you, but by on track competition.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa
I remember when everone basically ran March-Cosworths in the mid to late eighties (including Penske until he convinced Chevy to fund the Ilmor Indy). Then came the mid to late nineties when Reynard was the dominant chassis- and again Penske dropped building their own cars altogether.
You can have 10 or more different makes on the grid and still have a boring product. F1 clearly showed how that can be.
I appreciate your point, px400r. But as you said, it was on track competition that determined one chassis' dominance (and popularity) over another. It was not a mandate from the series. If there had been a mandate on what to run by CART, we'd have never seen the innovation of the "Reynske" or the Swift or the Fernandez(?) "Frankenstein" car. And even when it was March, Lola or Reynard that was the most competitive, the teams basically just used the base chassis. Unlike today, they could still heavily modify the base chassis and make it their own.
None of us have to shell out the dollars it would take to buy a chassis. But at the same time, as fans, we at least want to believe that a guy who has the knowledge to build a better mousetrap, or improve on a good mousetrap and make it better, can do so. If all they're doing is assembling kit cars, and like most ladder series, they can't deviate from the original design AT ALL, many of us have a hard time seeing that as top tier racing. It might be good racing. I'd rather watch GP2 than some F1 races, especially a few years ago when the F1 shows weren't always so good. When it's mandated spec, you do get a better idea of what one driver can do versus the others, because the cars are roughly equal. In F1, the only way to compare drivers (really) is to compare teammates to one another. But I don't care about that so much. I'm as fascinated by the innovations brought to the track by the McLaren, Red Bull or Ferrari organizations as I am about how good the drivers are. I guess the trick is finding the balance so that you don't consistently have someone like Danica being able to put a lap on Lewis Hamilton... ya know, should he ever lose his F1 ride (and his mind) and come to the IRL. :p
My only reservation about the IRL going away from the spec formula is that so much of the field depends on ride buyers, and doesn't have the resources to run anything other than a (cheap/inexpensive) spec chassis; they don't have the funds to develop it. But by the same token, if the league has not much more than broke teams funded by ride buyers, it's not really top tier anyway, huh? As the song goes, "if you ain't got no money, take your broke azz home!"
Your point though is mine. No top International or National series is spec. The IRL is supposed to be the top North American series with a unique American flavour to it. Giving everyone Italian chassis with Japanese motors with little or no connection to the American public has been a death sentence of sorts.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
They need to make a set of rules, and invite anyone who wants to play to play within those rules, engines or chassis and let the chips fall where they may. Worrying about car counts I know is a concern, but I would rather have a real series with 20 cars than 26 identical cars in theory, with only 6 to 8 always running up front like we do now.
Robin Miller hints there will be more than one chassis provider. I assume this means Dallara and Lola will collaborate to build a single chassis.
Or that they will continue with the current Dallara's...Quote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
No...this means both will put chassis out there for team's to buy. If they collaborate, then they might as well do nothing...Quote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
If only it looked like this.
http://cdn.images.autosport.com/edit...1278336015.jpg
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/85014Quote:
The new GP2 Series car, which will be used from the start of next year, has hit the track for the first time.
As AUTOSPORT's exclusive spy shot of the new GP2/11 car shows, it marks a radical visual departure from its predecessors.
The car will be raced in both the main and Asia Series, and was put through its paces by former GP2 racer Ben Hanley at the Magny-Cours club circuit on Monday morning.
The aerodynamic package of the car has been completely overhauled to bring it more into line with the current generation of Formula 1 cars.
Despite being visually very different, the basic chassis remains fundamentally the same apart from an enlarged driver head protection area.
This means that teams will have the option of either buying brand-new cars or having their current tubs modified to bring them up to spec.
#1, please. I fall into the n0-self-respecting-top-flight-series-is-spec camp.
If Indycar continues single-spec, I fully expect the death of a clown.
I understand your point. In truth, I subscribed to the same opinion. But the reality is that Indy Car's on track product is so boring and predictable that a variety of chassis and engines is only "lipstick on a pig." What's needed is to upgrade the on track competition. I'm willing to take the ugly spec Dallara-Honda if the racing was 10 times better. It's really no use to have a variety of chassis/engine combinations on the grid if the Penske/Ganassi domination continues.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
The racing WONT be better under the current format because the cars are about all developed out and there is a lack of room to find new ideas when the rules are so restrictive. What makes racing or passing interesting is the ability of cars to pass each other. You hit the right setup, you can drive by people. Now, most teams are so close to each other, passing is difficult. This in theory is a good thing, but people want to see passes. They want to see the fast car shuffled back because of a pit stop carving his way through the field. Under the current rules, you put a fast guy out with no pit stops remaining about mid field, he wont get to the front. If there was greater room for different setups and ideas, cars would be faster at different parts of the track and really fast guys would have the ability likely to carve their way forward. It is game of inches in this scenario, but right now it is a game of thousands...and you cannot really gain much of an advantage.Quote:
Originally Posted by px400r
It is a dichotomy. Cars have to be different from each other enough that there are faster and slower cars, but not be SO great that it is a run away. You get that when the rules are open enough that there are few different chassis, more engine possiblities and different aero tricks.
I agree with you. I don't know what they need to do to get there, but that is what needs to happen. Isn't it funny that in the (nearly) laissez-faire world of Formula One, a change in the rules set the F1 world on its head last season? And with Red Bull now a top team, it's still somewhat on its head. What confuses me is that in GP2 the racing is typically VERY good with a good amount of passing, but they have a spec chassis too. I mean there are top teams that tend to attract the best drivers every year in GP2. But watching a GP2 race is like watching a pack of wild, hungry dogs fighting over the last scrap of bread. I continue to think that one issue with the IRL is the drivers being too sweet & nice to each other. I'd rather see Paul Tracy, Mike Andretti, Alex Zanardi, Greg Moore, Jacques Villeneuve and Juan Montoya type people (truly) going for it, as if their lives depended on getting that next spot... like in GP2. But you can't just go out and buy those types of "win at any cost" personalities, so I don't know...Quote:
Originally Posted by px400r
I guess the latest rumor is an announcement of multiple chassis next week. We'll see what that does.