Dear Lord, it's a spec chassis and not chassis specs for 2011!

[Marbles]

Chassis talk came up in the engine thread but I thought it would be better discussed in it's own thread (again?).

For me personally, this is utterly disappointing but it seems to be the way that NASCAR, errr... I mean the IRL want to go. It's really COT thinking the way I see it.

A strict turbo engine spec with participation from major builders and manufacturers well see pretty close competition, especially as the formula matures (i.e. late nineties CART). Nobody well manage an extra 200 hp. Some well have better years than others but things should be close.

However, bring competing car builders into the arena and this is where things could get messy. Egad... you may not have pack racing! You know... where it doesn't matter how talented you are, Matsushi-ta is going to finish on the same lap as you. Worse yet, something unimaginable might happen, like Penske not qualifying for the Indy 500. Pick the wrong chassis at the start of the year, even if it's stamped LOLA on the bottom, and you could be out to lunch.

And this almost flies in the face of Indy heritage considering the diversity of cars that use to compete with the same engine (Offy).

My greatest hope was for a spec safety cell or a base chassis that allowed freedom in certain areas such as suspension or wings. Hell, you may even end up with a backyard privateer, albeit a rich backyard privateer, winning the big one. Imagine that! And instead of using rear view mirrors, he used rear facing video cameras which displayed on screens inside the cockpit. Now wouldn't that be sweet for the 100th anniversary.

[Scheckterfan54]

100 % agree. Specify certain criteria, lets really go back to the days of making new innovations. But, I am thinking that the spec chassis may be best for the current series because the series is still building itself. Its a good way to lower costs to add new teams/strengthen the weak teams. Maybe after that is done, it could be seriously discussed to open the field up to new innovation. But until the ICS is to that point, it would be hurting the series to eliminate the chance alltogether for the lower budget teams. Not that marty roth has a chance anyway.

[-Helix-]

In case you guys didn't realize the IRL isn't exactly booming with popularity and making tons of profit. How are teams going to afford to update their chassis and be competitive?

It's called evening out the playing field. The big budget teams have a big enough advantage already. Sure only having one chassis is lame but it's cheaper which is a very important aspect of racing these days. Maybe in the future we'll see chassis competition if it becomes more affordable.

[Bob Riebe]

In case you guys didn't realize the IRL isn't exactly booming with popularity and making tons of profit. How are teams going to afford to update their chassis and be competitive?

It's called evening out the playing field.

It is called grade-school play-ground rules.

When supposed professional racing becomes a welfare state, it is time get the fat lady and let her sing her heart out.

[Wilf]

It is called grade-school play-ground rules.

When supposed professional racing becomes a welfare state, it is time get the fat lady and let her sing her heart out.

Then I guess it is all just a matter of timing; will the IRL last long enough so we have something to watch until the Bob Riebe Racing League takes over since even though he has a better way, we have to give him at least six or seven months to get up to speed? It shouldn't take any longer since Bob seems to think all the problems of AOWR should have been cleaned up by now.

Sorry Bob, I agree with your premise, I just can't understand why you refuse to accept the idea that what you want takes money and it takes time to gather the money.

[Scheckterfan54]

In case you guys didn't realize the IRL isn't exactly booming with popularity and making tons of profit. How are teams going to afford to update their chassis and be competitive?

It's called evening out the playing field. The big budget teams have a big enough advantage already. Sure only having one chassis is lame but it's cheaper which is a very important aspect of racing these days. Maybe in the future we'll see chassis competition if it becomes more affordable.

Isnt that pretty much what i was descibing? Having a spec chassis this time around will be best to give the lower budget teams time to grow.?.?

[Chris R]

I think a spec chassis is only gives a false sense of security regarding costs. NASCAR has been pretty darn close to a spec series for nearly 10 years - the rules are very tight - so teams spend more and more money on little details which often cost more than outright innovation.

I think an open rule book may actually be cheaper - as you can easily see from the current spec for the IRL the teams with the most resources still go fastest and in some ways the gulf is as great or greater than ever.....

I would like to see a study done by a series insider of the relative cost to run a current IRL program vs. the cost to run an AOWR program as roughly 10 year intervals going back in time. All costs would need to be indexed to a common base value. It may very well be that a spec series is cheaper - but I am not sure anybody has ever done the math..... My best guess is that we will find the roadsters with Offy's (no spec chassis, no engine manufacturers) were the cheapest to run.... That is just a guess though....

[Wilf]

I think a spec chassis is only gives a false sense of security regarding costs. NASCAR has been pretty darn close to a spec series for nearly 10 years - the rules are very tight - so teams spend more and more money on little details which often cost more than outright innovation.

I think an open rule book may actually be cheaper - as you can easily see from the current spec for the IRL the teams with the most resources still go fastest and in some ways the gulf is as great or greater than ever.....

I would like to see a study done by a series insider of the relative cost to run a current IRL program vs. the cost to run an AOWR program as roughly 10 year intervals going back in time. All costs would need to be indexed to a common base value. It may very well be that a spec series is cheaper - but I am not sure anybody has ever done the math..... My best guess is that we will find the roadsters with Offy's (no spec chassis, no engine manufacturers) were the cheapest to run.... That is just a guess though....

I have no doubt that a tube space frame and aluminum skin chassis would be cheaper, at least $100K to $150K cheaper. But then, how much do you spend to bring it's crash worthiness up to the level of today's chassis. I don't know enough about the engine cost issue so hopefully someone else can address that aspect of your post.

[Chris R]

I have no doubt that a tube space frame and aluminum skin chassis would be cheaper, at least $100K to $150K cheaper. But then, how much do you spend to bring it's crash worthiness up to the level of today's chassis. I don't know enough about the engine cost issue so hopefully someone else can address that aspect of your post.

Yeah, althought NASCARS tube frame and engines with carburetors aren't exactly cheap...

I did not mean to infer a return to roadsters - but rather that an example of fairly open rules largely devoid of manufacturer participation might be a model worth looking at in order to keep costs down..... Technology is not nearly as expensive as excessive rules....

In the name of safety it might be worth using a spec "saftey cell" like in speedboats - it may also be impractical - just throwing it out there....

[PA Rick]

A spec series might keep the costs down to the large teams, but it negates small team innovation. Wings, aerodynamics, ground effects, tire development, turbocharging, diesels, etc have all benefited from the days when a team could think outside the box. When everyone has to stay in the box, it becomes less interesting.