jcmark611 - 24 October 2009 10:37 PM

Europe and Japan have several open wheel series that could use the designs.

Which of those have a significant number of their races on ovals?

"...none of these are radical; they are just an updated rehash of what's already been done. And nothing like these will generate any new interest."

Why should interest in the series be based on some ridiculous futuristic sci-fi car design? If the car is bland and boring and works fantastically, providing tight racing and easier overtaking, That will provide all the interest. Good Racing is the draw, not the appearance of the car.

cliffc - 25 October 2009 11:21 AM

jcmark611 - 24 October 2009 10:37 PM

Europe and Japan have several open wheel series that could use the designs.

Which of those have a significant number of their races on ovals?

Considering the number of street and road courses now on the schedule I'd guess the new car will be a little more balanced in it's design.

jcmark611 - 25 October 2009 12:52 PM

cliffc - 25 October 2009 11:21 AM

jcmark611 - 24 October 2009 10:37 PM

Europe and Japan have several open wheel series that could use the designs.

Which of those have a significant number of their races on ovals?

Considering the number of street and road courses now on the schedule I'd guess the new car will be a little more balanced in it's design.

It's still a compromise design compared to road race only ow cars which is what those Euro and Japanese series are. I still see no reason for someone to steal an ICS spec car design when they already have something that better suits their needs. F1 teams try to steal secrets from other F1 teams not from GP2 or A1GP or formula Renault.

cliffc - 25 October 2009 11:21 AM

jcmark611 - 24 October 2009 10:37 PM

Europe and Japan have several open wheel series that could use the designs.

Which of those have a significant number of their races on ovals?

With the direction the series is going, those designs from Europe and Japan will be more useful, of course you'll have to fans in attendance to watch it though.

As to this post: where the Hulman-George family have taken real AOWR. Son, REAL AOWR dies back in the 60's. What we have now is AEOWR: Formula cars on roadcourses with driver the fanbase in this country don't know and frankly don't care about and if you want to debate this issue, just look at the tv ratings, attendance, and market share and I clearly have made my point.

That is what I fear the "radical' new design might be throwback to the later fifties. Skinnier tires, minimal aero, no wings, front engine ... to try to recapture all the "lost fans" that hate the "funny furrin-looking cars with the engines at the wrong end."

ROFL I thought you'd like that picture...

Gil de Ferran said in an interview (I didn't post it because I was so sure someone else would) That IndyCars should ne the fastest cars in the world, with high power and low downforce.

Now THAT may be the way you can run the NECKCAR tracks and the flat tracks and the roadies and still be fast and entertaining.

Downforce=turbulence=less passing.

BUT, you see how happy NECKCAR fans are with the less aerodynamic COT. It's gotta be GOTTA be tested. At speed. In packs. And then (you NECKCAR fans have never seen this with the COT) re-evaluated and refined.

More power? With one engine supplier? Impossible. No matter what they do, the cars are not going to sniff CART performance levels until there is competition between engine suppliers. Without that, the best we have to hope for is a slow car that allows you to pass.

EarlofSpeed - 24 October 2009 12:51 PM

Alright, I play again. This was in Cavins Blog the other day and someone posted it in TrackForum.
http://www.diseno-art.com/encyclopedia/concept_cars/honda_indy_racing_car.html

The 1st thing I thought of when I saw it was if you take that thing off the back, there is a little resemblence to the 67 STP turbine. The shape, the roundness of it, if you look you can see it.

Now that I have thought on this a bit, and know Barnhardt's and Angst's proclivity to, ah shall I say, stretch reality, my guess is there really is no "radical" design. Heck, I'm not sure they are honestly working on a contemporary design. It would not surprise me that all this talk of chassis and engine mfgr's is just smoke and mirrors to get the ICS through the Indy centennial after which point they toss out the white flag and surrender.

springfield_mile - 25 October 2009 02:57 PM

cliffc - 25 October 2009 11:21 AM

jcmark611 - 24 October 2009 10:37 PM

Europe and Japan have several open wheel series that could use the designs.

Which of those have a significant number of their races on ovals?

With the direction the series is going, those designs from Europe and Japan will be more useful, of course you'll have to fans in attendance to watch it though.

As to this post: where the Hulman-George family have taken real AOWR. Son, REAL AOWR dies back in the 60's. What we have now is AEOWR: Formula cars on roadcourses with driver the fanbase in this country don't know and frankly don't care about and if you want to debate this issue, just look at the tv ratings, attendance, and market share and I clearly have made my point.

Spoken like a true sprint car fan. But the fact is, "AEOWR" did extremely well for about 35 years there. Not to mention a Euro tradition that predates the Hulman ownership of IMS. Wilbur Shaw won the 500 twice in a row in a Maserati 8CTF ex Grand Prix car.

Well, if you break it down...... and look at what we have now...... radical would be something completely different than what we have now correct? We currently have a winged high downforce car. So the opposite would be a wingless, low downforce car. What happens to the air if you take the wings off? Does it allow you to pass because the air is cleaner? I've got no idea as I am not an aerospace or mechanical engineer. That, however, would be radical.... no?

I am also fairly certain that those of you dreaming of a 900 hp indycar are going to be very disappointed. These things are going to be running 3000 miles? I would guess we are talking about a car less than 1000 lbs and with half that horsepower. Right now we are at a 1600 lbs. car and 650 hp right? So an 800 lbs. car would need 325 hp to do the same thing.