Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 7 votes

IndyCar for 2013, it's official.


  • Please log in to reply
1561 replies to this topic

#1151 prommer

prommer
  • Member

  • 164 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 08 May 2013 - 19:21

http://www.indycar.c...00-entrant-list

Buddy Lazier's program is official now. What an interesting story! He was Alesi's driver coach last year, and got the itch to drive again. His family and some buddies purchased Alesi's old Lotus tub and patched the rest of the entry together, including a Chevy lease. He'll be running the #91 that he won with in 1996.

Advertisement

#1152 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,105 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 08 May 2013 - 19:50

I think we're delving a bit too much in solely-Indy-500 discussion with this subject... will whoever is responsible for the Indy 500 thread this year stand up and create it? :) There's only two days until practice starts.


Working on it chief

#1153 OfficeLinebacker

OfficeLinebacker
  • Member

  • 14,019 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 08 May 2013 - 20:49

Now, here we go...someone writes something and everyone goes with it and it becomes distorted outta all shape. That's the thing about the internets messages boards (sic). Everyone's an expert...about things they don't know :)

No numbers were displayed, so get that out of your heads right now. A series of lights were flashed, not numbers. If a driver saw the light at each station, he was in proper position. Prior to 1972, an honor system was used (I know, hard to believe).

I don't recall for certain how it was that the lights were abused. One thing drivers found was they could accelerate down the pit lane - no speed limits then - and gain more ground. I think that might be the reference to what Bobby Unser did.

Have you Googled it, or searched for it?

Yes, I googled before asking and I found an archived newspaper from 1979 reporting that they were doing away with the system, that was all I came up with.

#1154 OfficeLinebacker

OfficeLinebacker
  • Member

  • 14,019 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 08 May 2013 - 20:53

Why don't you just send Robin Miller an e-mail for an explanation? Ask "What were these pacer lights? How were they supposed to work and how did Bobby Unser abuse them?"

He'd enjoy that one :) ...and you'd be educating other newer fans. Win, win :)

I agree with you, if you have his email address will you PM it to me? I'll do it.

#1155 Deluxx

Deluxx
  • Member

  • 2,174 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 08 May 2013 - 20:59

I sent him an email, hopefully he reads it. ( openwheelmailbag@gmail.com )

#1156 Jim Thurman

Jim Thurman
  • Member

  • 4,175 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 09 May 2013 - 05:40

We'd have been like Mansell and Vitolo. But a lot slower. A lot.

http://en.wikipedia....ER_Light_System

:lol: I don't think either one of us would be the Vitolo (though he wasn't an embarrassment in Atlantics).

#1157 Jim Thurman

Jim Thurman
  • Member

  • 4,175 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 09 May 2013 - 05:42

I agree with you, if you have his email address will you PM it to me? I'll do it.

Figured you'd check, just checking. Hopefully Deluxx will get an answer. I think Robin would love to answer something like that.

Yeah, the Google News newspaper archive shows exactly how poor the coverage was.

#1158 stewie

stewie
  • Member

  • 469 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 09 May 2013 - 14:48

Been announced today by BT that their BT Sports 1 & 2 and ESPN will be available for free if you are a BT broadband subscriber, lets hope that Indycars has a home on one of the 3 channels.

#1159 D.M.N.

D.M.N.
  • RC Forum Host

  • 7,222 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 09 May 2013 - 20:08

Confirmed that IndyCar will be on BT Sport from August (will likely still be ESPN for IndyCar).

Advertisement

#1160 stewie

stewie
  • Member

  • 469 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 10 May 2013 - 08:02

Result! We have BT Broadband at home so I'm happy as larry. Don't think my girlfriend is though...

#1161 Imperial

Imperial
  • Member

  • 2,725 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 10 May 2013 - 08:38

I may be wrong on this, but looking into the detail of BT's broadband packages I think you get BT Sports free for online use only.

The details of what is included in each broadband package all state "BT Sports app". You would of course then have to look into going beyond the basic pack to get unlimited broadband, as on the lowest pack you won't be watching very long before your streaming and downloads are switched off for the rest of the month.

Anything that sounds too good to be true always is too good to be true and I thought it was fishy that even if you have Sky TV they claim to give you BT Sports for free if you take BT broadband. I couldn't see how new channels would appear on your Sky box simply by having BT broadband, particularly as Sky wouldn't be making any money by hosting the channel for you.

I must point out I haven't seen what I'm saying in any of the BT literature, I'm working this out for myself, but thinking logically I do believe I may be right.

EDIT

The instructions for anyone who has Sky but internet via BT Broadband says:

"Once BT Sport channels launch on 1st August, you'll automatically have access to both the app and online player. Simply download the app from your app store or visit btsport.com to watch online."

http://www.bt.com/sp...h-bt-sport.html

Evidently nobody is getting BT Sport on their actual tv screen without paying for it.

Basic details for those wanting it on their screen are that it's £12.00 a month with a £15 activation fee. The monthly fee is £1.00 cheaper than those of us taking just ESPN for Indycar at the moment. The contract period is one month only, so there'll be no hassle cancelling when the Indycar season ends. I would assume you'll pay the £15 activation fee if putting it back in for the 2014 Indycar season of course, but still cheaper than paying all winter for channels you may not be watching.

Free HD for a year if signing up by August 31st.

Given that the monthly fee is £1.00 cheaper than I'm paying for ESPN and they throw in the two new BT Sports channels, it remains an excellent deal despite them intentionally giving less than the full facts while shouting "IT'S FREE IF YOU HAVE BT BROADBAND!"

It's worth pointing out here I am on a 2mb download 50 year old telephone line, hence my aversion to wanting to attempt to watch anything streaming live online.

Edited by Imperial, 10 May 2013 - 08:50.


#1162 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,819 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 10 May 2013 - 16:15

And Penske adds another race to Dinger's ever-expanding Indycar schedule... or should I say two races? Detroit. Sounds very much to me like AJ is bordering on a full season deal next year...

#1163 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 10 May 2013 - 16:33

I dunno, they'd need sponsorship? I feel kinda bad for Briscoe, why is Penske dipping into the pocket for Allmendinger but not him? Unless he told Ryan last year "I can only offer you part time work" and he decided to wait for something better. And turned down the Foyt ride thinking something better would come along...



#1164 Prost1997T

Prost1997T
  • Member

  • 1,980 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 10 May 2013 - 16:58

I dunno, they'd need sponsorship? I feel kinda bad for Briscoe, why is Penske dipping into the pocket for Allmendinger but not him? Unless he told Ryan last year "I can only offer you part time work" and he decided to wait for something better. And turned down the Foyt ride thinking something better would come along...


Ross, Briscoe's been given enough chances. He flunked the chance of a Toyota F1 drive by crashing. He crashed left and right with Ganassi in 2005. The 2007 ALMS season was pretty good which is why Roger Penske gave him an Indycar ride in 2008. Briscoe screwed up in 2009 (Long Beach, Motegi) when he had a championship run going. Ryan doesn't have the Indy wins that Helio has, and doesn't win or contend for championships at the same frequency as Will Power. Of the 2 wins he has in the last 3 seasons with Penske, one required his team-mate to lose ground through pitting behind traffic under yellow, and the other he was run close by Danica Patrick. There's a reason I said he trips over himself in the Indy thread.

Allmendinger on the other hand, has shown well in an underfunded Cup ride recently (the now defunct Phoenix team) and his open-wheel stats aren't bad either. He also did better at the Rolex 24 than Briscoe.

Edited by Prost1997T, 10 May 2013 - 16:58.


#1165 #99

#99
  • Member

  • 168 posts
  • Joined: September 02

Posted 11 May 2013 - 20:58

I may be wrong on this, but looking into the detail of BT's broadband packages I think you get BT Sports free for online use only.

The details of what is included in each broadband package all state "BT Sports app". You would of course then have to look into going beyond the basic pack to get unlimited broadband, as on the lowest pack you won't be watching very long before your streaming and downloads are switched off for the rest of the month.

Anything that sounds too good to be true always is too good to be true and I thought it was fishy that even if you have Sky TV they claim to give you BT Sports for free if you take BT broadband. I couldn't see how new channels would appear on your Sky box simply by having BT broadband, particularly as Sky wouldn't be making any money by hosting the channel for you.

I must point out I haven't seen what I'm saying in any of the BT literature, I'm working this out for myself, but thinking logically I do believe I may be right.

EDIT

The instructions for anyone who has Sky but internet via BT Broadband says:

"Once BT Sport channels launch on 1st August, you'll automatically have access to both the app and online player. Simply download the app from your app store or visit btsport.com to watch online."

http://www.bt.com/sp...h-bt-sport.html

Evidently nobody is getting BT Sport on their actual tv screen without paying for it.

Basic details for those wanting it on their screen are that it's £12.00 a month with a £15 activation fee. The monthly fee is £1.00 cheaper than those of us taking just ESPN for Indycar at the moment. The contract period is one month only, so there'll be no hassle cancelling when the Indycar season ends. I would assume you'll pay the £15 activation fee if putting it back in for the 2014 Indycar season of course, but still cheaper than paying all winter for channels you may not be watching.

Free HD for a year if signing up by August 31st.

Given that the monthly fee is £1.00 cheaper than I'm paying for ESPN and they throw in the two new BT Sports channels, it remains an excellent deal despite them intentionally giving less than the full facts while shouting "IT'S FREE IF YOU HAVE BT BROADBAND!"

It's worth pointing out here I am on a 2mb download 50 year old telephone line, hence my aversion to wanting to attempt to watch anything streaming live online.


I have a Sky+HD box but cancelled my subscription last year leaving me with Freesat from Sky. I have BT Broadband so I signed up to see if I could receive it through my Sky box and I received a confirmation email this morning to say I will be getting it through my Sky box (without a Sky subscription) all they require is your viewing card number and you will receive BT Sports/ESPN for free (provided you have BT Broadband)

#1166 Imperial

Imperial
  • Member

  • 2,725 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 12 May 2013 - 07:20

I have a Sky+HD box but cancelled my subscription last year leaving me with Freesat from Sky. I have BT Broadband so I signed up to see if I could receive it through my Sky box and I received a confirmation email this morning to say I will be getting it through my Sky box (without a Sky subscription) all they require is your viewing card number and you will receive BT Sports/ESPN for free (provided you have BT Broadband)


Including ESPN?

#1167 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,105 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 12 May 2013 - 17:43

I hereby christen the 2014 Indycar season Aerorama:

Aero kits for Indy, Pocono, Fontana in 2014.

In other news I have doubts about Panther's John Barnes.

"If you're going to do it, let's do it. I'm not sure it makes any financial sense to go through all the effort and expense to make the kits, but only use them for three races."


Surely he's not suggesting that everyone would otherwise be using the same aero kits in superspeedway spec and high downforce spec? The choice would be between building an aero kit for Indy, Texas, Pocono and Fontana, and a separate aero kit for everywhere else.

#1168 anbeck

anbeck
  • Member

  • 2,026 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 12 May 2013 - 20:14

I hereby christen the 2014 Indycar season Aerorama:


I wasn't aware of the fact that the aero kits are tied to the engine supplier. I had hoped that we'd see some cool mix'n'match, so that if we all tried really hard to believe in it, it would seem like some good old Indy days until the mid/late-1990s, where you always wondered, which chassis-engine-tyre combination was the best choice.

Having Honda- and Chevy-aerokits kind of emphasizes the fact that it's a spec-series trying to fake it, rather than helping us believing the fake!

#1169 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,105 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 12 May 2013 - 20:18

It's quite NASCAR. But remember who's investing in the kits.

Edited by Risil, 12 May 2013 - 20:19.


#1170 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 12 May 2013 - 20:31

If we followed my rulebook, they'd have one aerokit everywhere.

Which did nothing because low downforce is a way of life.

#1171 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,105 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 12 May 2013 - 20:32

Preaching to the choir dude

Edited by Risil, 12 May 2013 - 20:33.


#1172 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 12 May 2013 - 20:38

btw the aero thing is the answer to what question?

It's going to upset the competitive balance, no question. Some cars are going to be better than others now. It's going to add cost, either in R&D or simply buying the best kit from whomever comes up with it.

How do either of those things help the series? We gain a handful, genuinely a handful, of fans who are fussy about Indycar being a spec series, but they're going to lose more if it tilts the series in the wrong direction.

#1173 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,105 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 12 May 2013 - 21:03

MP's got Ganassi's Mike Hull saying the manufacturers want better identification between the Honda and Chevy cars. I guess it's a little similar to NASCAR's thinking with the Gen. 6 body styling.

On the other hand they're aero kits, the one that's designed better will go faster. So it's not just a marketing gimmick, although that seems to be how it got the go-ahead. I figure Indycar leadership is (currently) in favour of more technical competition, but introducing it really gradually. It's gonna be painful but how often do you see racing series reverse themselves out of the spec equipment ditch?

Edited by Risil, 12 May 2013 - 21:05.


#1174 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 12 May 2013 - 21:08

I don't think it's a ditch.

cf: NASCAR

#1175 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 4,058 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 13 May 2013 - 10:38

There used to be a great deal of excitement when the rules were more "open" about the cars themselves. Maybe aero kits would add some of that. The racing is good right now but why can't the racing be good with engine and body manufacturers competing instead of a spec series? There is also a lot of brand loyalty (see NASCAR and even F1) that manufacturers want to take advantage of.

I knew the engine manufacturers were going to make kits but weren't there others as well?

#1176 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 13 May 2013 - 10:57

Was the excitement based on the aero detail or other things?

#1177 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 4,058 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 13 May 2013 - 12:06

That it might enhance the racing. That it might lead to an evolution of car design. That if someone was clever they might get an advantage over the other guy.

None of that can happen in a series where the cars are all the same.

#1178 sblick

sblick
  • Member

  • 485 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 13 May 2013 - 12:27

I don't think this precludes anyone from trying another kit outside of Chevy or Honda but I don't see these engine manufacturers being happy with people who don't run their aero. Political bullying if you will.

#1179 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 13 May 2013 - 13:04

That it might enhance the racing. That it might lead to an evolution of car design. That if someone was clever they might get an advantage over the other guy.

None of that can happen in a series where the cars are all the same.


That'd work if it was Coyne coming up with the trick bits, but it's going to be Penske and Ganassi. And we only get back to competition with the rule that the kits have to be made available to everyone at a certain price point. So Coyne has to then spend 100k or whatever it is just to get back onto the same level as the other teams.

So it adds cost and tilts the balance towards the big teams again.

With aerokits I don't think Wheldon wins the 2011 Indy 500 nor is Tagliani on pole.

I think we get 93-esque seasons where it's Big Team A vs Big Team B (Penske v Newman-Haas) with potentially one team being better on the ovals and one on the road courses. The nightmare is one team being better everywhere.

Advertisement

#1180 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 4,058 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 13 May 2013 - 14:12

That'd work if it was Coyne coming up with the trick bits, but it's going to be Penske and Ganassi. And we only get back to competition with the rule that the kits have to be made available to everyone at a certain price point. So Coyne has to then spend 100k or whatever it is just to get back onto the same level as the other teams.

So it adds cost and tilts the balance towards the big teams again.

With aerokits I don't think Wheldon wins the 2011 Indy 500 nor is Tagliani on pole.

I think we get 93-esque seasons where it's Big Team A vs Big Team B (Penske v Newman-Haas) with potentially one team being better on the ovals and one on the road courses. The nightmare is one team being better everywhere.


Uh, the big teams already win the 500 every year. Smaller teams are going to get a win now and again (Williams in Spain last year). Wheldon's win had more to do with planets aligning than parity.

I think the best way to keep costs down is to have everyone race a 1993 Honda Accord. It would be close racing with a lot of passing.

I know that they can't afford too much technological innovation but they can't afford none or it will always be a spec series that has trouble attracting top flight drivers.



#1181 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 13 May 2013 - 14:16

Who's going to sign up because there's some extra winglets on the car?

#1182 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,105 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 13 May 2013 - 14:59

Who's going to sign up because there's some extra winglets on the car?


Exactly. What attracts top talent is teams being able to pay drivers a salary, instead of drivers paying for seats. When you have Rubens Barrichello being forced to find funding to continue an open wheel career after Formula 1, it shows the sad state in which IndyCar is. I viewed Rubens coming to IndyCar in a similar manner of Mansell, being that a huge name from F1, with wins and title contentions (Rubens winning a title is stretching it, but none less), should have made big bucks racing in the U.S.

NASCAR with the Gen 5 car was rubbish. Unliked by most in the garage, but people still wanted to race there. The cars were written in the biggest of spec rules known to the series, but people still were fighting in the lower levels to get there. Villenueve was willing to become a buy driver, and find funding to race there. You don't see Hornish going back to IndyCar, you see him running in the minor leagues of NASCAR. Why? Because he's getting paid the big bucks.

When an IndyCar team can pay a driver better than a midpack F1 team, will we see real talent coming to the series from other series. Sutil is never going to win a GP, but if a team could find the money to pay him what Force India is, he could easily take an IndyCar win.


(Grammar question, do you do two periods at the end of U.S., or end oddly with a period being used as both to end the sentence and abbreviate United States?)

#1183 Prost1997T

Prost1997T
  • Member

  • 1,980 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 13 May 2013 - 15:09

Exactly. What attracts top talent is teams being able to pay drivers a salary, instead of drivers paying for seats.


What do aero kits have to do with drivers? Shouldn't we be concerning ourselves with visibility and sponsorship first? F1 seems to disprove your argument somewhat, given the number of pay drivers there and the talent being locked out of progression due to money. I don't recall Vautier and Newgarden ride-buying, in fact if anything Vautier came to the US because of a cost problem in Europe.

As for Rubens, I think it was a bit more than just the money issue (Kalkoven and Vasser being morons as usual), being close to home all season would have been an important factor also.

Edited by Prost1997T, 13 May 2013 - 15:10.


#1184 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 4,058 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 13 May 2013 - 15:51

Who's going to sign up because there's some extra winglets on the car?


Who is going to sign up in 5 years to drive a 7 year old car that is likely to be the same car 7 years down the line?

The answer is that if you want to sponsor a team/series where the cars are all the essentially the same you are going to go to NASCAR. IndyCar shouldn't aim to be NASCAR without the hicks, hayseeds, and fenders.

Indy car racing was at its peak when it had variety. It's been lurching along like a gut-shot cowboy for the last 15+ years with spec cars. More of the same is not going to help.




#1185 Andrew Hope

Andrew Hope
  • Writer of 2013's Best Opening Post

  • 7,066 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 13 May 2013 - 16:19

(Grammar question, do you do two periods at the end of U.S., or end oddly with a period being used as both to end the sentence and abbreviate United States?)


When you end a sentence with an abbreviation and that abbreviation ends with a period (like Mrs. or Feb. or Inc.) then you don't add an extra period. So you'd say "Sutil should race in the U.S.", not "Sutil should race in the U.S.." and the first is correct.

Edited by Andrew Hope, 13 May 2013 - 16:20.


#1186 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 13 May 2013 - 16:35

Who is going to sign up in 5 years to drive a 7 year old car that is likely to be the same car 7 years down the line?

The answer is that if you want to sponsor a team/series where the cars are all the essentially the same you are going to go to NASCAR. IndyCar shouldn't aim to be NASCAR without the hicks, hayseeds, and fenders.

Indy car racing was at its peak when it had variety. It's been lurching along like a gut-shot cowboy for the last 15+ years with spec cars. More of the same is not going to help.


Indycar is still way ahead of NASCAR even with spec parts. It's a far more sophisticated. And you're confusing the peak of the series with the openness of the series. I say the latter followed the former. When teams had 20-30mil to run two cars they could play around a lot more. If I had 30m now I could run the entire Andretti team.

#1187 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 549 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 13 May 2013 - 16:40

The racing this year has been very good on tracks which usually are pretty awful. I get the logic behind the kits, but I would definitely try to ensure that the quality of the racing does not suffer. If the quality of the racing can continue, that can be a strong calling card in IndyCar's renewal. I don't think the aerokits will be nearly as important in the long run as the racing.

#1188 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 4,058 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 13 May 2013 - 17:34

Indycar is still way ahead of NASCAR even with spec parts. It's a far more sophisticated. And you're confusing the peak of the series with the openness of the series. I say the latter followed the former. When teams had 20-30mil to run two cars they could play around a lot more. If I had 30m now I could run the entire Andretti team.


It's cold comfort that IndyCar is ahead of NASCAR when NASCAR sucks all the oxygen out of the room. They get all of the sponsorship money, they get all the tv time, and they get the drivers. Does it matter that the racing is better if no one watches and the teams have to struggle for sponsorship?

Aero kits are not some panacea, but they would signal to potential sponsors that teams were serious about innovation and were moving away from spec series racing that drove sponsors and drivers to NASCAR (among other things). If you want stagnant cars that all look the same why pick IndyCar over NASCAR?







#1189 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,105 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 13 May 2013 - 18:03

What do aero kits have to do with drivers? Shouldn't we be concerning ourselves with visibility and sponsorship first? F1 seems to disprove your argument somewhat, given the number of pay drivers there and the talent being locked out of progression due to money. I don't recall Vautier and Newgarden ride-buying, in fact if anything Vautier came to the US because of a cost problem in Europe.

As for Rubens, I think it was a bit more than just the money issue (Kalkoven and Vasser being morons as usual), being close to home all season would have been an important factor also.


Ross asked why would driver's aim for IndyCar just due to some extra aero bits? I said no big names because they don't care what car they race. They want to get paid. Yes, the likes of Newgarden and Vautier might only bring a bit to the team (if any), but those guys are young guys with potential. I'm talking about bringing in the names. Can you convince a driver who is running mid-pack in F1, or even an aging F1 driver (like Sutil, like Webber, like Massa) to jump to IndyCar. But unless even a top team gets good funding, they aren't going to pay more than a low 7 figure number for a driver. Having a driver like Mark Webber or Felipe Massa would do more wonders for IndyCar than 10 Vautier's or Sao Paulo withstanding Newgarden's. An IndyCar team shouldn't have thought about it for a second and brought Glock back to the States, rather than allow him to take his skills to DTM.

It's cold comfort that IndyCar is ahead of NASCAR when NASCAR sucks all the oxygen out of the room. They get all of the sponsorship money, they get all the tv time, and they get the drivers. Does it matter that the racing is better if no one watches and the teams have to struggle for sponsorship?

Aero kits are not some panacea, but they would signal to potential sponsors that teams were serious about innovation and were moving away from spec series racing that drove sponsors and drivers to NASCAR (among other things). If you want stagnant cars that all look the same why pick IndyCar over NASCAR?


Aero kits are just the wrong way of doing it though. They seem to do the same for IndyCar that the rules in NASCAR have done. Create what is still a spec car, but allow a few small changes with the engine in the car. The Ford is a bit different than the Toyota, in the same way these aero kits would make the guys with a Honda a bit different than than Chevrolet. Ideally, it would be better to allow another chassis builder to enter to compete. I believe if written in the rules right, with chassis freezes to keep development costs down, you can run multiple chassis' manufacturers for the same price that the current car is keeping to the sport. Why costs went crazy in the 90's in CART/IndyCar was that team's had to buy a new car every year to stay competitive. Maybe for new teams it will be a bit uphill, but a chassis freeze for 3-4 years (in the way that GP2/GP3 works) would keep costs down and keep the innovation you want.

Edited by HaydenFan, 13 May 2013 - 18:11.


#1190 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 549 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 13 May 2013 - 18:24

It's cold comfort that IndyCar is ahead of NASCAR when NASCAR sucks all the oxygen out of the room. They get all of the sponsorship money, they get all the tv time, and they get the drivers. Does it matter that the racing is better if no one watches and the teams have to struggle for sponsorship?

Since professional racing is entertainment, yes it does, as without good racing, no one will bother watching. The product must be entertaining

Aero kits are not some panacea, but they would signal to potential sponsors that teams were serious about innovation and were moving away from spec series racing that drove sponsors and drivers to NASCAR (among other things). If you want stagnant cars that all look the same why pick IndyCar over NASCAR?


In what way does different body work signal innovation? Innovation means allowing genuinely new ideas an equal chance, regardless of the effect on competition. Two bodykits won't do that. Also, sponsors and drivers were not driven to NASCAR by spec racing. That would be a pretty poor bit of reasoning. Please don't try to create justification which isn't there.

Edited by juicy sushi, 13 May 2013 - 18:27.


#1191 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 13 May 2013 - 18:24

It's cold comfort that IndyCar is ahead of NASCAR when NASCAR sucks all the oxygen out of the room. They get all of the sponsorship money, they get all the tv time, and they get the drivers. Does it matter that the racing is better if no one watches and the teams have to struggle for sponsorship?

Aero kits are not some panacea, but they would signal to potential sponsors that teams were serious about innovation and were moving away from spec series racing that drove sponsors and drivers to NASCAR (among other things). If you want stagnant cars that all look the same why pick IndyCar over NASCAR?


Eh, going to open formula doesn't change the problems with the Indycar sponsorship model nor make NASCAR a less attractive option.

Why would sponsors come back when you're going to have to ask them for extra money to spend on bits? How does that help the sponsor's business? If you want to get Boeing to sponsor you, you might have a case, but why would Budweiser care?

#1192 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 4,058 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 13 May 2013 - 19:49

Since professional racing is entertainment, yes it does, as without good racing, no one will bother watching. The product must be entertaining



In what way does different body work signal innovation? Innovation means allowing genuinely new ideas an equal chance, regardless of the effect on competition. Two bodykits won't do that. Also, sponsors and drivers were not driven to NASCAR by spec racing. That would be a pretty poor bit of reasoning. Please don't try to create justification which isn't there.


I guess you're right. You couldn't possibly have both good racing and some variety and innovation. :rolleyes: The racing in the IRL and now in IndyCar has been better than NASCAR since the split and it hasn't done shit to bring more eyes to IndyCar. So the idea that entertaining racing will be the deciding factor is wrong.

The series is seen as a stop-over for people wanting to get to F1 or NASCAR or people who have been discarded by F1 or NASCAR. Spec cars and no innovation aren't going to change that. Or is it that you think maybe 15 more years of that formula will change that?

#1193 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 4,058 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 13 May 2013 - 19:55

Eh, going to open formula doesn't change the problems with the Indycar sponsorship model nor make NASCAR a less attractive option.

Why would sponsors come back when you're going to have to ask them for extra money to spend on bits? How does that help the sponsor's business? If you want to get Boeing to sponsor you, you might have a case, but why would Budweiser care?


Staying with spec cars for the next 10 years isn't going to change the problems with the Indycar sponsorship model nor make NASCAR a less attractive option.

#1194 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 549 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 13 May 2013 - 21:58

I guess you're right. You couldn't possibly have both good racing and some variety and innovation. :rolleyes: The racing in the IRL and now in IndyCar has been better than NASCAR since the split and it hasn't done shit to bring more eyes to IndyCar. So the idea that entertaining racing will be the deciding factor is wrong.

The series is seen as a stop-over for people wanting to get to F1 or NASCAR or people who have been discarded by F1 or NASCAR. Spec cars and no innovation aren't going to change that. Or is it that you think maybe 15 more years of that formula will change that?

How is dramatically increased costs and significantly worse racing going to help? The reality is that the series is still near death, and it will take a long time to get ratings and fan awareness back up. You can't do that without highlight reel worthy racing. No one is going to suddenly put IndyCar on the 6 o'clock news because suddenly they have a pair of body kits. Nor are the body kits innovative.

How much will the kits cost? Should the team owners have to fork out for them when it's already a genuine struggle to field cars? How will it affect the racing? If it results in an aerodynamic war and the tedious racing of the late 1990s or F1 (since forever) then how is it a move forward?

If you want innovation, that's fine, but you won't find that in racing. The rules are too restrictive in all series, and racing has little to offer street cars in terms of viable solutions. Modern street cars are more advanced and require more extreme solutions. IndyCar had the choice of innovation with the DeltaWing rules set. They looked away, as has every other sanctioning body.

#1195 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • Member

  • 7,465 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 13 May 2013 - 22:10

Thoughts on Derrick Walker become the series' president of operations and competition after Indy?

http://www.autosport...t.php/id/107414

I was always a fan of Walker Racing. I loved the Valvoline colours and Gil de Ferran was one of my favourite drivers. But I don't know that much about the man himself.

#1196 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,105 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 13 May 2013 - 23:56

Was a Penske guy before starting his own team. But after that seem to be a part of the small team brigade of CART/IndyCar, running a team that never really became a top team, and since working with the Falken Tire team in ALMS, and as team manager with Ed Carpenter's team. Solid move by IndyCar in my opinion. A team owner who never was one to be outspoken to the best of my knowledge, but seemed to be likes by all across the board.

Another person to put their foot in at the office of the management of IndyCar though. And another guy who isn't part of the Hulman & Co. mafia.

#1197 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 4,058 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 14 May 2013 - 02:09

How is dramatically increased costs and significantly worse racing going to help? The reality is that the series is still near death, and it will take a long time to get ratings and fan awareness back up. You can't do that without highlight reel worthy racing. No one is going to suddenly put IndyCar on the 6 o'clock news because suddenly they have a pair of body kits. Nor are the body kits innovative.

How much will the kits cost? Should the team owners have to fork out for them when it's already a genuine struggle to field cars? How will it affect the racing? If it results in an aerodynamic war and the tedious racing of the late 1990s or F1 (since forever) then how is it a move forward?

If you want innovation, that's fine, but you won't find that in racing. The rules are too restrictive in all series, and racing has little to offer street cars in terms of viable solutions. Modern street cars are more advanced and require more extreme solutions. IndyCar had the choice of innovation with the DeltaWing rules set. They looked away, as has every other sanctioning body.


Gosh I wish I had a crystal ball too. :rolleyes:

The series has been in the same state for 15 years. The racing has always been good but that single fact has not been enough to increase viewership. The series has been near death for the past decade and the formula you are content to continue with is a major part of the problem, yet you think more of the same is the answer? Based on what? Certainly not past success.

The body kits are supposed to be low cost modifications and they aren't mandatory. Teams already buy a car with a kit, a Dallara kit. No one is making them switch to an additional aero kit.

A lot of people are happy with spec cars. I am sure IROC races with everyone in a Camaro were thrilling to you but IndyCar (operative phrase is Indy) should be about speed and innovation not about 10 year old spec cars.



#1198 Lemnpiper

Lemnpiper
  • Member

  • 779 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 14 May 2013 - 02:45

Gosh I wish I had a crystal ball too. :rolleyes:

The series has been in the same state for 15 years. The racing has always been good but that single fact has not been enough to increase viewership. The series has been near death for the past decade and the formula you are content to continue with is a major part of the problem, yet you think more of the same is the answer? Based on what? Certainly not past success.

A lot of people are happy with spec cars. I am sure IROC races with everyone in a Camaro were thrilling to you but IndyCar (operative phrase is Indy) should be about speed and innovation not about 10 year old spec cars.



In fact nascar is as 'spec" as IROC ever was when you consider how many team buy pre fab parts for vtheir race cars from outside suppliers. That alone kills off a lot of inovation.


As for Indy car the basic design with wings started in the late 1960s/early 1970s and while it made Indycar more faster than nascar on tracks both race on , those very higher speeds removed innovation from indy car too the point the Tracks changed more (wider aprons , SAFER walls etc) than the cars have.
This may have resulted in fans becoming jaded, and once long time favorite drivers left and by not aquiring new favslong time fan tended to drift away from the sport for the most part and not be replaced with new fans willing to stick with the sport.

What can the powers that be do.

Even i dont think "spec" is the way to go , but if it contains costs even a little bit it might be the only option.
As we know Speed takes money, how fast you wanna go depends on the money as well.

It is even possible to build a complete Indy car for under 100 k now that could be competitive at a lap speed of 180 mph at Indy? 170 mph?


Paul

#1199 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 4,058 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 14 May 2013 - 10:20

In fact nascar is as 'spec" as IROC ever was when you consider how many team buy pre fab parts for vtheir race cars from outside suppliers. That alone kills off a lot of inovation.


As for Indy car the basic design with wings started in the late 1960s/early 1970s and while it made Indycar more faster than nascar on tracks both race on , those very higher speeds removed innovation from indy car too the point the Tracks changed more (wider aprons , SAFER walls etc) than the cars have.
This may have resulted in fans becoming jaded, and once long time favorite drivers left and by not aquiring new favslong time fan tended to drift away from the sport for the most part and not be replaced with new fans willing to stick with the sport.

What can the powers that be do.

Even i dont think "spec" is the way to go , but if it contains costs even a little bit it might be the only option.
As we know Speed takes money, how fast you wanna go depends on the money as well.

It is even possible to build a complete Indy car for under 100 k now that could be competitive at a lap speed of 180 mph at Indy? 170 mph?


Paul


I think my beef is that when someone looked like they might "do" something, they gave him a pink slip. Now they are poised to do nothing.

It seems to me they are more worried about what band is going to play at Carb Day and having a zip line at the track.

I would rather see someone take some chances.



Advertisement

#1200 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 549 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 14 May 2013 - 13:43

Gosh I wish I had a crystal ball too. :rolleyes:

The series has been in the same state for 15 years. The racing has always been good but that single fact has not been enough to increase viewership. The series has been near death for the past decade and the formula you are content to continue with is a major part of the problem, yet you think more of the same is the answer? Based on what? Certainly not past success.

The body kits are supposed to be low cost modifications and they aren't mandatory. Teams already buy a car with a kit, a Dallara kit. No one is making them switch to an additional aero kit.

A lot of people are happy with spec cars. I am sure IROC races with everyone in a Camaro were thrilling to you but IndyCar (operative phrase is Indy) should be about speed and innovation not about 10 year old spec cars.

I don't like spec cars, but I also know that the casual fan doesn't care that much. We, the hard core are the only ones that notice. But exactly how does one pay for innovation? New parts cost money that most teams don't have. More to the point, what happens if either the Chevy or Honda kit proves to be significantly better? The current balance and close racing is gone for what benefit? The other manufacturer will either demand to spend more money and carete a new kit, or lose interest in the series as the costs exceed the benefits. The uncompetitive teams will also have to buy another "updated" kit when that comes. Where will that money come from? This isn't a series with cash to burn and most teams are quite marginal.

Or are you suggesting that all the kits be checked in a wind tunnel to ensure aerodynamic "parity"? If so, how innovative is that?

How much innovation do you want, and how much can the teams afford to pay for? How much interest will come from the general public for this "innovation"? I know all we're doing is kvetching on an internet forum, but these are serious questions for the series, and the answers have very a significant impact on its financial health.

Edited by juicy sushi, 14 May 2013 - 13:44.