F1technical.net

Dario left for nascar due to the old dullara,s taking flight and called them unsafe quess the fixxered them ?

Walker implements upgrades to the DW12, the league just doesn't get it this is what you get with Dulllara making cheap cars, this car flying wasn't suppose to happen, and now they blame the FIA , this car never meet FIA standards,

Anyone knows that with an open wheel car wheels can touch and can cause the car to be launched into the air.

If you ask me, Dallara did a good job in trying to solve the problems, cars going airborne have become much less of a problem iic. As long as the cars are open wheel, you can never fully prevent an event where a car takes off due to contact with the wheels.

the car has been unsafe since it's inception they had to 1st put in 40lbs of lead in the nose to keep it from swapping ends now the fiasco's of Houston and fontana, they wanted a cheap car they got it, just as the previous car was unsafe now way in hell the DW12 meet FIA standards it's a crock of do do, they want wheel to wheel racing now with the bumper car they THE IRL do not get it

Yes, I know about the lead nose thingy, and I'm no fan of it either.

But please, could you post me something to back your story up? Because as far as I see it, the car is cheaper, handles better overall and safer than previous IndyCar chassis.

Also, I don't see how a car that took off in a wheel to wheel accident proves that it doesn't meet FIA standards.

wesley123 wrote:Yes, I know about the lead nose thingy, and I'm no fan of it either.

But please, could you post me something to back your story up? Because as far as I see it, the car is cheaper, handles better overall and safer than previous IndyCar chassis.

Also, I don't see how a car that took off in a wheel to wheel accident proves that it doesn't meet FIA standards.

I think he means overall the car doesnt meat the FIA regulations or standards.

cossie wrote:the car has been unsafe since it's inception they had to 1st put in 40lbs of lead in the nose to keep it from swapping ends now the fiasco's of Houston and fontana, they wanted a cheap car they got it, just as the previous car was unsafe now way in hell the DW12 meet FIA standards it's a crock of do do, they want wheel to wheel racing now with the bumper car they THE IRL do not get it

Good to see there are still a lot of disappointed chimpcar fan. The DW12 meet all the FIA's standards, just like the previous cars. The problem is the crappy street courses.

Huntresa wrote:

wesley123 wrote:Yes, I know about the lead nose thingy, and I'm no fan of it either.

But please, could you post me something to back your story up? Because as far as I see it, the car is cheaper, handles better overall and safer than previous IndyCar chassis.

Also, I don't see how a car that took off in a wheel to wheel accident proves that it doesn't meet FIA standards.

I think he means overall the car doesnt meat the FIA regulations or standards.

Yep, I know what he meant. But would love to see what sources there are to claim so. A car taking off in a wheel to wheel accident proves nothing, that is just basic physics

lizardfolk wrote:Had Franchitti not been involved in 3 previous back injuring shunts in both NASCAR and IndyCar he wouldn't have had to retire from that accident.

You have nothing to back that up, but whatever, it's beside the point. The speed that crashes happen in Indycar means there is far, far more energy in them than there is in a NASCAR crash, as spectacular as they look sometimes. That should be obvious to be honest.

It never ceases to amaze me how closed minded some can be. It's obvious you dont follow ALMS, IndyCar, or NASCAR (judging by your ignorance of Franchitti's injuries in NASCAR).

I'm afraid talking about other racing series, which have their own problems, will not help you here. Squirming by saying "Oh, look at this it's just as bad!" isn't a comeback. It's Indycar that is having the most serious accidents.

So tell me. On such little information and Franchitti needing to retire from the wreck he had at Houston you've decided to condemn IndyCar, the Houston track, and... essentially... any track with a concrete surface?

I don't condemn purely on Franchitti's accident, or the track surface at Houston. I condemn it on a succession of accidents and problems over many, many, many, many years. Nothing was clearly done after Dan Wheldon's death. But, we'll get another bad crash, and then another fatality and you'll continue to tell us Indycar has no problems no doubt.

I'm afraid I'm not taking these accidents in isolation as you oh so desperately want to imply I'm doing and want to see with those rose tinted glasses.

wesley123 wrote:But please, could you post me something to back your story up? Because as far as I see it, the car is cheaper, handles better overall and safer than previous IndyCar chassis.

That's not a ringing endorsement of an Indycar chassis.

Indycar has become a salutary lesson as to what happens when you have a standardised series with a standardised chassis that isn't being developed out of racing competition but out of a chassis builder's 'idea' of what happens at the kind of speeds they are doing. What's also dangerous is that the aerodynamic understanding of the car isn't improving, especially when the car is racing closely and where contact is made, nor do I think Indycar's are producing enough downforce for the speeds they are doing. Formula 1 needs to take note as to what direction it goes in.

Goodness knows what Robert Kubica's accident at Canada a few years ago would have looked like with an Indycar.

munudeges wrote:

wesley123 wrote:But please, could you post me something to back your story up? Because as far as I see it, the car is cheaper, handles better overall and safer than previous IndyCar chassis.

That's not a ringing endorsement of an Indycar chassis.

Indycar has become a salutary lesson as to what happens when you have a standardised series with a standardised chassis that isn't being developed out of racing competition but out of a chassis builder's 'idea' of what happens at the kind of speeds they are doing. What's also dangerous is that the aerodynamic understanding of the car isn't improving, especially when the car is racing closely and where contact is made, nor do I think Indycar's are producing enough downforce for the speeds they are doing. Formula 1 needs to take note as to what direction it goes in.

Goodness knows what Robert Kubica's accident at Canada a few years ago would have looked like with an Indycar.

Not enough downforce for the speeds they're traveling? What do you want? Restrictor-plate racing? That's definitely what you'll get if you increase downforce in indycars. I bet even JT isn't particularly fond of plate racing.

Also to Seg: to paraphrase, you said " At the speed indycars are traveling they have a lot more energy than Nascars". That's essentially only true in the center of the corner. I saw Nascars over 210 mph plenty of times this season.

munudeges wrote: The speed that crashes happen in Indycar means there is far, far more energy in them than there is in a NASCAR crash, as spectacular as they look sometimes. That should be obvious to be honest.

What? On oval courses, the speeds are not that different, and a stock car weighs about twice as much.

munudeges wrote: I'm afraid talking about other racing series, which have their own problems, will not help you here. Squirming by saying "Oh, look at this it's just as bad!" isn't a comeback. It's Indycar that is having the most serious accidents.

You understand that I'm agreeing with you that the IR07 was a POS chassis right? The IR07 has a bad history of injuring drivers on high speed oval wrecks. Had Franchitti not had the history of his wrecks with the IR07 he wouldn't have had to retire from that Houston wreck. That's my fricking point.

You seem to not be able to distinguish between the IR07 and DW12

munudeges wrote: Nothing was clearly done after Dan Wheldon's death. But, we'll get another bad crash, and then another fatality and you'll continue to tell us Indycar has no problems no doubt.

Really? Nothing was done? So the DW12 is basically the same chassis as the IR07 right?... Oh and I suppose we still have pack racing on the ovals as well? Enlighten me. Tell me how these changes still make IndyCar as dangerous as the IRL years of the 2000s?

munudeges wrote: I'm afraid I'm not taking these accidents in isolation as you oh so desperately want to imply I'm doing and want to see with those rose tinted glasses.

An accident in the IR07 is not the same as an accident in the DW12

munudeges wrote: Goodness knows what Robert Kubica's accident at Canada a few years ago would have looked like with an Indycar.

Uhhh... actually we already do know. Kenny Brack survived this:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVpux5JxqEk[/youtube]

And this was with the IR03 chassis. And the DW12 is by far a step up from the IRL chassis that's for sure.

munudeges wrote: What's also dangerous is that the aerodynamic understanding of the car isn't improving, especially when the car is racing closely and where contact is made,

I have proof this is wrong. The DW12 has produced faster lap times on both ovals and road courses than the IR07. What is your proof that "the aerodynamic understanding of the car isn't improving"?

Pierce89 wrote:Also to Seg: to paraphrase, you said " At the speed indycars are traveling they have a lot more energy than Nascars". That's essentially only true in the center of the corner. I saw Nascars over 210 mph plenty of times this season.

Same... this guy obviously knows nothing about NASCAR or IndyCar or oval racing period and yet he still claims to be the expert...

munudeges wrote:nor do I think Indycar's are producing enough downforce for the speeds they are doing..

You have lost absolutely all credibility having any opinion on IndyCar with this kind of ludicrous statement. What... do you want pack racing to return to IndyCar? You understand that IndyCar abolished pack racing to make it safer on the ovals right? Know what? Why don't you just give it up. You clearly have very little understanding of what you're commenting on

BoomBoom wrote:

cossie wrote:the car has been unsafe since it's inception they had to 1st put in 40lbs of lead in the nose to keep it from swapping ends now the fiasco's of Houston and fontana, they wanted a cheap car they got it, just as the previous car was unsafe now way in hell the DW12 meet FIA standards it's a crock of do do, they want wheel to wheel racing now with the bumper car they THE IRL do not get it

Good to see there are still a lot of disappointed chimpcar fan. The DW12 meet all the FIA's standards, just like the previous cars. The problem is the crappy street courses.

I am a former ChampCar fan.

Any ChampCar fan who is still sour grapes at the merger is deluded. The current ICS is more CART than IRL. Sure the Hulman gang is still in control of the series. But the series has gone so far from the IRL grassroots idea. Think about it.

1. Minimal ovals, mostly street courses and road courses.
2. Miles wants more international races and is actively pursuing South American and Asian/Pacific venues
3. Cars are gradually going to no longer be spec with aerokits.
4. The IRL stable of high downforce pack racing is long gone
5. The DW12 is a car designed to try to find a happy medium between ovals and road courses rather than the IRL method of designing an oval open wheeler and trying to adapt it for road courses.

If this doesn't scream the current IndyCar series swinging more towards CART then I don't know what will. If anything former IRL fans are unhappy with the current series. Any former CART fan who still has a grudge against the ICS needs to wake up.

cossie wrote:they THE IRL do not get it

Cossie... the IRL doesn't exist anymore.