F1technical.net

I really wish we could get a real decision about this so everyone can stop holding their breath or developing stuff they know has the risk of being throw away. I anticipate a huge drop in lap times on the road courses and I think it gives the series credibility to be top tier performers.

gixxer_drew wrote:I really wish we could get a real decision about this so everyone can stop holding their breath or developing stuff they know has the risk of being throw away. I anticipate a huge drop in lap times on the road courses and I think it gives the series credibility to be top tier performers.

The most ironic thing about IndyCar and one of the biggest reasons why it's being held back is that the series has too much political instability and too much on track stability.

What I mean is there's always constantly a fight in management on what to do, which direction to take, and the CART v. IRL fight is still very much there in spirit. IRL thinkers like spec racers, prefers if things were cheaper while CART... well they basically want to go back to the old CART formula of multiple chassis or aero configurations with more road courses than ovals.

What ends up happening is that all this in-fighting results in is more things being talked about than done and that results in the teams eventually getting satisfied with just running spec cars for decades at a time to "save money" and "be stable".

I hope IndyCar decides to finally start evolving more. The DW12 is a good spec car for a spec series even if it's ugly. IndyCar can't be just that forever and it's the complacency of the management to just be a spec series that has made IndyCar in the 2000 fallen to such depths.

Since F1 moved to NBC, my wife and I have actually watched an IndyCar race or two. She likes seeing a woman driver being up near the sharp end of the field, but could care less about whether the chassis is ugly or whether it is oval ready. We wouldn't watch an oval race under any circumstances anyway, even if it featured Danica Patrick driving backwards while stark naked.

No series can long afford to ignore the interests of 50% of its potential audience. Are you listening, F1?

Personally, I enjoy watching Hinchcliffe race. I respect a driver who can climb into any car and be quick, as opposed to those one trick pony prima donnas in Formula One.

MOWOG wrote:Since F1 moved to NBC, my wife and I have actually watched an IndyCar race or two. She likes seeing a woman driver being up near the sharp end of the field, but could care less about whether the chassis is ugly or whether it is oval ready. We wouldn't watch an oval race under any circumstances anyway, even if it featured Danica Patrick driving backwards while stark naked.

That's a shame, you'll miss Will Power sucking immensely at it and losing the entire championship because of it LOL.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8otRz0bJ1OE[/youtube]

Seriously speaking however, there's only a handful of oval races currently so Indy's pretty open to those who dislike oval racing

MOWOG wrote:
Personally, I enjoy watching Hinchcliffe race. I respect a driver who can climb into any car and be quick, as opposed to those one trick pony prima donnas in Formula One.

Great personality to boot as well! Simona's been doing well because this is actually the first year where she's in a proper team. The past 2 seasons she's been in the williams of IndyCar basically so she's still a little rough around the edges but she can really race unlike Danica.

http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/ ... -bad-idea/

I'm a little bit disapointed with this...

Sombrero wrote:http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/ ... -bad-idea/

I'm a little bit disapointed with this...

I think it's fine that IndyCar maintains some kind of oval heritage. I mean the current it's part of what makes indycar not a copy of European open wheel series.

Also the Sao Paulo race was quite amazing. I seriously suggest any motorsport fan to check this past weekend's race out. The only issue is the amount of cautions which, admittedly is a flaw, but the nature of the track and the tracks that IndyCar races at don't usually allow for quick clean ups like in F1 with a lot of run off and convenient stop locations. You can say that IndyCar still races on some really old fashioned tracks just with modern safety features and that means a lot of cautions.

but...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO1VSL0geZU[/youtube]

I totally agree about the ovals and their heritage. The best racing with big cars, sprint cars and midget on DIRT or on paved road on small ovals or superspeedways. I remember reading about the 500 mile races at Indy, at Ontario (CAL) and Pocono in the early 70s. It was all magical : great cars, great drivers, great tracks...

Were the ground effect cars a good thing for the racing on ovals ? Probably not : too much speed, too easily and far too expensive.

Indy 500 race replay

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkCsk_HwU6U[/youtube]

This weekend had a double header race at Detroit. Here are the two races

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwTLgu3WsKg[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOdkHoEV-Bg[/youtube]

Oh, they are still refueling?
Very nice, I think i should follow this series more then.

This weekend had a double header race at Detroit.

And much as it pains me to say so, it was very amateurish.
How many unforced errors?...How many first lap incidents?

Watched the first race, it was quite amusing to watch, drivers were actually racing.

strad wrote:

This weekend had a double header race at Detroit.

And much as it pains me to say so, it was very amateurish.
How many unforced errors?...How many first lap incidents?

On the surface, a correct statement. But almost all the mayhem happened on Sunday, while Saturday was much more crash-free. There is a reason, on Saturday the track was green and very low on traction. As well, the drivers did not feel any need to push hard, they had the next day to make up for any shortcomings. On Sunday it was do-or-die, the big names in Detroit were there, and the aggression level was much higher.

That being said, I watched both races, and in the middle of the race on Sunday, while I watched the cars battling fiercly nose to tail,I wondered to myself... if they can stage such battles in Indycar, why can't they do it in Formula One?

There were some very intense battles and amazing passing attempts, and the race was very exciting and entertaining.

I'm sorry,,,Yes there was some good racing,,,interspersed with some embarrassingly........well you get the idea. I don't won't to dwell on it.
I just thought, and I did watch both days, they had a number of errors. That track does get treacherous narrow in places.

I'm glad some of you found it enjoying. Despite being a huge IndyCar fan I have to admit the series is far from perfect and there's a handful of drivers who sometimes dive bombs more than they pass. For me, I watch both F1 and IndyCar, I personally dont think they should be mutually exclusive as there's things I love about IndyCar that I dont see in F1 but F1's professionalism and talent level is just top of the world.

Although I do have a suggestion to those new to IndyCar and who are used to F1. When an F1 car stalls or crash the way the tracks are designed lend it to be cleaned away easily without needing a full course caution. IndyCar tracks are still very "old school". Indy's street courses are still very much "ahhh just close the roads and let them race... no need runoffs". So because of this sometimes when a car stalls it requires the track to go full course yellow.

Which... very easily leads to Lap 1 pile-ups especially on such a narrow, bumpy, and old fashioned tracks. The Detroit Belle Isle circuit is a huge far cry from Singapore or Valencia.