Round 3: Toyota Grand Prix of Long Beach, 15th-17th April.

[rwintle]

Some thoughts:

Graham Rahal also commented in his post-race interview about the downforce and how the original DW12 was a better car to race. Interesting to hear that echoed by Power.

Chip Ganassi was very diplomatic about the penalty, although I'm sure his tongue was firmly in his cheek when he said he was going to talk to the stewards and that he "might learn something".

I'm convinced, based on watching other pit exits, that had Pagenaud gone that extra foot or whatever before turning in, he would have lost the lead. But of course we'll never know. I tend to agree with PT on this one - if there's a rule, enforce it. They could simply have told him to surrender the place to Dixon, which would maybe have seemed cruel, but a lot less so than, say, a drive through.

Otherwise - pretty terrible coverage. No replay or discussion of the contact on lap 1 that sent bodywork flying. Coverage of RHR under pressure, then yapping about something else *while RHR was passed by two cars in the background*. Never discussed. Etc., etc., etc.

So - conclusions? I dunno. It was a race. I do agree with various drivers who all said that it would be better if a bit longer to force a three-stopper and get rid of all the fuel saving. I like Pagenaud but I still don't feel that win should have been his. Ah well. IndyCar will IndyCar, I suppose.

[Nikki Katz]

well, that was a mess. Are race control unable to do anything right? It's a shame that it seems impossible to overtake without the push to pass now.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Nikki Katz

well, that was a mess. Are race control unable to do anything right? It's a shame that it seems impossible to overtake without the push to pass now.

With increased aero, the car produces more drag and turbulence. Push to Pass is IndyCar's equivalent of DRS but its use is limited.

I hope there's a rethink on aero-kits but I won't hold my breath.

[Purist]

The Series NEEDED to do something to make the Hondas and Chevys "look different from one another". I'd have to go back and watch the last few Long Beach races to give much of a verdict on the racing, if there is one.

It sounds like this race may have been like some at Mid Ohio, where the leader, or front few, took off, but there was good action further back. However, it sounds like the TV coverage did not do a great job of showing that action through the field.

The DW12 is pretty draggy either way. And even though the power is up to similar levels compared to the Cosworth XFE, I'm not so sure that the current lumps make as much torque. In any case, with all that drag, these cars CAN'T top out at the speeds we saw with the Champ Cars, and they don't seem to have the same sort of punch on corner exit.

This is a particular issue at Long Beach, where the main stretch is preceded by a very slow corner. You're going from 30-mph up to 180-mph. If you're right on the guy's tail at the apex of the hairpin, a fixed time gap will see you with a five-length gap to the guy in front (a six-length time gap) at the far end of Shoreline. In other words, you have to make up a fair bit of ground on the leader in the course of the straight to be able to have a go.

Furthermore, on the aero front, most of the corners at Long Beach aren't fast enough to have a drastic impact. That is, you're not going quickly enough to be that aero-dependent, or for the wash off the guy in front to be that strong. Turn 10 is probably the fastest, and I don't see the drivers having serious problems following one another closely through that corner.

Maybe try reading this description I gave in the "My Track Designs" section:
http://tentenths.com/forum/showpost....1&postcount=28

Now, as for Pagenaud, yes, a position swap ordered by Race Control would have been appropriate for his pit-exit violation. (And believe me, I'm a Penske guy, and no team has bugged me more, at times, in CART/IRL/IndyCar than Ganassi. I still think the Penske driver should have gotten a "real" penalty yesterday.)

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I hope there's a rethink on aero-kits but I won't hold my breath.

You would think long term yes - however short term what can they do?

On one hand we want separation, differentiation and innovation but then on the other hand when they lead a performance advantage.

Overlay that with cost control and we are in a perennial stalemate.

[icemachine]

If Honda wants to win they ought to do a better job on the engineering. What the hell do they think this is, kids soccer where they don't count goals?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Purist

The Series NEEDED to do something to make the Hondas and Chevys "look different from one another". I'd have to go back and watch the last few Long Beach races to give much of a verdict on the racing, if there is one.

It sounds like this race may have been like some at Mid Ohio, where the leader, or front few, took off, but there was good action further back. However, it sounds like the TV coverage did not do a great job of showing that action through the field.

The DW12 is pretty draggy either way. And even though the power is up to similar levels compared to the Cosworth XFE, I'm not so sure that the current lumps make as much torque. In any case, with all that drag, these cars CAN'T top out at the speeds we saw with the Champ Cars, and they don't seem to have the same sort of punch on corner exit.

This is a particular issue at Long Beach, where the main stretch is preceded by a very slow corner. You're going from 30-mph up to 180-mph. If you're right on the guy's tail at the apex of the hairpin, a fixed time gap will see you with a five-length gap to the guy in front (a six-length time gap) at the far end of Shoreline. In other words, you have to make up a fair bit of ground on the leader in the course of the straight to be able to have a go.

Furthermore, on the aero front, most of the corners at Long Beach aren't fast enough to have a drastic impact. That is, you're not going quickly enough to be that aero-dependent, or for the wash off the guy in front to be that strong. Turn 10 is probably the fastest, and I don't see the drivers having serious problems following one another closely through that corner.

Maybe try reading this description I gave in the "My Track Designs" section:
http://tentenths.com/forum/showpost....1&postcount=28

Now, as for Pagenaud, yes, a position swap ordered by Race Control would have been appropriate for his pit-exit violation. (And believe me, I'm a Penske guy, and no team has bugged me more, at times, in CART/IRL/IndyCar than Ganassi. I still think the Penske driver should have gotten a "real" penalty yesterday.)

I agree, the series did need to differentiate between Chevy and Honda. However, since the introduction of aero-kits a number of drivers have said the changes to the car have not had a particularly positive effect on the racing and Will Power's comments after yesterday's race echo that.

The current DW12 is certainly more draggy than the original DW12 because of the aero-kits and the modification to the undertray. I don't know either if the current engines produce as much torque compared to the XFE but Hélio Castroneves was able to break Sébastien Bourdais' 9 year old lap record of Long Beach last year and Bourdais set that in a DP01-Cosworth XFE.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

You would think long term yes - however short term what can they do?

On one hand we want separation, differentiation and innovation but then on the other hand when they lead a performance advantage.

Overlay that with cost control and we are in a perennial stalemate.

I said I wouldn't hold my breath because I can see IndyCar dragging their feet over this but in the short term they can do something about it; reduce the amount of downforce created by the aero-kits.

Drivers raised concerns at Phoenix about the speeds the cars were doing because of the downforce being generated. IndyCar needs to listen to the drivers and also allow for short term changes to be made. After those airborne incidents at Indy last year. the cars had to qualify in racing trim, so they make short term changes if they have to.

[D.R.T.]

On ovals absolutely - remember Indycar has been playing oval downforce since 2012. Well before the introduction of aero kits.

On road and street courses how much change can they implement outside of redesigning the current aero kits which isn't going to happen

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

On ovals absolutely - remember Indycar has been playing oval downforce since 2012. Well before the introduction of aero kits.

On road and street courses how much change can they implement outside of redesigning the current aero kits which isn't going to happen

During the recent off season, Chevy and Honda were allowed to make further updates to their aero-kits. How this has impacted on road/street course races, I think is too early to say. So it it will be interesting to see how the updates impact on the racing at Barber. Last year's race was excellent.

They wouldn't have to redesign the current aero-kits, they could revert to the 2015 designs but that would probably rankle because of the time and money spent on the 2016 upgrades. So in that respect you're probably right, it won't happen. Not this season anyway.

[Purist]

There wasn't a consensus among the drivers about the downforce level at Phoenix. Since it was a mixed bag at the test, IndyCar decided to leave it be.

The speed or downforce in and of itself is not the issue at Phoenix; it's more a matter that they need multiple, viable lines through the corners there. At Phoenix, I suspect even the default DW12 is just too draggy to allow for a great deal of speed differential between the end of the straight and corner apex.

Even if you lower downforce a bit, the speed differential over the field still isn't that much; that differential is what led to those wild fights for position among the leaders as they were trying to negotiate traffic on the one-milers. And even then, there were plenty of those races in years/decades past that were blowouts for the winner anyway.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Purist

There wasn't a consensus among the drivers about the downforce level at Phoenix. Since it was a mixed bag at the test, IndyCar decided to leave it be.

The speed or downforce in and of itself is not the issue at Phoenix; it's more a matter that they need multiple, viable lines through the corners there. At Phoenix, I suspect even the default DW12 is just too draggy to allow for a great deal of speed differential between the end of the straight and corner apex.

Even if you lower downforce a bit, the speed differential over the field still isn't that much; that differential is what led to those wild fights for position among the leaders as they were trying to negotiate traffic on the one-milers. And even then, there were plenty of those races in years/decades past that were blowouts for the winner anyway.

If the issue at Phoenix is more of a matter of multiple, viable lines through the corners, rather than too much downforce, how did this year's race compare to the 2005 race?

The original DW12 had a ground effect undertray. The current DW12 is certainly more draggy than the original DW12 because of the aero-kits and the modification to the undertray.

[Purist]

It wasn't all that different in 2005. With cars of similar speed, it's tough. If they cut down on you, you usually have to back out of it, and lose a fair bit of ground and momentum. Apart from the start and restarts, if you try to go high, you might be able to sit out there, but probably can't go anywhere.

In 2005, you were also dealing with the old track configuration, and the previous car. That car may have had less drag overall, though it was still pretty draggy, but you only had ~600-hp back then. The current cars have ~750-hp. The new cars have more surfaces, and likely drag because of that. Then again, I suspect with some of those spaces filled in, the newer cars may make less separation drag than the old cars.

Like I thought, most of the passing at Phoenix in 2005 came about in one of two ways. Either they pulled a Ryan Hunter-Reay around the outside on the start or restarts, like Tony Kanaan did off the initial start in '05, or substantially slower, lapped traffic stirred things up. And I mean like multiple seconds a lap slower, not just a few to a handful of tenths of a second slower.

The old cars were both draggy and relatively anemic on power. The current cars have good power, but produce more drag than might be desirable. And I'm quite certain that they could produce the downforce they make now significantly more efficiently, if they were allowed to. Your L/D can vary substantially when you have the design freedom to work on it.

I get the sense that the default drag may just be too high, regardless of downforce level, on some of these "in between" tracks. I'd like to see Texas run with a bit more downforce than they have had the last few years, to see how it works there. These ovals that drive like a somewhat larger track, but don't actually have the length in the straights for the slipstream to do much, are really tricky to get right.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Purist

It wasn't all that different in 2005. With cars of similar speed, it's tough. If they cut down on you, you usually have to back out of it, and lose a fair bit of ground and momentum. Apart from the start and restarts, if you try to go high, you might be able to sit out there, but probably can't go anywhere.

In 2005, you were also dealing with the old track configuration, and the previous car. That car may have had less drag overall, though it was still pretty draggy, but you only had ~600-hp back then. The current cars have ~750-hp. The new cars have more surfaces, and likely drag because of that. Then again, I suspect with some of those spaces filled in, the newer cars may make less separation drag than the old cars.

Like I thought, most of the passing at Phoenix in 2005 came about in one of two ways. Either they pulled a Ryan Hunter-Reay around the outside on the start or restarts, like Tony Kanaan did off the initial start in '05, or substantially slower, lapped traffic stirred things up. And I mean like multiple seconds a lap slower, not just a few to a handful of tenths of a second slower.

The old cars were both draggy and relatively anemic on power. The current cars have good power, but produce more drag than might be desirable. And I'm quite certain that they could produce the downforce they make now significantly more efficiently, if they were allowed to. Your L/D can vary substantially when you have the design freedom to work on it.

I get the sense that the default drag may just be too high, regardless of downforce level, on some of these "in between" tracks. I'd like to see Texas run with a bit more downforce than they have had the last few years, to see how it works there. These ovals that drive like a somewhat larger track, but don't actually have the length in the straights for the slipstream to do much, are really tricky to get right.

Thanks very much for that. So not much difference then between 2016 and 2005. I wonder how much of a difference there was in 1995/6, which was the last time ground effect cars raced there?

The current DW12 is very draggy. Once a car relies on wings to generate downforce the drag coefficient goes up. I don't think a lack of design freedom is the problem, rather it was a balancing act with safety at the centre. No one wanted to have the DW12’s stock suspension buckle under the downforce generated by the new 2015 aero-kits and many team owners objected to spending money on aero-kits, which would then require them to purchase stronger chassis components to better cope with the added downforce.

Both manufacturers had already undertaken very different approaches to their aero-kit development and had already begun production on certain aero-kit components. However, just prior to initial aero-kit testing, IndyCar made a pre-emptive move on safety grounds and introduced holes on both sides of the floor next to the sidepod radiator inlets, in anticipation of increased downforce numbers. Once the figures came back from early aero-kit testing, IndyCar thought a second round of reductions would be required and Chevy and Honda were instructed to remove the diffuser strakes from the new Dallara floor and to pull both diffuser sidewalls, bringing the total reduction in downforce from the undertray to something like 700 pounds. This then required a significant re-working of their aero-kits to function with less underbody downforce and increased drag.

It's a shame IndyCar 'interfered' and didn't let Chevy and Honda continue with their respective designs. As the DW12 was essentially a ground effect car, we would have seen something different to what we have now.

[Purist]

I've watched the first 70+ laps of the 1995 Phoenix race for CART, and again, most of the passing comes because of "speed-challenged" traffic.

Now, if you had a car that was set up well, it was possible to make an outside move on open track. However, this has long been difficult, even back when Teo Fabi did it to Mario Andretti in the early laps of the 1983 season finale.

The CART machines made less drag, and also had 800+hp at their disposal. Losing momentum could be counteracted more readily, and you didn't hit a veritable brick wall of air trying to use the outside line through the corners.

I wasn't talking about Coefficient of Drag in my last post, but about how much Lift (upside-down lift is downforce) is made relative to how much Drag is produced. An efficient formula car can have an L/D in the neighborhood of 4.0:1. So, you'd get 4,000lb of downforce with a penalty of 1,000lb of drag. I'm pretty darn sure that the current Dallara isn't that good.

BTW, when you said 700lb of downforce taken from the undertray, do you have any idea about at what speed that would be for? If it's 700lb at 200-mph, that's one thing. If it's 700lb at 150-mph, that would correspond to almost 1,250lb of lost downforce at 200-mph.

And ground-effect cars can be done well. The '90s GT1s and early LMP900s had a fairly serious, but relatively easy-to-spot design flaw, and it was rectified. The old GTP/Group C cars were generally, pretty well-behaved. Even when Chip Robinson popped a tire on his Nissan at Road Atlanta in 1992, the car didn't do anything erratic, and while the front lifted, it quickly settled back down.

And EVERYBODY has to be realistic enough to understand that at ANY great speed, once serious contact is made with a wall or another car, just about all bets are off as to whether your carefully-arrayed safety measures are going to still work to keep the car on the ground.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

During the recent off season, Chevy and Honda were allowed to make further updates to their aero-kits. How this has impacted on road/street course races, I think is too early to say. So it it will be interesting to see how the updates impact on the racing at Barber. Last year's race was excellent.

They wouldn't have to redesign the current aero-kits, they could revert to the 2015 designs but that would probably rankle because of the time and money spent on the 2016 upgrades.

I agree it is too early to say.

The biggest aero upgrade (which would have an impact on racing and overtaking) was from 2014 to 2015. Whilst there were minor upgrades from 2015 to 2016 (which would have less of a comparative impact on racing & overtaking) - pinning a lacklustre race at Long Beach on this would be misguided.

Long Beach has had some rather straight forward races over the years - not dependent on aero upgrades

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

I agree it is too early to say.

The biggest aero upgrade (which would have an impact on racing and overtaking) was from 2014 to 2015. Whilst there were minor upgrades from 2015 to 2016 (which would have less of a comparative impact on racing & overtaking) - pinning a lacklustre race at Long Beach on this would be misguided.

Long Beach has had some rather straight forward races over the years - not dependent on aero upgrades

Aero-kits made their debut last year at St. Petes and during the recent off season further updates have been made.

I don't think anyone's pinning a lack lustre Long Beach on aero-kits but a number of drivers are questioning the effect aero-kits are having on racing in general.

Maybe it's time for the aero-kit thread.