|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
16 Mar 2008, 03:24 (Ref:2153127) | #76 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,885
|
Quote:
Today I was at Sebring and it really was quite interesting to see the different cars and engine formulas and how it all worked together quite well. By comparison, it will be next to impossible or just plain impossible for me to watch the irl with it's ugly dallara and horrible sounding honda engine. Same with Nascar. Actually the odd thing is I'm more interested in the drivers and the driver aspect of motorsport more than the cars, but if the cars are plain terrible, I can't stand to watch at all, no matter what the drivers are. |
||
__________________
Wolverines! |
16 Mar 2008, 12:01 (Ref:2153489) | #77 | |
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 108
|
I'd say put a horsepower limit of 800hp but how you get to that is entirely up to the teams. Then you'll see all sorts of different engines.
|
|
|
16 Mar 2008, 13:26 (Ref:2153622) | #78 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,073
|
The cool thing about the 12 Hour at Sebring (I watched a fair amount on the telly) was that the P2 cars used their combination of lighter weight/handling/fuel efficiency to take advantage of the "faster" P1 cars when those cars had to spend time in the pits.
Fernandez put on a heck of a show late, but I digress... To my way of thinking, this is what IndyCar needs: some room in the rules to allow for different car types and different strategies. More displacement gets more drag/weight; less displacement gets less drag/weight - or something. If the point is to "save money" by making your top-tier racing series a spec series, then what is the point to having the series at all when everything from formula Ford to Atlantic is a spec series as well? |
||
__________________
"He's still a young guy and I always think, slightly morbidly, the last thing you learn is how to die and at the end of the day everybody learns every single day." - The Ever-Cheerfull Ron Dennis on Lewis Hamilton. |
26 Mar 2008, 21:44 (Ref:2162453) | #79 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,892
|
I do very much agree with having variety.
I thought though, that I would point something out. The economic argument is at least two-fold. There is of course the concern to keep costs in check so you have a series that is affordable to enough competitors to make a decent grid. The other portion is perhaps even more problematic however. Sponsors, teams, manufacturers: they all want/demand results, and quick results at that. That's probably an even bigger challenge to overcome. We are in the era of instant access and gratification. Nobody wants to wait for their team to come up with the next innovation. No front-running sponsor is going to find it particuarly acceptable to have to run mid-pack until the team they fund sorts things out to get back to the front. On a more positive side not though, I would definitely say that what the ALMS and LMS demonstrate as far as variety is very encouraging. |
||
__________________
The only certainty is that nothing is certain. |
27 Mar 2008, 07:09 (Ref:2162725) | #80 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 493
|
I have no problems with any of the feeder series being a spec formula. That is when it is really needed to keep costs at a reasonable level to allow young drivers to compete. And as with a spec formula a large portion of your results comes down to driver ability which gives the top level an indication of what kind of driver they will be investing in.
For indycar though, there must be a way somehow to set up the rules to allow however many number of chassis manufacturers to participate. Just maybe cap it so that individual teams can't develop the car themselves. The chassis manufacturer (after consulting with their teams) has to submit developments to the league. As for engines, well set the rules and open the door to all. eg. We are going to run turbo V6 engines on ethenol, all welcome. |
||
__________________
F1 - Ricciardo, V8 - Tander and McLaughlin, Indy - Power and Briscoe, NASCAR - Ambrose, Moto GP - Parkes in 2014. |
27 Mar 2008, 17:49 (Ref:2163230) | #81 | ||
Racer
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 109
|
They need to lower the cost of competing is this series so capping the development would be a good thing. Why don't someone buy the rights for the Raynard chassis. Those chassis was good to look at and was fast as well. They was unlucky that Cart went bankrupt. For the engines they should limit it to 750hp.
|
||
|
28 Mar 2008, 07:50 (Ref:2163624) | #82 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,065
|
I like having different chassis and engines, too. But don't you also run the risk of having some select teams continually dominate? This may sound melodramatic because the IRL isn't close to this, but what I hate about Formula 1 is that every race weekend it's only a very select few teams that win. After awhile it makes for boring watching.
What I liked about Champ Car was that out of all of the racing series out there, they gave even lower-tier teams a chance to be competitive. Yes, Bourdais kept on winning championships, but teams like Rusport and Team Australia kept challenging. Having the same specs most likely fostered that competition. |
||
__________________
Cuz trucks need love, too! |
28 Mar 2008, 10:02 (Ref:2163715) | #83 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,073
|
So how cheap do we have to make it? No offense, but why not use a bunch of old Spec Renaults or Formula Super Vees?
This is supposed to be a top tier series. I would agree that the feeder series should be inexpensive to run in order to encourage the new talent coming on and get then significant seat time. If you want to keep things "equal" or "cheap" then maybe the teams should not own cars at all - the drivers could just show up and have one issued to them randomly like at a kart track. Look, part of the excitement is to see what the teams do to make their car better than the next team's cars. Levelling playing fields and keeping things cheap just takes the team aspect out of it and most importantly it dulls the competitive edge. |
||
__________________
"He's still a young guy and I always think, slightly morbidly, the last thing you learn is how to die and at the end of the day everybody learns every single day." - The Ever-Cheerfull Ron Dennis on Lewis Hamilton. |
28 Mar 2008, 13:28 (Ref:2163833) | #84 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 480
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
Don't mention JV. |
28 Mar 2008, 15:02 (Ref:2163905) | #85 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,351
|
John:
Remember what we have now are youts, even in the US who are so used to SOMEONE else picking up the bill, that they assume it not fair to force competitors to either spend what it costs or leave till they can. This is just another result, in the US of the liberal edict, everything is someone else's fault, so attack those who are capable of bucking the system. They do not fit in. Bob |
||
|
28 Mar 2008, 21:04 (Ref:2164130) | #86 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,065
|
Quote:
I know what you are saying. What is the point of having competition if everything is equal and fair? I feel that the root of competition is to face the challenges that you have and overcome them. So, in the case of the lower teams, their goal is to be as competitive if not more so than the upper teams. It's an adult league and nothing is handed to anyone. If I was the head of an upper-eschelon team, I wouldn't want to dumb-down my operations that I've worked so hard to build so that the competion can be fair. For those of us who understands racing and the spirit of competiton I am sure that we all can agree that the challenge of the lower teams are to be greater than they are. But for those casual fans, they may see things differently. BTW, I'm 27 so I may be one of those youths you're talking about! :-) |
|||
__________________
Cuz trucks need love, too! |
28 Mar 2008, 22:48 (Ref:2164202) | #87 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,892
|
You're not alone Amar. I have very much an "old school" attitude (look at my alias), and I'm only 21 years old.
|
||
__________________
The only certainty is that nothing is certain. |
29 Mar 2008, 11:26 (Ref:2164420) | #88 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,073
|
Bob, while I don't agree with you on the politics part, I definitely hear what you are saying! Not embarrassed to admit to being 50 - and so I think I have seen a thing or two in racing during that time.
When I dabbled in racing, the idea was that you would find some way to be competitive. If someone had bigger $$ at hand (and that does NOT always mean they are going to be faster!), then you had to find ways to compete. At the top levels, I want to see the best at their best. Heck, when Foyt and Mario and the Unsers were at the top of the game everyone was gunning for them. The whole grid was looking for ways to beat them. What you did not hear was talk of "leveling the playing field" or "keeping things equal" or any of that tripe. To a lot of folks, beating these guys under artificial circumstances (rules changes or spec series rules) would have been a let down. They want to beat the best at their best. Period. If you want "fair and equal" then hook up the Playstation or X-box and have at it. Me, I want to see the dominant team/driver fight to stay dominant and the teams/drivers that aren't fight to BECOME dominant. |
||
__________________
"He's still a young guy and I always think, slightly morbidly, the last thing you learn is how to die and at the end of the day everybody learns every single day." - The Ever-Cheerfull Ron Dennis on Lewis Hamilton. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Turbos vs Atmo Engines | EspritS3 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 45 | 27 Oct 2004 22:31 |
Ford wants Turbos in 2005 | macdaddy | ChampCar World Series | 36 | 12 Feb 2003 01:29 |
f1 turbos | crash | Racing Technology | 5 | 15 Nov 2000 21:26 |