2011 spec chassis and tires - official?!

[Teretonga]

It's not the specs that create the defacto situation. It is the competitiveness of the chassis.
Back in the mid 90's Lola had a bad year. everyone running reynards were fine but those with Lola's got a raw deal. Some changed because they could afford to and others got stuck with a chassis that wouldn't go....

It is safer for the teams if everyone has one chassis to run so at least they feel they are starting with the same baseline.
Hence the current de-facto situation. Only Dallara has a suitable chassis. Panoz development couldn't keep pace and they fell away. Ganassi relegated them to the road courses for a season but then Dallara development brought it up to the same level or better and Chip pensioned the Panoz off for good.

No manufacturer is going to build a car for the IRL unlesss he thinks he can sell enough to cover development costs.
No team is going to buy a chassis unless they are sure the new boy on the block is going to beat the current leader...
Supply and demand. Thats the way it is.

Penske built his own cars in the CART days but when he wasn't competitive he didn't try too long before he went and bought customer cars (March, and later Reynards) because his own brand couldn't foot it.
As long as there was an advantage the Captain justified the extra cost but with no advantage or potential advantage it wasn't effective any more.

It is no different out there now.

[indycool]

Well explained, TT. The Penske PC-10 was a good car long after its original year. Others usedd them later and were competitive. Indeed, John Paul Jr., won the Michigan 500 with one a year later. Same when the Lola went fast, everyone wanted one. When the March went fast, the same, When the Reynard went fast, the same. Even in older days, the same with the Watson roadster.

[bil588]

Official: spec Dallara chassis for 2011

9-17-2008

"The timeline for defining a spec and receiving a commitment from manufacturers to replace the workhorse Honda Indy V8, which has been the stalwart sole power plant for the IndyCar Series since 2006, remains the end of the calendar year. That would allow proper lead time for design/development and manufacturing for full-scale testing in 2010. Honda was one of the five manufacturers represented at the latest meetings in Indianapolis."

http://www.indycar.com/news/?story_id=12577

http://www.dallara.it/

I'm thinking of starting a petition for non-spec chassis.

[JohnSSC]

No offense, but the petition will achieve what if unaccompanied by $10 million to cover new chassis' to liven things up?

Seriously, I am nearly as bored with petitions as I am with spec racing. Maybe we should all go to a joint ALMS/IRL venue and then just turn our backs when the IRL cars go 'round...or something.

The point is kids that even in a spec series the "fast" teams are spending $5 million plus per car in an environment where the sponsor dollars just aren't there. Where for the love of God are they supposed to get the $$ to develop a new chassis?? I can't stand it either but there is no realistic alternative. You can write all the rules you want but with no moola you aren't going anywhere.

[climb]

Holy words John

[JohnSSC]

Thank you climb.

I am frustrated too, but the $$$ dictates the ability of the teams/series to add variety. Right now it just isn't there. Dare I say that maybe we should be happy with what we have now (considering we came within a knife edge of having nothing) and look forward to a day when we have a bit more??

Nahhh!

[indycool]

John, you have said it best: When in doubt, follow the money. If the price of racing goes up, how many people would pay $200 a ticket to watch? How much would the casual TV viewer care?

A race team will spend as many dollars as it takes in, if not on the race cars, on a new motorcoach or something. That's still the case.

[JohnSSC]

Just watch an F1 race: bazillions of $$ and what do they spend on? The cars?? No way! Trees. Cuisine. Clothing. Mobile Brand Centres.

1,000 people work for McLaren. I wonder just how many of them actually work in a car-related capacity and not PR, accounting, hospitality, arranging Ron Dennis' hair brushes, counting the trees...

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by JohnSSC

Just watch an F1 race: bazillions of $$ and what do they spend on? The cars?? No way! Trees. Cuisine. Clothing. Mobile Brand Centres.

1,000 people work for McLaren. I wonder just how many of them actually work in a car-related capacity and not PR, accounting, hospitality, arranging Ron Dennis' hair brushes, counting the trees...

Don't forget the guy that changes the light bulbs. There is actually a guy at Mclaren(I believe his name is Phil) and all he does is go around the building all day and change the lightbulbs when needed. That's his whole job, nothing more, nothing less.

[Amar7605]

But the thing is that for those teams who spend more money, what should you do with them? Do you chide them because they are able to get the funds better than other teams? Do you put spending caps on the teams? John is right - when in auto racing, it's not the specs or the regs that matter, it's the capital. Why do you think that Bourdais was so dominant in Champ Car for those four championship seasons?

[indycool]

Although salary caps for the actual athletes work pretty well with the NFL because plater contracts hafta be approved by the league, it'd be pretty easy to hide money/expenditures from a sanctioning body for all the rest of the stuff in auto racing.

[JohnSSC]

That IC, and you have to remember in Football (American and everywhere else) it is more labor than technology intensive.

With creative accounting practices, I am sure you could end up paying "Phil" six figures or have trees that cost a bazillion $$.

[bil588]

The 2011 indy car?

from 2008 Mid-Ohio race

http://www.theracesite.com/index.cfm...um=1&mag_cat=8

[johntt]

Originally Posted by bil588

The 2011 indy car?

from 2008 Mid-Ohio race

http://www.theracesite.com/index.cfm...um=1&mag_cat=8

Could be. I prefer this concept from Bruce Ashmore, albeit with less downforce (something Ashmore himself admits); http://www.gordonkirby.com/categorie..._is_no134.html

[Amar7605]

So the Ashmore design looks to be turbocharged, whereas the Mid-Ohio design looks to be naturally-aspirated.

[Teretonga]

Dallara will build a chassis to a spec and a price.
Spares will be at a mandated price. All customers will have the same pricelist.
Everyone will start at the same baseline.

A bit like NASCAR in so far as there is a limit on the technology (but this is more advanced...Unless they are going to spaceframes...)
This will surely encourage more teams to come in, providing they can source an engine deal.
This is where the costs will soar.
At the moment everyone gets a Honda 'cos thats all there are...
But if you have multiple manufacturers what will happen?
The top teams will get subsidised engines...
Others will have to buy/lease them
Some teams may struggle to get an engine....
Remember Dan Gurney had to let his CART team fold when he Toyota left CART
He couldn't get a Ford or an Illmor and Honda wouldn't do a deal with him.
Thats where the problems may occur.
If BMW or Porsche or Honda decidethey are not going to sell you an engine where do you go? TG will have to put in place some sort of system to balance it up...
If one manufacturer decides to back two teams with preferential treatment and any others pay through the nose they could dominate technically and we get the same horsepower/cost spiral we had in the 90's with CART.

The majority of the 80's had the Cosworth but when Chevrolet later Mercedes and Honda & Toyota became involved costs dramatically increased.

While I am all in favour of the new engine formula watching it play out will be interesting.

[Jonerz]

Good point Teretonga. A similar situation exists currently in the ALMS. Michelin dominate in tires supplied, so they get massive amounts of feedback and work closely with teams for factory development. If you decide to enter the series today unless you are GM, Honda, Audi, Mercedes, Toyota or some seriously big constructor, chances are you will not get a "factory" deal with Michelin. Thus, most small teams have to pay exorbitant amounts of money to get second rate tires from another manufacturer. (Though with solid testing/development this could be fixed, the second rate thing - but that is another issue altogether.) However, thought recent history (CART and I suppose the IRL as well) show that multiple engine manufacturers can result in increased costs, perhaps having a completely open rule book, allowing anyone to come in with a technically legal engine not from a contracted engine supplier could keep costs more manageable. One could talk about regulating the relationship between, let's face it, the Penskes and Ganassis of the world and the Hondas or Toyotas of the world but you can't stop favoritism on the part of manufacturers completely. I think the best option is, as mentioned briefly, open the rules up completely and let you "run what you brung" so long as the cars and engines meet technical and safety regulations, of course the manufacturers may not be particularly keen on that.

On the matter of spec chassis and tires, in a series like IndyCar (I know that there will be a rogue group of super fans who will poopoo me for saying this), but I'm okay with spec tires. (This really contradicts what I am all about and I don't really know why my opinion changes on the issue of IndyCar). However, I'm all for (as stated) opening up the rule book completely, allowing anyone who can build a car to the specs, come in and run it at any point (don't have Grand-Am style licenses, or development restrictions). On the matter of downforce and horsepower, I've always been on the side of getting rid of all the downforce and adding a load of horsepower (these are of course the technical terms). Thus forcing the drivers to back off and brake into corners on ovals, creating better racing in my opinion. (I figure that some people must actually like the flatout, side-by-side racing and I would appreciate an explanation on what makes it so attractive). However, it is important to keep the cars at a level where they are still maneuverable, where they still perform like open-wheel cars and they can do lightning-fast handling maneuvers such as going from riding along the wall down to the white line without upsetting the car too much. It is an interesting debate over future regulations but at some point the IndyCar series has to dive right in. If you look at the ACO and IMSA, they took a rule set that encouraged vast technical diversity in all facets and put it into play. The manufacturers have responded with support. Quite frankly, towards the turn of the century when series globally were becoming increasingly spec there was no hard evidence suggesting that manufacturers would give the kind of long term support we've seen out of the Audis and Chevrolets of the world. I believe that IndyCar needs to take the same gamble and they'll see sponsor, manufacturer, and fan interest grow as rapidly as those of the ALMS.

Chris

[climb]

Both teretonga and jonerz have a point: what's the good of a multi engine/chassis form,ula, if the manufacturers make favouritism towards the teams who are already the strongest, giving stuff FOC to the rich and imposing high purchase prices to the poorer?

we already seen this scene, and that's what brought IRL from the 26+ cars grids of 2002, to the 18- of 2007.

The spec car doesn't sound as very attractive to a little bunch of superfanatics (most of them gather in fora like 10/10 ) whereas most of the fans will appreciate the fact that all the drivers/teams have more ot less the same stuff to run, and only the fastsst drivers and the most clever race engineers will make the difference.

[Jonerz]

I'd personally like to see the most creative designers, best chassis/engine/tire/team/driver combos be brought to the top but I think we can all agree at this juncture in the life of American open-wheel that wouldn't be the wisest decision.

Chris

[bil588]

Firestone testing new tires at Indy

10-6-08

http://www.indycar.com/news/?story_id=12654

"We're testing at Indy because we've run the same spec tire here for the last two years," said Paige Mader, general manager of race tire development for Firestone.

[bil588]

Originally Posted by Jonerz

Good point Teretonga. A similar situation exists currently in the ALMS. Michelin dominate in tires supplied, so they get massive amounts of feedback and work closely with teams for factory development. If you decide to enter the series today unless you are GM, Honda, Audi, Mercedes, Toyota or some seriously big constructor, chances are you will not get a "factory" deal with Michelin.

Perhaps, but Dunlop beat Michelin for the GT2 class of the 2007 and 2008 Le Mans Series.

http://www.driversknow.co.uk/article...raws_to_an_end

http://www.spindriftmedia.com/client...n.php?p=080915

[johntt]

There is a flipside to being the only team that runs a certain type of tyre in that you can work much closer with the tyre company and tailor the tyres to your needs as Virgo has done.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Reynard lost out in CART at the end of the 90's and they died.

Reynard went bust subject to the costly purchase of Riley & Scott and a failed IPO on the NYSE, not chassis manufacturing costs.

[indycool]

Well, in deference to the thread title............

http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/artic...to-series//P2/

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Reynard went bust subject to the costly purchase of Riley & Scott and a failed IPO on the NYSE, not chassis manufacturing costs.

I wasn't suggesting that Reynard dies because of manufacturing costs, but because they were not competitive in the market place as a design (Lola was a more comeptitve car in those final years and took a larger share of the market).

You are correct in suggesting other conditions and other markets contributed to Reynard's final collapse but at that stage they were already losing the edge they had previously held over Lola.