Turbos or NAs?

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

I'm sure KK would be happy to provide TG a very attractive lease deal for 3-5 years while something else was worked on to bring in additional; manufacturers for the long term.

The IR L does not have 3-5 years to dork around with ANY single engine spec. series, the supposed euphoria of a single series will wear off quickly a bunch of same dung, same pile spec. mobiles.

[Teretonga]

The IR L does not have 3-5 years to dork around with ANY single engine spec. series, the supposed euphoria of a single series will wear off quickly a bunch of same dung, same pile spec. mobiles.

The truth is that CART grew to be the force that it was because from the 70's through till the late 80's all it had was the Cosworth DFV turbo that anyone could buy off the shelf...
That level playing filed contributed to it's growth and success. It wasn't until the Chevy deal that Penske did with Illmor that things started to change and we got a proliferation of manufacturers.
None of that really did the series any good because that was when the costs went through the roof for the teams.

What amazes me is that people remain blind to the lessons of history and repeat the same mistakes over and over again.

The most successful engine spec Indy ever had since the 60's was the 2.65 litre turbo specification. You can get an engine with that specification now at a very reasonable price so why would you go through the whole exercise over again..... and continue to be at the mercy of a major manufacturer whose involvement will only ramp up your costs?

[Purist]

Bob, before you spout off again, could you please come up with a perceptually more reasonable proposal for what should be done regarding the cars. Trust me, the idea of 5.0-litre engines in modern formula cars is going to scare at least some people, and could very easily get you into a regulatory hornets nest as far as what other concerned parties (tracks, insurers, etc) are comfortable with.

I mean, I can easily see an initial reaction being, "Holy crap! These guys are making 700hp with just 3.0 litres, and you want to give them 5.0 litres! Are you out of your mind?!" And when outside influences have to be taken into account, it can become a nightmare. My father worked as an engineer on "Starship" at Beechcraft, so I've heard many times over just what a mess things can become.

[Fish_Flake]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

The truth is that CART grew to be the force that it was because from the 70's through till the late 80's all it had was the Cosworth DFV turbo that anyone could buy off the shelf...
That level playing filed contributed to it's growth and success. It wasn't until the Chevy deal that Penske did with Illmor that things started to change and we got a proliferation of manufacturers.
None of that really did the series any good because that was when the costs went through the roof for the teams.

What amazes me is that people remain blind to the lessons of history and repeat the same mistakes over and over again.

The most successful engine spec Indy ever had since the 60's was the 2.65 litre turbo specification. You can get an engine with that specification now at a very reasonable price so why would you go through the whole exercise over again..... and continue to be at the mercy of a major manufacturer whose involvement will only ramp up your costs?

No doubt the Cosworth DFX-spec engine has had a great run, but the formula has been in place for over thirty years. There's very little left to develop with it, and in fact numerous measures have been taken to limit the engine's performance since the early 1990s because the combination of its massive horsepower and improved aerodynamics means that the speeds cars would otherwise reach are way too high.

This shouldn't be about remembering the sport's past or present; it should be about looking toward a stronger future. That means that a new engine formula must be allowed to develop into maturity, much in the way that the 2.65-liter turbos went from making 189 MPH lap speeds in 1976 to 237 MPH lap speeds twenty years later.

[drdisque]

Turbos aren't coming back unless the manufacturers request them, and if they do, I imagine they'll be bundled with electric hybrid 4 cylinders or V6es

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Purist

Bob, before you spout off again, could you please come up with a perceptually more reasonable proposal for what should be done regarding the cars. Trust me, the idea of 5.0-litre engines in modern formula cars is going to scare at least some people, and could very easily get you into a regulatory hornets nest as far as what other concerned parties (tracks, insurers, etc) are comfortable with.

I mean, I can easily see an initial reaction being, "Holy crap! These guys are making 700hp with just 3.0 litres, and you want to give them 5.0 litres! Are you out of your mind?!" And when outside influences have to be taken into account, it can become a nightmare. My father worked as an engineer on "Starship" at Beechcraft, so I've heard many times over just what a mess things can become.

Purist:
I still believe at least half of the US population is not as dumb as a pail of rocks.

The equivalent in power to a 183 in. cu. DOHC race engine, in two-valve push-rod form far larger than 305 inches. (Remember the blower engine size used by CART was just part of the multi-class engine formula taken from USAC)

I gave a formula, now you give me proof that people are as paranoid and stupid as you seem to think they are.
There is a world of difference between a multi-valve DOHC and a two-valve push-rod engine.

Having to deal with the aero regulators, who ARE a bunch of self-righteous fascist knuckle-draggers, is not the same as the world of auto racing.

There are a myriad of ways to reduce the speed of the Indy cars of which simply eliminating wing is the most simple, and far more intelligent than trying to sell a bunch of spec. go-karts to a populace that is already getting bored with same crap, same pile over-load.

If open wheel racing wants to become more than just Indy, and the rest a side-show, it has to involve Detroit, and in case you have not noticed, Detroit is not using four-poppers, six-bangers, or unavailable blown DOHC v-8s to sell its products.

[gttouring]

the 2.65 litre turbo XFE can continue and should as the customer engine and benchmark. so what,
people are still afraid of a .44 magnum revolver- when there is much better hardware out there...the XFE can still do damage.
allow new engines great! look at history and think the best racing the best formulas....Formula 5000 anyone? why expect them to run 14K revs when they don't have too a mix of XFE and a Hendrick V8 and a honda 3.5 litre V8 in the back of a dallara/Panoz/Lola going round michigan or milwaukee would cause send shivers up anyones spine with the mix of sound and fights coming off corners...never mind through the streets of long beach or Surfer'sParadise
any V8 supercar builders interested in makign a n Indy V8?

it can work the rule book needs to be blasted open an more options considered and evened out in the top numbers no necesarily the area under the curve.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

The truth is that CART grew to be the force that it was because from the 70's through till the late 80's all it had was the Cosworth DFV turbo that anyone could buy off the shelf...
That level playing filed contributed to it's growth and success. It wasn't until the Chevy deal that Penske did with Illmor that things started to change and we got a proliferation of manufacturers.
None of that really did the series any good because that was when the costs went through the roof for the teams.

What amazes me is that people remain blind to the lessons of history and repeat the same mistakes over and over again.

The most successful engine spec Indy ever had since the 60's was the 2.65 litre turbo specification. You can get an engine with that specification now at a very reasonable price so why would you go through the whole exercise over again..... and continue to be at the mercy of a major manufacturer whose involvement will only ramp up your costs?

You seem to love to ingnore anything except the Ford/Cosworth.
The Ford/Cosworth did not come about till the late seventies.

GEE how did racing survive all those years before Parnelli Jones tried one.

In 1977 There were 25 Offy based engines, 4 Ford/Cosworths, 3 Foyt/DOHC Fords and 1 blown AMC.

In 1980 there were 20 F/C at Indy

There was a serious attempt to use push-rod engines in the early eighties, led by Dan Gurney, but CART simply did its best to kill them, and finally simply eliminated Gurney, both cars and engines.

From the eighties to the nineties there was also Alfa Romeo, Buick, Chevy p-r V-6s, Honda, Judd, Porsche and various chassis. USAC' over-reaction to the p-r Ilmore/Merecedes was the start of the doldrums into same crap, same pile.

You have forgotten history.

[icemachine]

If you want Indy to be relevant to Americans, your not going to sell it with V8 pushrods.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by icemachine

If you want Indy to be relevant to Americans, your not going to sell it with V8 pushrods.

Yeh right, tell that to NASCAR, drag racing.

No that's right those two AMERICAN racing groups are doing so poorly with those lack-lustre push-rod engines.

[icemachine]

Whats the average American have in their driveway these days? Is it a PR V8, or an OHC V6 or I4 with VTEC?

[Purist]

Bob, they don't have to be paranoid. All a person needs to do is speak without thinking, which we Americans, and many others, do quite easily.

The Panoz GTR-1, and LM-1 used pushrod V8s, as did many of the R&Ss, yet they didn't set sportscar racing on fire here in the states. As to output, the 4.5-litre unit in the early GTR-1s gave 600hp. So, you can get a reliable 133hp/litre out of such an engine, in endurance trim. That's 667hp out of 5.0 litres, before you tune up for sprint trim.

Bob, it's ironic your banking on Detroit, then going on about evolution of racing cars. Detroit has been staunchly opposed to any "evolution" and have only progressed because Japan has forced them to. Since Japan has gotten the jump on them though, Toyota has overtaken GM. And if Detroit is so forward-looking and interested in other fields, not to mention marketing products they actually sell, why are the "Big Three" even in NASCAR anymore.

[Teretonga]

Bob Reibe

You have forgotten history

No I haven't. I am well aware of the history of Indy and the Offenhauser and everything else before and after.
My comment was specifically related to the growth of CART, not Indy, from the late seventies through till the early nineties.
The entry of multiple manufacturers pushed up the costs when Toyota Honda etc got involved in a technical battle. Porsche and Alfa Romeo were single entry efforts that were either half hearted or failures, not withstanding that Porsche did win a race.

US racing is focused on two primary elements: The battle in Detroit and the personalities of the drivers.

Nascar has exploited both and open wheel racing always exploited the latter until recently but has never really exploited the former. Ford's involvement in the 60's was the only really significant move until the Illmor-Chevy partnership.

While their is nothing wrong with the detroit V8's as engines, I have questions about the appeal of a detroit V8 based formula to the people at Ford, Dodge and GM...
They already have huge budgets directed at NASCAR... Are they going to then shift funds to Indycar? Or would we have a raft of specialist companies producing alloy blocked engines using Nascar developed parts? There is nothing wrong with that per se, but is it going to provde the sort of racing and spectacle people are looking for?

2.4 litreTurbo V6? Maybe? A racing engine or a production based engine? Highly stressed or a lazy reliable producer with extended life that will run forever...

Whatever is chosen needs to be a result of all the factors that will produce spectacular racing that will attract spectators, enthusiasts and the media to the sport if it is to regain its former glory.

Indy is about speed and personalities more so than technical advances so is a high spec technical formula really the way to go? It will cost $$$ and will it give you the results you really need.
Anything that reduces the engine costs overall and provides a reliable consistent power plant at low running cost is going to benefit the whole sport.
Is anyone really thinking about the sport outside Indy?

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Indy is about speed and personalities more so than technical advances so is a high spec technical formula really the way to go? It will cost $$$ and will it give you the results you really need.
Anything that reduces the engine costs overall and provides a reliable consistent power plant at low running cost is going to benefit the whole sport.
Is anyone really thinking about the sport outside Indy?

There is NO open wheel (besides short tracks) outside of Indy. CART found out the hard way.
Remember the "personalities, did not get so by racing paved ovals only, the big names at Indy came from up to the early seventies short tracks and big dirt tracks, it was only during the later sixties that there were a lot of paved tracks.
That connection was severed decades ago.

Non-USAC personalities came from other forms of motor sports, mostly road racing but also NASCAR, and some other sprint and super mod circuits.
To you some of the personalities may seem like non-stars, but I was there and if a super mod. big name hit the Indy trail, it got press coverage.(the lack of print media, compared to the sixties or even the sevenites is a lacking that goes unmentioned too often. Remember TV then was really a non-entity compared to print and radio{I actually listened to Indy last year on radio, and it has its own special plusses])
THere is no major road racing circuit to come from any more, besides possibly F-1.
IMSA/ALMS is a big fish in a little pond, with drivers that mean little to nothing to the average US fan.
The average US fan can name ten drag racers for every road racer.
GARRA has drivers from other series, NOT well know GARRA drivers.

You were there and you know as well as I that the tech. side got heavy coverage in Hot Rod, Sports Car Graphic and other performance auto magazines.
The Tech. side was very important, at least after Black Jack Brahbam and Mickey Thompson, put Indy in the eyes of Colin Chapman who put the Offy Roadster out of "gotta have to win" category.

The other circuits to draw from either have gone totally in house, or in NASCAR's case, are now the place where one might migrate to, but in any case the very important one (or few) off drive, cross overs are gone, (It got national and local press space) and therefore the importance of a certain name driving in circuit X, Y, or Z is gone also.

Hero worship worked for NASCAR because Big Bill had decades of history, to draw from. Even there, had Earnhardt (who was called by national press, the last of the old guard) not had a son, who glammed off of his old man's history, people who specialize in writing about NASCAR say the hero driver era is coming to an end, and they say it is not just reduced attendance and viewer-ship, but when they speak to fans, outside of earnhardt, no driver really means much, SO for open wheel to think it could use hero worship driver following to fill its coffers, would be from simply obtuse, to asininely ignorant.

[Purist]

Bob, I think you're forgetting the names of Andretti and Foyt; those do still carry weight. Unfortunately, Unser hasn't had a proper heir to the family trade.

The spec racing is largely respnsible for the collapse of this hero worship side of things I would have to say. If nobody can dominate, they can't build nearly as strong a record/reputation. You don't breed legends by enforcing mediocrity.

[gttouring]

"The spec racing is largely respnsible for the collapse of this hero worship side of things I would have to say. If nobody can dominate, they can't build nearly as strong a record/reputation. You don't breed legends by enforcing mediocrity"

i think you are very right about this....
look at lemans although little hero efforts have come the machines are glorious these last few years...Indy has to capitalize on some of this diversity...

[Amar7605]

It's a tough thing. On the one hand a spec series evens things out in theory. On the other hand, letting engine manufacturers some free reign on their R&D can create a new buzz for the series.

I did like it when CART had Ford Cosworth, Honda, Toyota, and Mercedes Benz competing with one another at the same time.

[wills]

Bourdais dominated Champ Cars for years yet the series went into decline. I suppose him being french was one big factor. But the real reason why the general interest in American Open wheel racing was gone was that they became one make series since 03 if I recall. Manufacturers make a huge influence to the sport and the more involved the better.

[Teretonga]

The one make series thing was basically by default. reynard wasn't competitive and only Lola's were bought by teams.
The deal with Ford/Cosworth was because Honda and Toyota crossed over and Mercedes benz vacated (and hadn't been competitive for a few years anyway). The trut is when there were several manufacturers only two of the 4 were really competitive in any one year, which in effect disenfranchised the teams that had otehr engines.

Toyota had several loyal teams for several years before they got it together before they did anything worth while. dan Gurney struggled with them for years, thenGanassi signed up but the dicarded AAR and AAR couldn't get a Ford deal and folded...and look at the years in IRL when Ganassi hasd Toyota's and they ran well back from the Honda's...
In the 80's CART thrived on basically one engine... The DFX Cosworth. It was only when the Illmor came on the scene that the ante was upped but if you couldn't get a Chevy-Illmor deal in the following two years you struggled...
Manufacturers do bring money and media....But not better racing.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

The one make series thing was basically by default. reynard wasn't competitive and only Lola's were bought by teams.
The deal with Ford/Cosworth was because Honda and Toyota crossed over and Mercedes benz vacated (and hadn't been competitive for a few years anyway). The trut is when there were several manufacturers only two of the 4 were really competitive in any one year, which in effect disenfranchised the teams that had otehr engines.

Toyota had several loyal teams for several years before they got it together before they did anything worth while. dan Gurney struggled with them for years, thenGanassi signed up but the dicarded AAR and AAR couldn't get a Ford deal and folded...and look at the years in IRL when Ganassi hasd Toyota's and they ran well back from the Honda's...
In the 80's CART thrived on basically one engine... The DFX Cosworth. It was only when the Illmor came on the scene that the ante was upped but if you couldn't get a Chevy-Illmor deal in the following two years you struggled...
Manufacturers do bring money and media....But not better racing.

So what, teams and vehicles struggled, that is what racing is based on.

Gurney lead the small block chevy brigade in the early eighties, and other engines came in to strut their stuff later.
It made for great racing. Close finishes are not, nor ever have been a requirement of good racing. They are a bonus that should be enjoyed occasionally.
When rules are changed to force them, they are BS.
The victories gained by Nissan were doubly sweet because it was an uphill battle.
Variety is the spice of life, without it, racing is boring same crap, same pile dung heap.

[JohnSSC]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

So what, teams and vehicles struggled, that is what racing is based on.

Gurney lead the small block chevy brigade in the early eighties, and other engines came in to strut their stuff later.
It made for great racing. Close finishes are not, nor ever have been a requirement of good racing. They are a bonus that should be enjoyed occasionally.
When rules are changed to force them, they are BS.
The victories gained by Nissan were doubly sweet because it was an uphill battle.
Variety is the spice of life, without it, racing is boring same crap, same pile dung heap.

There is a good bit of truth here. One of the things that aggravated the snot out of me with NASCAR back in the late 80's was the arrival of the late caution for "debris." NASCAR made a big production of how close the finishes were. That is still going on and it still aggravates me. I enjoyed seeing the Super Birds that Petty had go out and demolish everyone because I knew that everybody was now trying to come up with something that would demolish them. Unfortunately it was a rule change that did them in.

The IMSA Camel GT is a perfect example of what Bob is talking about. You had great diversity and you had great racing. Yeah, Peter Gregg dominated, but you had Bob Holbert and Hurley Haywood and John Greenwood and that David Hobbs fellow (among many others) out there making it more than interesting.

I get tired, really, of all the "cost-containment" talk. I mean, this is racing. It is expensive. If you try to launder out the "costs" you often get "boring."

Personally, I think there is enough engineering talent out there to devise a formula that would allow a variety of engine types including blown and NA that would at least allow for some variety. I think we really do not need to have the series become one where there is the same McRacecar with the McRace engines.

[Amar7605]

On the flip side, if one team/car/driver continues to domate race after race, year after year, then I think fans will get bored. What's the point of watching races when you know who's going to win?

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by JohnSSC

I get tired, really, of all the "cost-containment" talk. I mean, this is racing. It is expensive. If you try to launder out the "costs" you often get "boring."

Personally, I think there is enough engineering talent out there to devise a formula that would allow a variety of engine types including blown and NA that would at least allow for some variety. I think we really do not need to have the series become one where there is the same McRacecar with the McRace engines.

I agree for the most part. There are enough bright people out there to devise a formula that will appeal to all involved or inspire future involvement.

[JohnSSC]

Thanks, MS.

Amar, Penske "dominated" and then couldn't qualify for the 500! Thats racing. You could also argue that even in a spec series, Newman-Haas dominated as well. The bottom line is however you write the rules, the possibility exists that one team will dominate. I tend to look at it as an opportunity to "raise the bar" rather than to dumb things down.

Taking nothing away from Star Mazda or IPS or Atlantics, but these are all exciting to watch. What they lack though, is that "innovation" part that allows one to do more than "tweak" the car and actually develop a package that is better than the other "packages."

I thought it was really cool way back when to stand in Thunder Valley at Mid-Ohio and hear the Cosworths and the Hondas when Honda first came into CC. Variety is good.

[Dutton]

I'd choose variety over spec any day of the week.

I don't mind de facto spec, since it is the natural result of product comparison, but mandated spec I can happily live without.