OK what to do about Superspeedway specs

[Tony Clifton]

Now that the series are merging, lets have some light hearted, real world debate regarding downforce on superspeedways.

In my opinion IRL cars have way too much downforce causing the cars to run in packs and you hope to get a draft and run to pass the car in front of you.

CART/CCWS tried many different setups and devices to make competition better, hanford device, road course wings on the front with superspeedway wings on the back etc.

What about this scenario, REDUCE the total aerodynamic downforce on the cars with both minimal front and rear wings and specifically designed undertrays.

The concept being that the cars are very fast in a straight line but the drivers would be forced to lift when the went toward the corner.

This would force the driver to be a huge part of the equation and keep corner speeds down.

Thoughts?

[enemy-ace]

I remember the CART race at Fontana where Vasser won. That was a good race where there was real battles for position and it didn't seem overly aero dependant. Anyone remember what kind of setup they ran there?
I am not a huge fan of the current IRL setup now either. Running side by side is all good, but not when the guy on the bottom can just stay there without lifting. I would like to see a change as well.

[Stefvh]

At Indy, with the single element, races are good.

The problem is on little speedways only, i think

[Purist]

Indy has "flat" turns. The problem is with the aero and restricted power, you can't make decisive moves on the higher-banked, moderate length ovals (1.5-milers in particular). At Iowa, the cars don't have the power to run off of the bottom, even on the straights. If you get caught on the outside (even just the second lane up), you're a sitting duck.

[Fish_Flake]

Purist sums it up pretty well. The current IndyCars have too much downforce in their oval package, which means that it is all too easy for a driver to keep his car on the bottom line and keep everyone behind him at bay. The next generation of car needs a less aero-dependent chassis that requires driver finesse to avoid sliding up the banking in turns.

Remember that when CART introduced the Handford Device, it did so to create excess drag and slow down top speeds. Of course, in doing so it punched a huge hole in the air which sucked a trailing car in at speeds even faster than those reached before, and also had the side effect of creating ridiculous amounts of on-track passing at Michigan and Fontana. When CART tried to install the Handford Device at short ovals, though, that drag equated into massive turbulence which made passing impossible. Take from this the fact that what works on big tracks doesn't necessarily work on small ones.

[Amar7605]

Originally Posted by enemy-ace

I remember the CART race at Fontana where Vasser won. That was a good race where there was real battles for position and it didn't seem overly aero dependant. Anyone remember what kind of setup they ran there?
I am not a huge fan of the current IRL setup now either. Running side by side is all good, but not when the guy on the bottom can just stay there without lifting. I would like to see a change as well.

I was at that race in 2002, and if I remember correctly CART had Handford devices at that race. It was a sight to see Champ Cars competing with NASCAR-style dradting. It really made the whole race even more exciting.

Contrast that when Champ Car went to Las Vegas Motor Speedway in 2004 (my sister and I were there). Without the Hanford devices, the cars had too much downforce and basically they couldn't pass one another. Once the top speeds were reached there was no way to catch up and pass one another. It was boring. The Craftsman Truck race before it had way more action.

[johntt]

I have to agree with the OP - reduce the downforce, the IRL cars carry far too much in their oval configuration.

[Tony Clifton]

Originally Posted by Amar7605

I was at that race in 2002, and if I remember correctly CART had Handford devices at that race. It was a sight to see Champ Cars competing with NASCAR-style dradting. It really made the whole race even more exciting.

Contrast that when Champ Car went to Las Vegas Motor Speedway in 2004 (my sister and I were there). Without the Hanford devices, the cars had too much downforce and basically they couldn't pass one another. Once the top speeds were reached there was no way to catch up and pass one another. It was boring. The Craftsman Truck race before it had way more action.

I was at the 2004 and 2005 Las Vegas oval race also. The 2004 race was a complete joke, if memory serves me correct they ran road course wings resulting in a huge amount of downforce.

There was no passing, the cars were slow in a straight line and everybody stayed down low.
That race was boring and most of the crowd WAS gone after the NASCAR trucks ran.
In that race Bourdais ran into the back of Tracy putting him in the wall, he had followed Tracy for 20 laps or so.
Forsythe went down to the NH pit after that and almost punched Carl Haas right in the face, Haas looked like he was pretty scared.

That is why I say, cut a HUGE amount of downforce off the cars, rely more on the mechanical grip of the tires and force the DRIVER and his crew to adjust to changing conditions to improve the racing. With the downforce now drivers just run flat out.

[nickyf1]

They should use the minimal CART style front wing, which was basicaly a winglet on each side of the nose and a Single Element rear wing.

[Jonerz]

As little downforce as possible was a good theory put into practice back in the 90's. I remember (my Dad says I have a strange memory like this - remembering primarily what happened in the racing world when I was a little kid) in 97 or somesuch at the season opener in Miami CART had changed the rule so that they ended up running their super speedway wings at what was a unique four-cornered track and the race was fantastic as a result. Drivers actually had to drive the car instead of going flat and that allowed for passing. That is what is needed at the super speedways - very, very little downforce so cornering require significant off-throttle time.

Chris

[Tony Clifton]

I have done some more thinking on this topic.

Extreme low downforce, drivers are forced to lift for corners, which creates virtually no turbulence.

2 sets of tires, soft and hard compound, both compounds of tires MUST be used at least ONCE in the race.

Push to pass with 1.5 minutes of time BUT with 2 settings. One setting gives 50 extra horsepower, the other gives 100 extra horsepower, however, if you use the higher push to pass setting (100 extra ponies) each push uses up 2 seconds of time, 50 extra horsepower uses 1 to 1 time.

Think about this, minimal downforce cars have great straightline speed but so little downforce that drivers MUST lift for the corners. Low downforce equals low turbulence.

2 sets of compounds and push to pass with 2 settings.

This setup could prove to add some real driver input to superspeedway (and even short track) racing.

[enemy-ace]

[QUOTE=Amar7605]I was at that race in 2002, and if I remember correctly CART had Handford devices at that race. It was a sight to see Champ Cars competing with NASCAR-style dradting. It really made the whole race even more exciting.
QUOTE]
I think they ran a short-oval package at that race. The rear wing looks like a smaller version of the Handford.
http://www.motorsport.com/photos/car...on-tm-0307.jpg

as opposed to the larger version they ran the year before.
http://motorsport.com/photos/cart/20...on-ds-0424.jpg

A bit off topic, but aren't those beautiful cars?

[JohnSSC]

Limiting aero seems to be the simplest solution. Changing the stagger of the tires would aid in this along with increasing power.

Tire width and aero would seem to be the best options.

[Mr Pink]

Originally Posted by enemy-ace

http://www.motorsport.com/photos/car...on-tm-0307.jpg


http://motorsport.com/photos/cart/20...on-ds-0424.jpg

A bit off topic, but aren't those beautiful cars?

I just thought the same thing, hope the net generation cars are a modern version of those. Really beautiful at the same time as they differ from the "F1-style" formula cars. Come on Dallara!

[nickyf1]

yeah, the roll hoop on its own was nice, also, no raised nones! The cars should resemble something like the late 90's Lola, Ranards and
Penskes.

Also, the 1997 Indy Racing Leugue car looked nice

http://www.bjwor.com/altsin97.jpg

[JohnSSC]

No offense, but is this Vintage Racing? While an early 90's look may be cool and in no small part nostalgic, any new formula should bring with it a more modern look, if you will.

A step forward in looks/technology will help capture the new fan as well. In fact that should be the primary goal: capturing new fans along with energizing the existing fan base. I do not think the best way to make this happen would be to make things look like it is 1994 all over again.

Good-looking as the Lola was, I was really growing tired of looking at it by the time they retired the chassis.

[johntt]

IMO the aesthetics should be based on the 2003 CART World Series cars. Technically i would go with what someone suggested a while ago which was LMP2-style engine rules to encourage technical diversity and draw manufacturers in. IIRC an LMP2 Judd engine can crack 1000bhp with its restrictor removed.

[duke_toaster]

LMP1 Judd V10s can get 800hp or so unrestricted, a LMP2 unit surely couldn't do 1000hp unless it's got a turbo and it will blow up after a minute or so.

[johntt]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

LMP1 Judd V10s can get 800hp or so unrestricted, a LMP2 unit surely couldn't do 1000hp unless it's got a turbo and it will blow up after a minute or so.

May have been LMP1 style engine regs then.

[Mr Pink]

Originally Posted by JohnSSC

No offense, but is this Vintage Racing? While an early 90's look may be cool and in no small part nostalgic, any new formula should bring with it a more modern look, if you will.

A step forward in looks/technology will help capture the new fan as well. In fact that should be the primary goal: capturing new fans along with energizing the existing fan base. I do not think the best way to make this happen would be to make things look like it is 1994 all over again.

Good-looking as the Lola was, I was really growing tired of looking at it by the time they retired the chassis.

I can only speak for myself but what I meant wasn´t going back to those cars but to do something modern based on that style. For example look at the new GP2 chassis: nice looking cars which resemble F1 cars and fit in to that package without looking exactly like them.

Hope you get my point.

[nickyf1]

Im not saying, 'hey, lets run some old cars'. I am basically saying that the new chassis should have that 'indycar' look, but in a more modern way. And I was only pointing out that the 1997 car looked nice...

[JohnSSC]

Originally Posted by Mr Pink

I can only speak for myself but what I meant wasn´t going back to those cars but to do something modern based on that style. For example look at the new GP2 chassis: nice looking cars which resemble F1 cars and fit in to that package without looking exactly like them.

Hope you get my point.

Got it now!

Thanks!

[Bob Riebe]

Is this a racing series or a fashion show.

The term "modern" rhetorically, is an obtuse chorus heard often on on line forums, but when I ask what is "modern" the answer is near always defeaning silence.
"Modern" is NOT A LOOK, it usually represents something BETTER than that that came before but it has been over a decade since "modern" race cars of near ANY sort have fit that.

I would much rather see super mods. or front engine cars without the chicken-**** restrictors run, and continually try to get faster, than see another rear-engined go-kart series with all the spec. restrictions that make racing a boring farce.
Bob

[Xpunk75]

I Totally agree with everyone who feels the Down force need to be cut dramatically. I think the cars being this over winged is dangerous for the drivers. It seems when ever these IRL cars touch wheels they go flying into the air and were all praying that the drivers isn't killed. Some examples are Dario's crash this year and Marco's at Indy. I'm sure there are a lot more but I'm sick and have a headache and can't think of anymore right now.

I also agree that Super Speed Way oval racing is different then short oval racing and I think it be an interesting Idea to perhaps have a different Aero package for them but only if it made the racing more fun to watch.

[JohnSSC]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

Is this a racing series or a fashion show.

The term "modern" rhetorically, is an obtuse chorus heard often on on line forums, but when I ask what is "modern" the answer is near always defeaning silence.
"Modern" is NOT A LOOK, it usually represents something BETTER than that that came before but it has been over a decade since "modern" race cars of near ANY sort have fit that.

I would much rather see super mods. or front engine cars without the chicken-**** restrictors run, and continually try to get faster, than see another rear-engined go-kart series with all the spec. restrictions that make racing a boring farce.
Bob

So, Bob, what do you really think about this issue (just kidding!)?

But you hit it on the head: this is not a fashion show and when I say "modern" I mean cars that are obviously being designed to go faster today, rather than borrowing elements to duplicate past characteristics.

To use Indy as an example - I loved it when the Loti (Lotuses?) arrived and you had the classic handling and lightweight vs power and heavier weight. More than having favorite drivers, the cars also had variety to them as well.