The New Car

[danny123]

As we all know there supposed to be a new car for the 2010 season. Thats leaves only about year and a half. Shouldnt they be testing the car by now? I mean I dont remember exactly how long it took for the Panoz but I know at least a year if not more, for testing and whatever they do to them to make sure there ready for use.

[BobGarage]

panoz was launched at san jose (July) 2005 and tested throughout 2006 (from what I remember).

So for a 2010 launch I would hope to hear something around july september this year.

[MAX_THRUST]

Don't know if anyone else read the interview from Long Beach with Kevin Kal, who said Tony Cotman had a huge hand in the development of the Panoz, and would be keen to push for something along those lines again.

As Panoz was in the IRL previously, I don't doubt they might be back, not with the DPo1whatever it was, but possibly a development on that prinicpal.

The way things have been moving so far this year, I wouldn't be to surprised to hear something soon.

As a side note do the current rules allow for a team to turn up with any chasis provided it is in line with current rules? Or do they all have to be Dallara's?

[BobGarage]

As a side note do the current rules allow for a team to turn up with any chasis provided it is in line with current rules? Or do they all have to be Dallara's?

Only the dallara is legal this year. however the irl panoz chassis is legal for Indy only.

[MAX_THRUST]

Thanks Bob....there is nothing you don't know!!! Doubt anyone will use the Panoz though. Has it ever won Indy???

[BobGarage]

Doubt anyone will use the Panoz though.

there are two on the entry list at the moment... http://www.indy500.com/images/pdf/2008_entrylist.pdf

[shazbot]

Buddy Rice was the last to win the Indy 500 in a Panoz chassis in 04. Although the race ended under yellows for rain he was the class of the field all day. Of course Penske won in a Panoz/G Force in '03, and Montoya in 2000.

[Vegasguy]

there are two on the entry list at the moment...

Nothing with a driver though.....

IMHO the best way to design the next car is to create a set of specifications, wheel base, width, height, cockpit size, wing size, tunnel limits, etc and let the manufactures design and compete. Just like back before the un-unification when we had Lola's and Renard's and Penske's.
We could potentially have chassis from a number of manufactures, Lola, Panoz, Dallara, just to name a few.

Then create an engine spec and let the engine guys do the same thing.

[DrDomm]

The smart thing might be to delay the car a year...though I dread the thought of looking at the Dallara for another season.

Get at least 2, possibly 3, chassis manufacturers to commit to the series for 2011. See what direction this series is going to go during the next 6-12 months. Obviously Indy will always be a part of it, but what about other large ovals? Decide on an engine formula. Speak with the committed manufacturers, engineers, and drivers to come up with a list of desirable qualities. Then give the manufacturers 18 months to create and test their chassis from a strict formula.

Unless, they've been working on something with a combined series in mind for a long time now, I don't think they could get all this done by 2010. I just don't want to see another spec series until 2013.

[DRC]

I think for the next few years cost will still be a major factor in the specifications of a car. Part of the beauty of the DP01 was, overall, it was cheaper to run (and fix!) than the previous Lola (and I'm pretty sure cheaper than the IRL cars now). If / when the series returns to it's "glory" days (and there's simply more money in the series), then it can be opened up to additional chassis manufacturers, etc. But until then (and I'm afraid it will take some time), they'll need to keep the focus on costs (w/o sacrificing safety or performance, of course).

[nigelred5]

The smart thing might be to delay the car a year...though I dread the thought of looking at the Dallara for another season.

Get at least 2, possibly 3, chassis manufacturers to commit to the series for 2011. See what direction this series is going to go during the next 6-12 months. Obviously Indy will always be a part of it, but what about other large ovals? Decide on an engine formula. Speak with the committed manufacturers, engineers, and drivers to come up with a list of desirable qualities. Then give the manufacturers 18 months to create and test their chassis from a strict formula.

Unless, they've been working on something with a combined series in mind for a long time now, I don't think they could get all this done by 2010. I just don't want to see another spec series until 2013.

IMHO, it doesn't have anyhing to do with a combined series, their chassis specs were guaranteed to remain the same until 2010. They have been racing on three different type of tracks for three years now. The only thing that has changed is a lack of competing series to fight for sponsor money with. The IRL teams have known for 2 years that a new chassis was due in 2010. The only difference a combined series brings in my mind is greater opportunity for a few more well finaced teams. The combined series is a healthier series. With the state of the current economy and the likely direction it is going to continue to go, they need to make cost a primary concern to ensure the teams can afford to stay involved. It's a bad economy to be looking for sponsorship and the dollar will likely continue to weaken for some time, so the equipment needs to be affordable and preferrably domestically produced to avoid problems with currency fluctuation. Other than retaining the current equipment, Panoz and possibly even swift should be solicited for a new chassis. If Dallara can compete price wise against that, the more the merrier, but they really shouldn't risk too much competition right away. Sure a Panoz could be based on the dp01, but it will already be an almost 4 year old design by then. IMHO, approving an intact DP01 for 2010 is unlikely, simply because noone should start with a leg up.

[tbyars]

As we all know there supposed to be a new car for the 2010 season. Thats leaves only about year and a half. Shouldnt they be testing the car by now? I mean I dont remember exactly how long it took for the Panoz but I know at least a year if not more, for testing and whatever they do to them to make sure there ready for use.

Don't let the development of the DP-01 put you in a box as to how the new IRL car will be developed and the timeline involved. Be sure to read Vegasguy's post above.

I believe he is exactly right. Rather than developing the car from a specific manufacturer along a very specific set of guidelines, I believe the IRL will set a collections of specs and safety standards and then turn the manufacturers lose. That will make this a totally different process than what you saw with the Panoz. That will also make that timeline invalid to a large extent. And, if it is a competitive process, you can count on it being much less open and public than the DP-01 development was.

[NickFalzone]

I'm ok with the reality that there may not be a new car by the start of the 2010 season... yes, some have said that it will happen, but I think it's far from a guarantee at this point. More likely IMO is that they will continue to add improvements to the current car through the start of the 2010 season, and have a new package by 2011. Upgrades to the current car are not a bad thing - they went from methanol, to 3.5L ethanol, they added the new weight system, the paddle shifters, testing of "variable assistant steering", along with improvements in the sled and roll bar. Plus every year theres a bunch of "new parts" that get around to the different teams. Did anyone see those cool "windows" in the Penske cars at Kansas? The rest of the top tier teams will have that soon.

And the good news that I'm hearing is that they really are starting from scratch on the new car in a number of ways. It will be a re-design and not just an evolutionary improvement.

[weeflyonthewall]

Historically, wasn't the process started in May? With the new car showing up a year and a half later.

[BobGarage]

Rather than developing the car from a specific manufacturer along a very specific set of guidelines, I believe the IRL will set a collections of specs and safety standards and then turn the manufacturers lose. That will make this a totally different process than what you saw with the Panoz.
But that is exactly what champ car did. issued a set of specs and let manufacturers lose. Both panoz and Lola came back with designs!!! Once the design deadline was reached champ car made the decision to go with panoz.

it was always the intention to go with one manufacturer but they didn't decide which one until everyone that wanted to had submitted a design to champ cars set of specifications for the new car.

[DrDomm]

I'm all for keeping the cost reasonably low, but to get this series back to where CART/IndyCar was in the early 90's we need to have a non-spec/multiple manufacturer series (for both chassis and engine, at least). The increased team count, and impact/perception of a unified series, will allow this.

[keysersoze]

IMO of course:

to keep costs dowm, make the "new" chassis an evolution of the current. Just clean up the back end to make the car not seem so rear-heavy (or sculpt the back to accommodate a turbo).

[nigelred5]

Anyone want to try a photochop of that one??

[BenRoethig]

But that is exactly what champ car did. issued a set of specs and let manufacturers lose. Both panoz and Lola came back with designs!!! Once the design deadline was reached champ car made the decision to go with panoz.

it was always the intention to go with one manufacturer but they didn't decide which one until everyone that wanted to had submitted a design to champ cars set of specifications for the new car.

Was the Lola design basically the same formula as the DP01?

[nigelred5]

We can only assume the preliminary design was to the same set of parameters as the DP01 was. IIRC, there was a lot of the actual design performed after the supplier was chosen. I don't recall seeing that either supplier had completed a chassis design prior to the selection. I'd like to see what the Lola would have really looked like in the flesh. IMHO, the actual DP01 doesn't look anything like the what the first rendering looked like when it was announced.

[Phoenixent]

Anyone want to try a photochop of that one??

I am not that good at photoshop but here is a photoshop od the DP01 with a lower nose. Enjoy. :)

Cosworth Turbo
http://shutter11.pictures.aol.com/data/pictures/19/004/5D/FD/1A/D6/t2FzhM0yqpoOyydo3MStQBefx0UsJXS102BC.jpg

Honda NA Enigine
http://shutter14.pictures.aol.com/data/pictures/22/005/5D/FD/1A/D6/XOadjqriVnDbjo6tBQISKN86FKsKhowP02BC.jpg

[BobGarage]

Was the Lola design basically the same formula as the DP01?

basically... here the Lola design...

http://www.lola-motorsport.co.uk/med/usr/1610/champ1jpg150632.jpg

[Chris R]

interesting - to my eye the "problem" appears to be the airbox area The Panoz with a lower nose looks fine but if you add that air box it becomes pretty ugly.....

[Phoenixent]

interesting - to my eye the "problem" appears to be the airbox area The Panoz with a lower nose looks fine but if you add that air box it becomes pretty ugly.....

I agree on the airbox is ugly. It could go the route of the old Indy Lights cars with no airbox.

[mikiec]

interesting - to my eye the "problem" appears to be the airbox area The Panoz with a lower nose looks fine but if you add that air box it becomes pretty ugly.....

That's because it's the Dallara airbox photoshopped onto a DP01.

If you want to see what the DP01 would look like with an airbox, have a look at the Superleague Formula's Panoz DP09......

http://www.autoracing1.com/Images/2007Misc/SuperLeague7.jpg

http://www.psv.nl/upload/145551_661_1175588622182-SuperleagueFormula4681.jpg

http://www.superleagueformulamedia.com/media/image_2_18_10a.jpg

[JSH]

That's because it's the Dallara airbox photoshopped onto a DP01.

If you want to see what the DP01 would look like with an airbox, have a look at the Superleague Formula's Panoz DP09......

http://www.autoracing1.com/Images/2007Misc/SuperLeague7.jpg

http://www.psv.nl/upload/145551_661_1175588622182-SuperleagueFormula4681.jpg

http://www.superleagueformulamedia.com/media/image_2_18_10a.jpg

So in other words, a panoz with a NA engine will look like an F1 car.

[DrDomm]

So in other words, a panoz with a NA engine will look like an F1 car.

And what's wrong with that?

Sure as hell beats a 2008 Indycar!

I think a modified (for ovals) DP01 is the way to go. Get a couple of other manufacturers to build one, and stipulate a price (for the chassis and parts).

[Chris R]

I do not much care for the Superleague air box either - although it is waaayyy better than the Dallara....

I think an Indycar should not have a significant airbox - it is just not part of the design heritage of the formula....

[BenRoethig]

That's because it's the Dallara airbox photoshopped onto a DP01.

If you want to see what the DP01 would look like with an airbox, have a look at the Superleague Formula's Panoz DP09......

http://www.autoracing1.com/Images/2007Misc/SuperLeague7.jpg

http://www.psv.nl/upload/145551_661_1175588622182-SuperleagueFormula4681.jpg

http://www.superleagueformulamedia.com/media/image_2_18_10a.jpg

That might be the greatest pro turbo argument I've ever seen. That thing makes the Dallara look good.

[-Helix-]

That might be the greatest pro turbo argument I've ever seen. That thing makes the Dallara look good.

Agreed. The Superleague car is hideous. It's like they took all the worst qualities from every other open-wheel car and put them together.

[tbyars]

But that is exactly what champ car did. issued a set of specs and let manufacturers lose. Both panoz and Lola came back with designs!!! Once the design deadline was reached champ car made the decision to go with panoz.

it was always the intention to go with one manufacturer but they didn't decide which one until everyone that wanted to had submitted a design to champ cars set of specifications for the new car.

That's not exactly correct, and certainly not anything along the lines I suggested. It's not '....exactly what champ car did.". Not even a scale model had been built before the contract was awarded to Panoz.

Just to be clear, I don't anticipate the IRL selecting a single manufacturer. Publish the specs and open it up to anyone who thinks they can play.

[mantom]

That's not exactly correct, and certainly not anything along the lines I suggested. It's not '....exactly what champ car did.". Not even a scale model had been built before the contract was awarded to Panoz.


According to the way you originally phrased it, yes, it is exactly what Champ Car did.

They created a description of how the car should perform, defined a budget the car must stay within, and let the manufacturers come up with their own designs. 4 manufacturers submitted designs, Panoz and Lola came in with the most competitive bids, and Panoz won partly on account they're based in the USA and would be cheaper in the long run for quicker turnaround of parts and shipping.

IndyCar would be smart to polish up the DP01 with whatever revisions they find necessary, make that the new car for a few years, then go back to the boards and work on something truly green and next generation as the longer term solution. Why? teams would save on running the DP01s now, and it would give time for the series to stabilize so in a few years time the specs could be opened up for mulitple manufacturers as everybody here seems to want.

It's seems to be rather late in the game to be introducing anything but the DP01 or Dallara as the new car if it's to hit the ground running in the 2010 season opener. If they choose DP01, they can use them starting in 2009 which buys more time for the next generation design to be fleshed out.

[ShiftingGears]

Ask yourselves this...

Why need wings?

[mikiec]

Ask yourselves this...

Why need wings?

If they can design a wingless open wheel race car that looks cutting edge and doesn't look like a Formula Ford or something out of the 1950's then great! I wouldn't hold my breath though.

I think all this talk about the DP01 is a bit moot as they've already said they're looking for a style of car that is unique in its look compared to any other type of open wheel race car. I think that whatever they do, there'll be people calling it ugly and people calling it beautiful, so they can't win either way.

[Jonesi]

Historically, wasn't the process started in May? With the new car showing up a year and a half later.

Originally it was Chassis announced in Jan for next year, Engine announced in June for next year or june. However that was back when they could start a season in June and end it at I500. At some point they will have to realize they need do chassis & engine at the same time if they are ever going to have real change.

[shazbot]

That's because it's the Dallara airbox photoshopped onto a DP01.

If you want to see what the DP01 would look like with an airbox, have a look at the Superleague Formula's Panoz DP09......

http://www.autoracing1.com/Images/2007Misc/SuperLeague7.jpg

http://www.psv.nl/upload/145551_661_1175588622182-SuperleagueFormula4681.jpg

http://www.superleagueformulamedia.com/media/image_2_18_10a.jpg

Foe what it's worth these pics are not the actual Superleague car, just a concept show car with different liveries digitally added on. The actual car looks and sounds very good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kwkKn7Zm_U&eurl=http://superleagueformula.net/

[Chris R]

I don't know - it just does not do it for me - a little too F-1 in design cues. It is not a bad looking race car - just not very unique and I would be disappointed if the next Indycar were much like it....

[DrDomm]

FWIW, I like that Superleague car...even with the airbox.

[BenRoethig]

Foe what it's worth these pics are not the actual Superleague car, just a concept show car with different liveries digitally added on. The actual car looks and sounds very good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kwkKn7Zm_U&eurl=http://superleagueformula.net/

That I can live with.

[tbyars]

According to the way you originally phrased it, yes, it is exactly what Champ Car did.

Where did I even hint that IndyCar should limit the new car to one manufacturer in my original post? That's just your assumption.


IndyCar would be smart to polish up the DP01 with whatever revisions they find necessary, make that the new car for a few years, then go back to the boards and work on something truly green and next generation as the longer term solution. Why? teams would save on running the DP01s now, and it would give time for the series to stabilize so in a few years time the specs could be opened up for mulitple manufacturers as everybody here seems to want.

Why do so many people hang on to the DP-01? Mark my word, when the new car is developed and announced, it will have absolutely NO relation to the Panoz DP-01. That chasis will never be used in any way by the IndyCar series. Even Panoz lists it as "out of production."

The new car will be purpose-built to compete at the Indianopolis Motor Speedway, and then used everywhere else.

[NickFalzone]

Here's a new article on IndyCar designs (from students). I wish they had more pictures though:

http://www.indycar.com/news/?story_id=11174

[Mad_Hatter]

I'm not liking the way this is going. What are they going to let artists engineer the new car?


Not Good.

[Phoenixent]

I see that one student copied the 1972 Antares for their concept. I want to know what the Target disc does on the model. :D

What a future to look forward to. :(

[weeflyonthewall]

I think an Indycar should not have a significant airbox - it is just not part of the design heritage of the formula....

B I N G O

[NickFalzone]

i don't know if i'd take this all as a negative. How seriously are they taking these designs? It's in addition to, not in place of, whatever car design professionals they already have working in development.

http://www.indycar.com/multimedia/photos/ (http://www.indycar.com/multimedia/photos/gallery.php?series_id=1&event_id=752&track_id=17&eventDate=2008-05-02)

[garyshell]

i don't know if i'd take this all as a negative. How seriously are they taking these designs? It's in addition to, not in place of, whatever car design professionals they already have working in development.

http://www.indycar.com/multimedia/photos/ (http://www.indycar.com/multimedia/photos/gallery.php?series_id=1&event_id=752&track_id=17&eventDate=2008-05-02)

There is something retro cool about the "Audi" one. The XFX is striking as is the Armed Forces Honda one, I like it a lot.

Gary

[BenRoethig]

I'm hoping that audi one is sending some kind of message.

[DrDomm]

While form should follow function, these designs are neat in that they do show what some of the consequences (good or bad) of implementing radical changes (i.e. split rear wing, no wings, cockpit protection, etc.) might be. Cool.

[Breeze]

Put me in the skeptics camp. These designs are fascinating and stylish and creative and all of that, BUT WILL THEY WORK?!! A designer is not an aerodynamicist or a race car engineer, which for me, makes these designs no more than fancy paper weights.

Now, if in the end one of these designs can be adapted to a well engineered car and be fast, stable and adjustable at high speeds, I'm all for it. Until then................

[garyshell]

I think the idea here is to try to bring some design aesthetics to the engineering. Yes, these are PURELY aesthetic designs, they might not be able to be engineered. But look what happens when you remove designers from the process and put everything into the hands of the engineers. You get this sort of GARBAGE. (see attachment) That nose on the leading car is the UGLIEST thing I have ever seen on a race track.

But when you allow the designers and the engineers to work side by side you get things like the Bentley prototype that ran at Le Mans a few years ago. A work of art AND engineering.

Guys, this is NOT an either/or situation.

Gary

[xtlm]

i dont like these crazy futuristic designs....

[!!WALDO!!]

panoz was launched at san jose (July) 2005 and tested throughout 2006 (from what I remember).

So for a 2010 launch I would hope to hear something around july september this year.

Actually it was San Jose in 2006 and raced in 2007. First serious test took place weeks before Las Vegas by Roberto Moreno at Sebring.

It was a rush job like the Atlantics the year before.

(NO REFERENCE, IMPLIED OR REAL TO ANY POSTER, LIVING, DEAD, or NOT YET BORN.)

[Jag_Warrior]

I know... "shame on me for remembering the good old days". But remember when there were new car(S!!!) EVERY year? Sometimes the new car from one manufacturer was an evolution of the previous year. Sometimes it was revolutionary. But multiple manufacturers took multiple approaches. But this discussion just reinforces how pathetic this has become, with people hoping that maybe a better looking, better performing (single make spec?) design can be cobbled together in a couple of years, and be launched three seasons from now.

Other than counting my gray hairs, it doesn't get much worse than that.

[Vegasguy]

I agree, you think that an F1 car is a 1.5 year introduction process? Ummm..... No!

Ive said it before, set some design specs and let the manufacturers build a car... then let the teams buy them.
If you want to control cost you set a max amount allowed for the builder to sell the car for. You set a max price for parts. It can be done.

[ShiftingGears]

Here's a new article on IndyCar designs (from students). I wish they had more pictures though:

http://www.indycar.com/news/?story_id=11174

You'd think that if they designed it based on aesthetics the designs would look better than the Dallara...


How wrong we were!

Fresh sheet of paper - design a car around a wingless formula. Make sure the important things are taken care of and then worry about aesthetics. The racing will sell itself a lot better.

[mantom]

I agree, you think that an F1 car is a 1.5 year introduction process? Ummm..... No!

Ive said it before, set some design specs and let the manufacturers build a car... then let the teams buy them.
If you want to control cost you set a max amount allowed for the builder to sell the car for. You set a max price for parts. It can be done.


If you go that route, you'll end up with one of two scenarios:

a) Car at set price isn't up to the job

or

b) Car is up to the job, but is too expensive for enough teams to purchase.


The highest priority right now is economic control, not getting a kubillion manufacturers competing for limited dollars from a cash strapped pool.

One of the advantages of having a spec series is the costs can be spread out allowing prices of parts to come down from mass production. Panoz would not have been able to produce the DP01 at Champ Car's asking price if they only had 3 teams out of the entire Champ Car paddock purchasing from them. The logistics of hiring personnel on the project and delivering in timely manner would've forced Panoz to raise the price of the car.

Opening up manufacturing of the chassis to multiple vendors is something you do after economic control has been established and teams are back on their feet. That's still a few years away. the next new car needs to be a spec car. After that contract runs out, they'll be able to allow multiple manufacturers to compete.

[mantom]

You'd think that if they designed it based on aesthetics the designs would look better than the Dallara...


How wrong we were!

Fresh sheet of paper - design a car around a wingless formula. Make sure the important things are taken care of and then worry about aesthetics. The racing will sell itself a lot better.

I think we've already seen wingless designs in other series. they all look alike, and for good reason. If you build something purely for function, chances are it won't look too pretty. that's how the Dallara ended up the way it did.

[FORMULA-A]

GOOD SWEET JEEBUS those student cars were HORRIFIC. There are people (Gordon Murray) and cars, THe McLaren M-16, The Lotus 56 Turbine (my favorite Uhm...Wingless car of all time) the AAR EAGLE OLSONITE LIVERY, that were race cars that were works of art not works of art that become race cars!

Stangely, I see so little drawings and hypthesizing about real possibilities and I would give my uhm...well a lot to see and talk about some ideas even radical, battery powered ones!

How about it?

[DrDomm]

I know... "shame on me for remembering the good old days". But remember when there were new car(S!!!) EVERY year? Sometimes the new car from one manufacturer was an evolution of the previous year. Sometimes it was revolutionary. But multiple manufacturers took multiple approaches. But this discussion just reinforces how pathetic this has become, with people hoping that maybe a better looking, better performing (single make spec?) design can be cobbled together in a couple of years, and be launched three seasons from now.

I do remember...and that's what we need again. I've said this for a couple of years now...we need multiple manufacturers. It adds drama and storylines. When Danica isn't winning a race, and when the race is actually boring, we (and the media) will be able to talk about the performance of different chassis manufacturers, engine producers, and perhaps even different tire makers. What a world it will be!

[Jag_Warrior]

Hey, Doc. Yeah, sweet times, weren't they?

I think as long as everything comes down to cost control (instead of increasing the value), nothing is going to change. Formula car racing is going to require a certain budget, no matter the cost of a chassis or engine lease. But if it's seen as a commodity, the value won't be there to encourage sponsors and others to invest. CCWS found that out the hard way. And (IMO) as long as the IRL relies primarily on Danica and Gene Simmons (or other gimmicks) to bring long term value to the series, it'll be in the same boat.

Personally, I think Grand Am has a pretty good model. I'm not crazy about some of the designs. But they've found a way to affordably get a good number of chassis and engine manufacturers involved... and keep costs in line with the expected returns/value.

[Marbles]

Just dust off the chassis rule specs from the mid-nineties -- mail to any interested parties and tell them they have to be able to supply rollers for x-amount of dollars if they want to partake.
Done!
Next problem?

P.S. Just don't let them use that fin\fence that ran down the centre-line of the engine cover from the roll hoop towards the rear spoiler. That was UUHHGGLLYY!! I couldn't believe any top class series would allow such an abomination. Oh well, I guess they didn't know any better back then... way back then... before Jag had grey hairs. ;)

[call_me_andrew]

And what's wrong with that?

Sure as hell beats a 2008 Indycar!

I think a modified (for ovals) DP01 is the way to go. Get a couple of other manufacturers to build one, and stipulate a price (for the chassis and parts).

There are too many small features that wouldn't easily carry over. For example, the DP01's gearbox was designed to be especially cheap. The Dallara's gearbox was designed to act as a crumple zone in a rear first collision. A gearbox like the DP01's crashing rear first on an oval would have F1 like results.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA1KRf9s8Ds

[Jag_Warrior]

P.S. Just don't let them use that fin\fence that ran down the centre-line of the engine cover from the roll hoop towards the rear spoiler. That was UUHHGGLLYY!! I couldn't believe any top class series would allow such an abomination. Oh well, I guess they didn't know any better back then... way back then... before Jag had grey hairs. ;)

That's a good point: the cowl fence or shark fin or whatever it was called. Didn't that first appear on the Penske? Then some other teams used it on their chassis, and some didn't. There were different approaches to aerodynamics from chassis to chassis, and even team to team.

And yeah, I understand and agree that ongoing development costs money. But whether under CART or USAC, part of the attraction this type of racing had in North America was the innovation that was allowed. That seemed to attract fans and sponsors, and it added to a general buzz that the sport no longer seems to have (IMO, true of CCWS or IRL).

I don't know what the magic bullet answer is, but when it comes to spec racing, GP2, Atlantics and Star Mazda do the trick for me. To be top shelf, it seems to me that you have to have something more than that.

I'm going to try some of that Grecian Formula stuff. I met a perky tweenager with a navel ring at a NOPI race a couple of years ago. She said her dad used that junk. So it must be good. :)

[fan-veteran]

Current Dallaras are IMO the safest OW cars ever which is definitely important. So the next car must be even safer.

[Miatanut]

Fresh sheet of paper - design a car around a wingless formula.

What?!
You mean cars the drivers really have to drive??! GASP!
:up:

[NickFalzone]

There's no question that safety is of huge importance in the new design, and being spec more than ever will not only improve safety but balance of safety and speed.

[Marbles]

That's a good point: the cowl fence or shark fin or whatever it was called. Didn't that first appear on the Penske? Then some other teams used it on their chassis, and some didn't. There were different approaches to aerodynamics from chassis to chassis, and even team to team.

And it just popped up now... over a decade later in F1... who'd of thunk?



I don't know what the magic bullet answer is, but when it comes to spec racing, GP2, Atlantics and Star Mazda do the trick for me. To be top shelf, it seems to me that you have to have something more than that.

Personally, for me the best racing finishes last year came from Canadian NASCAR (you had to see Ranger's finish at Trois Rivieres to believe it) and SCCA Touring Car.. But they just ain't sexy. Those guys don't spend anywhere near as much money on losing.

I'd like to see the chassis regs freed up and a small displacement turbo engine. Fiddle with the boost and fuel mileage (restrict revs) when the manufacturers start making too much HP and adjust boost for road and oval purposes. Ferchrissakes, we can't mandate horsepower when more than one engine supplier is involved.


I'm going to try some of that Grecian Formula stuff. I met a perky tweenager with a navel ring at a NOPI race a couple of years ago. She said her dad used that junk. So it must be good. :)

Remember, both top and bottom. The illusion must be complete! So I've heard.



Fresh sheet of paper - design a car around a wingless formula. Make sure the important things are taken care of and then worry about aesthetics. The racing will sell itself a lot better.

Late sixties F1 cars looked great. Also, in my estimation, did a Champ Car when it had it's rear wing knocked off (awesome profile). This should seriously be looked at if the ICS wants a distinct identity. Wings provide advertising space though. Serious set back. They do not, IMO, provide much in the way of crush zone safety. Some here, however, feel they do.

[Miatanut]

Late sixties F1 cars looked great. Also, in my estimation, did a Champ Car when it had it's rear wing knocked off (awesome profile). This should seriously be looked at if the ICS wants a distinct identity. Wings provide advertising space though. Serious set back.

The teams can't currently sell the advertising space they have, and with the nice teardrop shape of the engine cowl, advertising on the cowl would be perfectly visible from a rear 3/4 angle if there wasn't a rear wing blocking the view.

If they had these tail-happy beasts that glued eyeballs to the TV, a whole lot less advertising space would be worth a whole lot more.

[shazbot]

Current Dallaras are IMO the safest OW cars ever which is definitely important. So the next car must be even safer.

?? IRL crash test regs are nothing compared to those implemented in F1. The Panoz DP01 had to pass the F1 front and side impact tests as well. I'd argue the Dallara is at the end of it's life and the series could do with a safer car like the al the other higher level open wheels series.

[Marbles]

Would it be possible for the ICS to desing a cockpit\safety cell and allow manufacturers to design a car around it?

[garyshell]

Would it be possible for the ICS to desing a cockpit\safety cell and allow manufacturers to design a car around it?

With some tight specs on a rear crush zone BEYOND the cell, this is an EXCELLENT idea!

Gary

[gofastandwynn]

?? IRL crash test regs are nothing compared to those implemented in F1. The Panoz DP01 had to pass the F1 front and side impact tests as well. I'd argue the Dallara is at the end of it's life and the series could do with a safer car like the al the other higher level open wheels series.

Do you know how fast the F1 crash testing speed is? 15 m/s, or 33 miles per hour. Steve Matchett recently went on a rant about that on Speed F1 coverage about the low speed of the crash testing. Is it starting to show? Well, Kubica's feet were clearly exposed in his accident at Montreal last year, and you could clearly see daylight through Kovalainen footbox in Barcelona. And they hit at less speeds than what you would see on an oval...

[DrDomm]

There are too many small features that wouldn't easily carry over. For example, the DP01's gearbox was designed to be especially cheap. The Dallara's gearbox was designed to act as a crumple zone in a rear first collision. A gearbox like the DP01's crashing rear first on an oval would have F1 like results.

I have no insight into the specifics of the DP01 gearbox, and whether or not it has the structural integrity to absorb enough energy during an oval crash. But I'd imagine that it would be something that could be modified. I suppose there is a point where too many modifications make it more practical to start from scratch. I'm not convinced that anyone who posts on this forum (aside from maybe Hoop98) has that knowledge.

Here's another guy that might have some insight into the DP01's specifics...
http://archive.motorsportforums.com/vb2/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=23508&

[shazbot]

Do you know how fast the F1 crash testing speed is? 15 m/s, or 33 miles per hour. Steve Matchett recently went on a rant about that on Speed F1 coverage about the low speed of the crash testing. Is it starting to show? Well, Kubica's feet were clearly exposed in his accident at Montreal last year, and you could clearly see daylight through Kovalainen footbox in Barcelona. And they hit at less speeds than what you would see on an oval...

The IRL car would not pass many (any?) of the FIA tests. Obviously there are more tests other than front impact and of course F1 cars don't generally see the kind of impacts that oval race cars can be subject too. Both Kubica's accident and Kovalainen's was a testiment to the safety of the cars. I just think that crash test regs need to be updated for the IRL, and I'm sure they will be with any new rule set that is announced.

[garyshell]

Do you know how fast the F1 crash testing speed is? 15 m/s, or 33 miles per hour. Steve Matchett recently went on a rant about that on Speed F1 coverage about the low speed of the crash testing. Is it starting to show? Well, Kubica's feet were clearly exposed in his accident at Montreal last year, and you could clearly see daylight through Kovalainen footbox in Barcelona. And they hit at less speeds than what you would see on an oval...


The IRL car would not pass many (any?) of the FIA tests. Obviously there are more tests other than front impact and of course F1 cars don't generally see the kind of impacts that oval race cars can be subject too. Both Kubica's accident and Kovalainen's was a testiment to the safety of the cars. I just think that crash test regs need to be updated for the IRL, and I'm sure they will be with any new rule set that is announced.


Testament to the safety of the cars? You have to be kidding right? Kubica's feet were exposed and you could see daylight in the footbox of Kovalainen's car and this is a testament to their safety? No I'm sorry, it is a testament to how LUCKY these two guys were.

Gary

[gofastandwynn]

The IRL car would not pass many (any?) of the FIA tests. Obviously there are more tests other than front impact and of course F1 cars don't generally see the kind of impacts that oval race cars can be subject too. Both Kubica's accident and Kovalainen's was a testiment to the safety of the cars. I just think that crash test regs need to be updated for the IRL, and I'm sure they will be with any new rule set that is announced.

The Dallara was tested to "exceed FIA standards" and passed all crash test standards. The F-1 chassis came apart at speeds a lot slower than what a crash at Indy would be.

[shazbot]

The Dallara was tested to "exceed FIA standards" and passed all crash test standards. The F-1 chassis came apart at speeds a lot slower than what a crash at Indy would be.

Simply not true.

[gofastandwynn]

Simply not true.

http://www.indycar.com/tech/images/dallara_car.jpg

Yea, I guess not...

[garyshell]

Simply not true.

Specifics??? Or is this more of the "testament to the saftey of the F1 cars" sort of thinking?

Gary

[shazbot]

http://www.indycar.com/tech/images/dallara_car.jpg

Yea, I guess not...

I don't understand what the above info proves? I'm not saying that the IRL car is unsafe, just that an F1 car in a typical F1 accident (if there can ever be a typical accident) is safer than an IRL car. Can you honestly say that you would rather have Kubica's accident in a Dallara that his BMW? Kubica's crash was an almighty impact, and the fact that he all but walked away is a testiment to it safety. Yes you could see his feet, but he suffered no injury. The chassis protected him.

My contribution to this thread was merely to suggest that the new IRL car needs to be the safest car for obvious reasons. For example an IRL chassis will not pass an FIA F1 holl hoop test. The rear of the IRL tub is a bolt on alluminium panel which is simply not strong enough to resist the load applied to the roll hoop. Based on the various accidents in the last few years in the IRL that cars have landed upside down the IRL car is still pretty stout. I may be wrong but I think in one of Dario's accidents the roll hoop did fail though.

[garyshell]

Yes you could see his feet, but he suffered no injury. The chassis protected him.

No, if you could see his feet the chassis did NOT protect him. Luck did. It really IS that simple.

Gary

[shazbot]

Luck is not quanitifiable, chassis construction is. He had a huge accident and the only thing between Kubica and the wall was the chassis. I believe the chassis protected him in the same way it protected all the F1 drivers that have had sizeable accidents in the last few years. I think we are going round in circles a bit so perhaps we should agree to disagree! :) I'd like to see the focus of this thread directed at innovative safety improvements to the next generation of IRL cars, or perhaps a new thread entirely if there's the interest?.

[tbyars]

?? IRL crash test regs are nothing compared to those implemented in F1. The Panoz DP01 had to pass the F1 front and side impact tests as well. I'd argue the Dallara is at the end of it's life and the series could do with a safer car like the al the other higher level open wheels series.

I'd like to see links for that post, please. I'd like to see your data that the IRL crash test specs are less than F1.

[garyshell]

Luck is not quanitifiable, chassis construction is. He had a huge accident and the only thing between Kubica and the wall was the chassis. I believe the chassis protected him in the same way it protected all the F1 drivers that have had sizeable accidents in the last few years. I think we are going round in circles a bit so perhaps we should agree to disagree! :) I'd like to see the focus of this thread directed at innovative safety improvements to the next generation of IRL cars, or perhaps a new thread entirely if there's the interest?.


Yes it is not quantifiable. The only point I was trying to make was that if their feet were exposed there was a failure in the chassis in one of the key safety aspects it is supposed to provide. Yes it saved their lives. But it didn't do its entire job. To bring this back on topic, I believe one of the most stringent parts of the spec is and should be in the area of the foot box.

Gary

[shazbot]

I agree, although it is almost impossible to design a nose cone that would disipate the energy of a high speed head on crash. Of course you can't make a car totally safe from impacts, and I think that Kubica's accident was so violent that without a total re-think on the way cars are designed and drivers are postioned no car could withstand that kind of impact without transfering massive forces the driver. The fact that cars crush in a fairly controlled way helps to reduce the G-loading on the driver. As I'm sure you guys know the FIA place load sensors on the impacting part of the test equipment. If the G load excedes a pre-set limit the part fails regardless of how little/much it crushed. Interestingly if you look at the Kubica accident you'll notice that the nose cone was knocked off on the initial impact, reducing its ability to absorb the impact somewhat. The FIA has various 'push-off' tests conducted on the chassis, one of which is the nose. It's easy to say that perhaps that should be a more stringent test but again this was a hefty impact.

[weeflyonthewall]

Current Dallaras are IMO the safest OW cars ever which is definitely important. So the next car must be even safer.

Safest in what respect? Certainly not by FIA standards.

[Marbles]

The only time I've ever seen an F1 car hit a concrete wall on an oval the driver broke several vertabrae...(and sat unattended to for several minutes, but that's a different story). I find that FIA talks a great game when it comes to safety but their execution tells a different story. Those horse blinder raised cockpit sides they mandated this year are a joke and with all the resources at their disposal they've yet to come up with a wheel tether that actually works.

I certainly don't think the Dallaras are anything to brag about either but if I had to drive into a cement wall (and not a 6 deep tire safety barrier) at 200 miles an hour I would probably choose the Dallara.

[NickFalzone]

I know very little about the safety features of a Dallara vs an F1 car but based on that ignorance I'd prefer a Dallara on an oval and an F1 on a road course.

[Hoop-98]

IMHO, the Panoz wouldn't work in an evironment of competing chassis. Normally chassis builders have to work within in an ever tightening box of rules and differentiate their offering thru research and development.

Small details and engineering make up the difference between chassis. The DP01 was built to a cost/performance standard, and could do things like increase tunnel size for free downforce.

If you took the specs for the DP01 and let Lola build the car (or Panoz) you can bet it would perform much better.

Then you would have to tighten the rules and so on and so on. One other thing, while I can't be sure, I think the high nose was mostly for that euro look. Whn you look at what drove the development of the high nose cars in F1 it was a way around the rules, not some natural evolution. I believe it is highly likely that a combination oval/road course design would go in a different direction, like the Lolas and Reynards.

Anyways, just my thoughts. Also I think the DP01 gearbox is basically the same as the Lolas IIRC, not sure.

rh

[shazbot]

I'd like to see links for that post, please. I'd like to see your data that the IRL crash test specs are less than F1.

IRL Roll Hoop - 25kN Laterally, 50 kN longitudinally, 70kN vertically
F1 Roll Hoop - 50kN Laterally, 60 kN longitudinally, 90kN vertically

IRL front impact test @ 12m/s (there is a secondary impact test @ 8.5 m/s)
F1 front impact test @ 15m/s

This is basic stuff because the F1 regs seem to be more specific on initial investigation, and the IRL don't specify in as much deatil that I can find. Rear impact tests on both are conducted at similar speeds. The nose push off tests appear to be the same as well. The F1 cars have a regulated side impact crash structure which the IRL do not have. They do however mandate side pod construction and there is a side intrusion test (tub).

[maylego]

That might be the greatest pro turbo argument I've ever seen. That thing makes the Dallara look good.

I think the Dallara looks ugly.

Simon Marshall designed the DP09.

Video with Menard V-12

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kwkKn7Zm_U

Simon:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ma75_Q2U4w

Future indy cars

Specifics weren’t offered on future car configurations or whether the series will return to turbocharged (http://fast-autos.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7864#) engines from the current naturally aspirated format. The IndyCar Series’ current engine/chassis generation ends after the 2009 season.

http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/george-kalkhoven-lay-out-unification-plans/