Don't Fear the Future, but Brian Barnhart does?

[Mark in Oshawa]

http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/miller-dont-fear-2012/

The latest from Robin Miller. His take on the new car, the new engine possibly, and how Barnhart is having kittens worrying about losing control of the formula. Robin lays out a pretty good rationale for how this is the chance to breathe a lot of life into the sport, even tho I suspect we can quibble on some of it. That said, the last few paragraphs he basically calls out Barnhart for trying to reign in this diversity in design. I don't know if that is fair or not, but I do know that the status quo isn't working for a lot of people, and he better grasp THAT.

[NickFalzone]

Well it's on Brian if the safety of the new cars isn't up to snuff, and if the racing isn't exciting. I'd say he has a lot of pressure to make sure they do it right. I however, disagree with what is apparently Brian's mindset that, as-is, the IRL is moving in the right direction. What I see is a series that's gotten pretty stale in loads of ways, and needs to try something different. A very unique car design is important in separating it from the common perception of F1 racing that the American public generally is not interested in. I do think the IRL needs to position itself, with its new car design, as an exciting and very unique alternative to NASCAR, and not simply slower F1 cars that run on a variety of tracks. I'm not saying that Bowlby's design is superior or Dallara's new car is superior. We simply don't know. But I do think that the more extreme changes in look, handling, and performance, will pay off bigger for the league.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Well it's on Brian if the safety of the new cars isn't up to snuff, and if the racing isn't exciting. I'd say he has a lot of pressure to make sure they do it right. I however, disagree with what is apparently Brian's mindset that, as-is, the IRL is moving in the right direction. What I see is a series that's gotten pretty stale in loads of ways, and needs to try something different. A very unique car design is important in separating it from the common perception of F1 racing that the American public generally is not interested in. I do think the IRL needs to position itself, with its new car design, as an exciting and very unique alternative to NASCAR, and not simply slower F1 cars that run on a variety of tracks. I'm not saying that Bowlby's design is superior or Dallara's new car is superior. We simply don't know. But I do think that the more extreme changes in look, handling, and performance, will pay off bigger for the league.

The impression I get is that Brian likes having a lot of control over the formula and wants to make this simple to police. AT some point...he has to grasp that Miller is right in the sense what got many of us to love Indy, and the rest of the series was the variety of cars, packages and ideas. There is ZERO innovation, so all Penske and Ganassi do is to polish and tune every part and piece to the nth degree and they will always run up front. If there is many variables, they have to have the better package where the other guys are bringing new ideas to the table, some that work better than what they have.

[gofastandwynn]

http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/miller-dont-fear-2012/

The latest from Robin Miller. His take on the new car, the new engine possibly, and how Barnhart is having kittens worrying about losing control of the formula. Robin lays out a pretty good rationale for how this is the chance to breathe a lot of life into the sport, even tho I suspect we can quibble on some of it. That said, the last few paragraphs he basically calls out Barnhart for trying to reign in this diversity in design. I don't know if that is fair or not, but I do know that the status quo isn't working for a lot of people, and he better grasp THAT.

My problem with all of this is that Robin has offered no proof that this is the answer to the problem, it is just presented as different.

Robin speaks of the old days of multiple chassis & engines, and wanting to see Dan Drinan & Joe Devin build cars for the 500, low costs, etc. And yet he never explains how this new car could change all of this nor if it even will. All this sounds like a single make car (by Dallara in the USA) with engines by Honda. WOW, what a change.

And it will have even less horse power @ 325 hp. Really, 325? A midget engine produces between 325 & 400 hp @ 900 lbs. You really think a 325 hp turbo will get the ratings up?

It worries me that you people are so wrapped up in this idea of change that none of you are asking if it will be any better.

[gofastandwynn]

There is ZERO innovation, so all Penske and Ganassi do is to polish and tune every part and piece to the nth degree and they will always run up front.

As compared to the old days of innovation when Penske & Ganassi were the only ones who had the most money to develop the car the best and they always ran upfront.

Once again where does Robin show this car will keep Penske & Ganassi from winning all of the time?

I think that most of you have nostalgia bias and remember past events as having been better than they really were at the time.

[speeddurango]

This new car has basically everything the old car has. Apart from its low horsepower, but irl adopted much lower horsepower than CART anyway back in the day, hence not a backstep. The rest are good----low cost, innovations, possibilities of putting on a good show etc. Loving the idea. There is always one thing or another to be skeptical about before innovations, and it is right in doing so; but the thing is that irl is now in such a miserable state that it needs to find a radical new way and test them out. irl is basically now in a "what have you got to lose" situation now.

[indyracefan]

I wouldn't take every word from Miller as gospel nor do I approve of Barnhart's 'ultra-conservative, zero innovation, keep things as they are' mindset.

[Wilf]

I wouldn't take every word from Miller as gospel nor do I approve of Barnhart's 'ultra-conservative, zero innovation, keep things as they are' mindset.

Is that based on what Brian has said or what Robin thinks?

[Mark in Oshawa]

As compared to the old days of innovation when Penske & Ganassi were the only ones who had the most money to develop the car the best and they always ran upfront.

Once again where does Robin show this car will keep Penske & Ganassi from winning all of the time?

I think that most of you have nostalgia bias and remember past events as having been better than they really were at the time.

Wynn, here is the deal: If you open the series up for multiple manufacturers and allow some innovation, a small team can find something that a big team doesn't. A different package option allows people to guess right or wrong on what chassis to buy or develop.

Having one mandated chassis with no changes allowed is spec racing. Last Time I looked, no SCCA spec racing series ever made really compelling television.

As for the power, I want more of it. I am not in agreement with Miller on that score. I want them running 800 hp with very minimal wings...I want to see guys manhandlling the cars through the corners on roadcourses in full out slides...On the ovals, I want to see them run 240 down the straight at Indy and actually have to brake down to about 190 or so to make the corner...Then the driver's ability will make a difference.

As for Penske and Ganassi, they will win more than the others just on their large engineering and support, and their superior money advantage. That said, under the current strict rules, they will dominate because they can perfect everything to the 10th one of a percent that the others cant, and if everyone is equal, this will often win. In a series where there are many options on setup and chassis, the blind squirrel will find more nuts theory kicks in. Andretti's teams will find something and win a race or two. Maybe Rahal Letterman will find something and win ( providing they are still in the biz)

AS for Robin's theory on cheaper racing, I think he is thinking this can be a "junk" formula like Indy had in the 30's. Not sure how he figures that will happen, but I think he wants local guys to at least be given a set of rules and a "box" and let them try to build a race car to compete with. Noble thought...beats everyone in a Dallara with no mods allowed and a sealed Honda.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Is that based on what Brian has said or what Robin thinks?
It is based on how there is no innovation allowed with the current Dallara and sealed Honda.

Tell me who designed this idea? Brian.... so the proof is in the results. The teams are all running identical race cars because they have no other choice. It isn't Roger Penske's idea trust me...

[gofastandwynn]

Wynn, here is the deal: If you open the series up for multiple manufacturers and allow some innovation, a small team can find something that a big team doesn't. A different package option allows people to guess right or wrong on what chassis to buy or develop.

Having one mandated chassis with no changes allowed is spec racing. Last Time I looked, no SCCA spec racing series ever made really compelling television.



As nice of an idea that could be, there is about the last 30 years of auto racing that disagrees. How many times were the McLarens outpaced in the Can Am before the bigger factory came in? How many privateers won once Nissan, Toyota & Jaguar came in to GTP? When you open it up to innovation the small teams get left in the dust of the big teams, because it is the big teams that to do the development. And even when manufactures go with the smaller guys (Spirit Honda in F1 or AAR Toyota in CART) they bolt for the bigger teams (Williams & Ganassi).

Do you think Dale Coyne ever would have won a race if there was no split?

When you open it up to innovation, it comes down to a cash game, and how fast can you afford to go.




As for Penske and Ganassi, they will win more than the others just on their large engineering and support, and their superior money advantage. That said, under the current strict rules, they will dominate because they can perfect everything to the 10th one of a percent that the others cant, and if everyone is equal, this will often win. In a series where there are many options on setup and chassis, the blind squirrel will find more nuts theory kicks in. Andretti's teams will find something and win a race or two. Maybe Rahal Letterman will find something and win ( providing they are still in the biz)

AS for Robin's theory on cheaper racing, I think he is thinking this can be a "junk" formula like Indy had in the 30's. Not sure how he figures that will happen, but I think he wants local guys to at least be given a set of rules and a "box" and let them try to build a race car to compete with. Noble thought...beats everyone in a Dallara with no mods allowed and a sealed Honda.

But my problem with this is that there is still no expatiation as to how this car will fix the problems that everybody seem to have. What on this car will keep things equal w/o Penske & Ganassi's large engineering & support placing them into dominance? Robin doesn't answer this nor has he even made an attempt to.

Robin brings up Drinan & home made chassis, then a paragraph later talks about Lola, Panoz & Swift making cars again. How is that supposed to work? A guy in a race shop will be competitive against engineers with wind tunnels & fluid dynamics? Get real people.

I want a formula car, with wings, sidepods & a center chassis like all formula cars evolved from. I don't wanna see everybody throw out the baby with the bathwater because they don't like this car.

I want cars running on the ragged edge with new track records. I want turbos w/ more power and multiple chassis, but I could honestly care less about innovation. Honestly when was the last time there was real ground breaking innovation in champ/indy car? The turbine? There sure wasn't any in cart and that appears to be what we are trying to get back to.

[Wilf]

It is based on how there is no innovation allowed with the current Dallara and sealed Honda.

Tell me who designed this idea? Brian.... so the proof is in the results. The teams are all running identical race cars because they have no other choice. It isn't Roger Penske's idea trust me...

Or, could it be that Chevy, Toyota and Infinity said bye bye followed soon after by G-Force/Panoz. The spec series was created when there was only one chassis and one engine supplier left. I don't think anyone designed it that way.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Money always wins over all, but the little guy can sneak one in every now and then if the rules allow new ideas.

Don't disagree with your last points tho....but it wont happen. They wont let the teams push the cars forward to chase those lap records. If they are going to "slow" down racing, let them change it and try a new idea, make the cars hard to drive and make it apparent to the man in the stands how on the edge they are.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Or, could it be that Chevy, Toyota and Infinity said bye bye followed soon after by G-Force/Panoz. The spec series was created when there was only one chassis and one engine supplier left. I don't think anyone designed it that way.

The IRL has shown little or no inclination to open up that playing field in the last few years either....

THey were the ones who said you had to have a chassis from one or two suppliers, and said only some engines from certain manufacturers could be legal. With the process of time, the top stuff was adapted by everyone else, and with the rules being as tight as they are, there was no way to make the other stuff competitive.

The way things used to work was you wrote rules and said whomever builds a car to pass under those rules, can race. No set chassis suppliers, no designated engine suppliers.. Am I splitting hairs? no...not really. Whatever you do, you do NOT want people in the racing business feeling they are being excluded by rules or officialdom, and that was the essence of what the IRL did.

[Wilf]

The IRL has shown little or no inclination to open up that playing field in the last few years either....

THey were the ones who said you had to have a chassis from one or two suppliers, and said only some engines from certain manufacturers could be legal. With the process of time, the top stuff was adapted by everyone else, and with the rules being as tight as they are, there was no way to make the other stuff competitive.

The way things used to work was you wrote rules and said whomever builds a car to pass under those rules, can race. No set chassis suppliers, no designated engine suppliers.. Am I splitting hairs? no...not really. Whatever you do, you do NOT want people in the racing business feeling they are being excluded by rules or officialdom, and that was the essence of what the IRL did.

Have we forgotten that five engine suppliers HAD expressed continued interest in participating in IndyCar. That doesn't sound like there was a too restrictive set of requirements.

Since then the economy has taken a dump and we just learned earlier this week that the VW group was walking. If IndyCar has done anything, they've been too protective of the little guy. Either of the red car teams could fund the development of a new chassis, but the IndyCar insists that any chassis available to one has to be available to all at a fixed dollar amount. They had similar requirements on the engine suppliers to protect the little guys.

If you want five or six cars on the track, let em run what they brung. Otherwise you have to make sure everyone has access to the same equipment for a price. Is that wrong; is Brian Barnhart really a big meanie?

[CCWS77]

The way things used to work was you wrote rules and said whomever builds a car to pass under those rules, can race. No set chassis suppliers, no designated engine suppliers.. Am I splitting hairs? no...not really. Whatever you do, you do NOT want people in the racing business feeling they are being excluded by rules or officialdom, and that was the essence of what the IRL did.

I think most fans like the idea of you set fixed rules ahead of time and whoever complies with them can show up and race. MY question is if fans are really oblivious to the difference between that and what really happens, which is a political and financial negotiation on exactly what is legal and therefore who has an advantage. If that is what it is going to be then you might as well stick with a SPEC supplier because it certainly will bring NONE of the innovation or competition that people always dream about when they view manufacturer involvement with their rose colored glasses.

Notice the IRL attempts to get manufacturers involved explicitly was NOT by setting rules ahead of time and saying all are welcome. It was by private political and financial negotiations on what it takes to accommodate them. That difference is NOT splitting hairs either.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Have we forgotten that five engine suppliers HAD expressed continued interest in participating in IndyCar. That doesn't sound like there was a too restrictive set of requirements.

Since then the economy has taken a dump and we just learned earlier this week that the VW group was walking. If IndyCar has done anything, they've been too protective of the little guy. Either of the red car teams could fund the development of a new chassis, but the IndyCar insists that any chassis available to one has to be available to all at a fixed dollar amount. They had similar requirements on the engine suppliers to protect the little guys.

If you want five or six cars on the track, let em run what they brung. Otherwise you have to make sure everyone has access to the same equipment for a price. Is that wrong; is Brian Barnhart really a big meanie?

Wilf, we had 5 or 6 engine manufacturers sniffing around, but no one actually committed did they?

The economy may well be the only factor, but I am always left with the thought that the IRL's insistence on everything being available to everyone is a factor that discourges growth. If VW for example wants to do a deal with Chip, then why should they maybe have to tool up to give 3 more teams the engines? What if they don't want to commit to that? so they look at it..and realize that is too much exposure for them. THAT is the IRL. They are trying to help the little guy, but they are actually stifling the series by making the admission price for entry for the series on the back of the supplier. Honda is there by the grace of god, and because they have exclusivity at this point, but I suspect it is better for their marketing if they beat someone.

Ditto with the chassis. I am repeating more or less what you say, so I am really going to say the IRL should set the rules up, say, build what you want to fit inside this box, and the engine has to be fueled with Ethanol, only suck back so much CFM of air, and get an average of x amount of mpg. After that...have at it. You want a rotary? go ahead, you want a turbo 4? Sure....

Parity in car design is what the IRL has aimed at in aims of reducing costs, but it is killing the series. Now I realize Chip and Roger have more dough and will likely clean up...but explain how that is different that what happened this year?

Gotta shake up the paradigm in my opinion...but I know Brian isn't thinking that way. I can understand how he thinks that way, but the result is, the series is stiflingly boring...One only had to watch Richmond to see that.

[Mark in Oshawa]

I think most fans like the idea of you set fixed rules ahead of time and whoever complies with them can show up and race. MY question is if fans are really oblivious to the difference between that and what really happens, which is a political and financial negotiation on exactly what is legal and therefore who has an advantage. If that is what it is going to be then you might as well stick with a SPEC supplier because it certainly will bring NONE of the innovation or competition that people always dream about when they view manufacturer involvement with their rose colored glasses.

Notice the IRL attempts to get manufacturers involved explicitly was NOT by setting rules ahead of time and saying all are welcome. It was by private political and financial negotiations on what it takes to accommodate them. That difference is NOT splitting hairs either.

I think too much of this stuff has been back room. By setting one set of rules and say build what you must to fit within them, it then is equal to anyone who wants to enter. It is basically how USAC set up the formulae in the wild era between the roadsters and the 70's. They made adjustments at Indy to accomodate stock blocks, and some of the greatest stories came out of this era. We saw lots of interesting stuff. THe only reason the sport wasn't bigger because racing itself was not covered live, if at all, and only the hardcore racers were able to go. If we had that sort of change, innovation and interest with today's media, it would wipe NASCAR off the map.

One more point. By putting the rules in the open, add in a codicil. If you see that things are getting out of hand, you maybe change the rules but it is done in consultation with the teams. They don't get the veto, and yes they will complain, but heck, they do that now anyhow.

Right now we have two teams that have honed those cars down to such a fine edge that they are just that little bit better everywhere and as a result, only 4 cars are running up front at every event onthe ovals, and almost every road/street course. Dale Coyne's team winning at the Glen with Justin Wilson was the highlight of the year....so it is obvious the status quo of constant "parity" also helps the best teams.

BTW, I think Barnhart has done a lot of good things, and I don't hold it personal against him that I think he has created this parity. He was mandated to do this for money reasons, and he made the IRL a professional organization in how they presented a race. The sport owes him a lot on that score...but on this, new ideas please...

[CCWS77]

I just think fans and even IRL leadership falsely equate having a manufacturer involved as somehow equaling or leading to these exciting idea of bring whatever you come with that meets these fixed rules.

1(GOOD)fixed rules ahead of time, build and bring whatever you can to meet that
2(OK) SPEC rules with fixed suppliers
3(AWFUL) manufacturer negotiated and subsidized bendable rules


everyone bitches about 2, but that is not the real problem, 3 is. That is what the IRL has been doing all along and continues to fail at. People just get confused by the fact that only 1 company wanted to play.

[Mark in Oshawa]

I just think fans and even IRL leadership falsely equate having a manufacturer involved as somehow equaling or leading to these exciting idea of bring whatever you come with that meets these fixed rules.

1(GOOD)fixed rules ahead of time, build and bring whatever you can to meet that
2(OK) SPEC rules with fixed suppliers
3(AWFUL) manufacturer negotiated and subsidized bendable rules


everyone bitches about 2, but that is not the real problem, 3 is. That is what the IRL has been doing all along and continues to fail at. People just get confused by the fact that only 1 company wanted to play.

CCWS, once upon a time there was 3 chassis choices and two or three engine choices, and I didn't see a huge difference due to the nature of the rules. THAT said, it was still more interesting to me then. I was an avid watcher of IRL events even tho I was more of a CART guy mainly because I love racing, and I was waiting for Tony George and his management to either prove me wrong or give it up. They never proved me wrong, and he didn't give up...lol

[CCWS77]

but don't you see, i'm not saying that more more engines and openness would not be better. I'm point out that the way people advocate to get that result is totally wrong, backwards, and debilitating to the sport.

having a SPEC rules with fixed suppliers is a CLOSER step to the ideal of fixed rules in which anybody can bring anything that meets them. The totally bogus concept that we will engage in politics and backroom financial deals in order to bring in a bunch of various competing manufacturers into the fold is a bogus road that is never going to lead to the idea of setting rules ahead of time with integrity for anyone to build to.

[gofastandwynn]

I just think fans and even IRL leadership falsely equate having a manufacturer involved as somehow equaling or leading to these exciting idea of bring whatever you come with that meets these fixed rules.

1(GOOD)fixed rules ahead of time, build and bring whatever you can to meet that
2(OK) SPEC rules with fixed suppliers
3(AWFUL) manufacturer negotiated and subsidized bendable rules


everyone bitches about 2, but that is not the real problem, 3 is. That is what the IRL has been doing all along and continues to fail at. People just get confused by the fact that only 1 company wanted to play.

If I had my chance to run the rule book, this is what I would say. (left intentionally vague because I'm not an expert.)

Car specs to keep it to look like a traditional Indycar/formula car. What I fear about this "delta" car is that people look at it and do not recognize it as a indycar. It should have wings, sidepods, central carbon fiber tub, etc.

The rear wing would measure XX sq. inches, the maximum width being no wider than the distance between the rear tires , so you could run thinner tires and a wider but narrower wing.

Chassis would not be limited by manufactures, so any car built to spec could be allowed to enter. Max. price rules would still be enforced, with a min. product that must be met if demanded that would be determined by the league (so Lola would have to be able to produce more cars than if Dan Drinan tried) Cars would be on a 3 year cycle, new cars would only be allowed at the start each 3 year period. All undertrays would have to be submitted to the league for approval before they could be run. The undertrays could be changed & updated year to year, buy the one submitted at the start of the season is the only one that will be legal on that car for the year.

Engines would be a mixed variants as big as 4.0L NA (V12 to V8) or 2.0L turbocharged (V-6 to I-4) or. Boost levels, rev limiters and air restrictors would be used to equal the power. Power outputs would be targeted at 900 hp for the RC and Indianapolis and 700 for all other ovals. Engine formula could be adjusted at anytime for competition purposes to maintain level playing field (So if they went back to Denver, turbo cars would get less boost than Long Beach or St. Pete at sea level) Adjustments could also be made using min. weight or fuel cell size.

It is a blend or CART, IRL, Grand Am & ACO/FIA sports car rules. Is it perfect, no.