New chassis time frame

[Wilf]

At this point they're all concepts," Barnhart said Wednesday. "There's more questions around the radical car, but until they become realities, we can't be in position to pick one until they're off the computer screen and on the track.

"The proposals are exciting and unique, and yet they're all very similar from the business side. It's really coming down to making a decision on which is the best direction for the future of IndyCar."

Barnhart says the IRL must settle on a design within the next three months to have it ready for 2012. While the IRL would welcome competing chassis manufacturers, it seems likely only one might be chosen.

This is from USA Today. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/motor/irl/2010-02-03-irl-new-chassis_N.htm

[nigelred5]

[quote="Wilf"] While the IRL would welcome competing chassis manufacturers, it seems likely only one might be chosen.

[\QUOTE]

That's a bad decision IMHO. Champcar and the IRL have shown a spec chassis doesn't sell tickets. They need CHASSIS competition as much if not more than engine competition to make the competion exciting.

[Scheckterfan54]

[\QUOTE]

That's a bad decision IMHO. Champcar and the IRL have shown a spec chassis doesn't sell tickets. They need CHASSIS competition as much if not more than engine competition to make the competion exciting.[/QUOTE]

Chassis competition will not singlehandidly revive AOWR. This is a step in the right direction. The IRL is choosing their path for the future, in order to have multiple chassis there has to be a starting point.

I hope I dont forget to buy more kool-aid at the store tomorrow.

[gofastandwynn]

While I would like to see multiple chassis manufactures, it is not financially possible at this point and most in this forum need to come to reality about that.

We need for this car to be cheaper than the current. Everybody is in agreement about that. But the only way to get the cost down and have a great car is for there to be single mfg. If we go with multiple chassis mfg. then the cars will cost more just because they have to recoup their investments with fewer cars sold.

[Chamoo]

I think this cost argument is more dependant on actual numbers and scales.

If Dallara or Lola or Swift can build a car for $250000 if they are granted the sole manufacturers spot, or they build a car for $300000 if they have competition from 1 or 2 entities, which one do you choose?

Obviously these numbers are not specific as I don't have any information to the actual prices. I think this is something that needs to be considered. At what point is it feasible to run multiple chassis?

Personally, I hope that Randy Bernard tours the IMS museum and realizes that we need to have multiple chassis' on the track, and passes that along to BB.

[gofastandwynn]

I think this cost argument is more dependant on actual numbers and scales.

If Dallara or Lola or Swift can build a car for $250000 if they are granted the sole manufacturers spot, or they build a car for $300000 if they have competition from 1 or 2 entities, which one do you choose?

Obviously these numbers are not specific as I don't have any information to the actual prices. I think this is something that needs to be considered. At what point is it feasible to run multiple chassis?

Personally, I hope that Randy Bernard tours the IMS museum and realizes that we need to have multiple chassis' on the track, and passes that along to BB.

I would agree that it does depend on scale and actual numbers, but lets be realistic, teams aren't beating down the door to join.

Realistically, the will probably be 40-50 chassis sold. I 1 chassis mfg spends $8,000,000 on R&D, then they would have to sell the cars at $180,000 each to recoup their investment. If there are 2 mfg., now you have just split the chassis pool in half and need to make up your investment with fewer cars sold.

This is the same dilemma the US Gov & Lockheed Martin with the F-35, where Lockheed could say it would be sold at a low price because of the guaranteed Gov sales, but now the the US is backing out of orders Lockheed is telling customers the price is going up per plane.

If there were enough teams to sell 100-120 chassis then yes, it would make sense, but I just don't see how that is at all possible.

[dataman1]

I would agree that it does depend on scale and actual numbers, but lets be realistic, teams aren't beating down the door to join.

Realistically, the will probably be 40-50 chassis sold. I 1 chassis mfg spends $8,000,000 on R&D, then they would have to sell the cars at $180,000 each to recoup their investment. If there are 2 mfg., now you have just split the chassis pool in half and need to make up your investment with fewer cars sold.

This is the same dilemma the US Gov & Lockheed Martin with the F-35, where Lockheed could say it would be sold at a low price because of the guaranteed Gov sales, but now the the US is backing out of orders Lockheed is telling customers the price is going up per plane.

If there were enough teams to sell 100-120 chassis then yes, it would make sense, but I just don't see how that is at all possible.

All good points. Let me add another thought. If the R & D was done by the league and specs handed out to chassis builders then the builder with the most efficient operation could sell for less. (Sort of using the Grand-Am model). Yes, it will take cash to do the R & D so a league partner is needed who can engineer the specs, build models, do some crash testing, etc.. Let that partner take the credit, give them fee ads, a suite, etc.. Thought for consideration.

[nigelred5]

As long as the starting point is less than 2, there is no incentive for any other chasis manufacturer to come in and compete with an established design. They have been through this and told that before. IMHO, they really need to think about a general downsizing of the car. IMHO, I'd rather see them open the series to various existing cars with similar performance than ram-rodding yet another new specification no one can afford. Just about any of the various large formula cars other than F1 would be capable of zeroing in on 210-215 mph on a superspeedway. I hear there's a warehouse of Ferrari A1GP cars available that could probably be bought for a song. throw in a few superleague teams, a few former Champcar, etc. and see what they are capable of. To my knowledge, the cars have all passed FIA crash tests at least if not more stringent than the IRL.

[nigelred5]

All good points. Let me add another thought. If the R & D was done by the league and specs handed out to chassis builders then the builder with the most efficient operation could sell for less. (Sort of using the Grand-Am model). Yes, it will take cash to do the R & D so a league partner is needed who can engineer the specs, build models, do some crash testing, etc.. Let that partner take the credit, give them fee ads, a suite, etc.. Thought for consideration.

that gets close to the suggstions in the other thread we had going. Design a common tub specification, maybe a spec under tray since that is a large part that created both a lot of controversy and is an expensive part to mfg simply due to it's size. Give a base aero package and let anyone that wants to compete do the rest.

[DBell]

While I would like to see multiple chassis manufactures, it is not financially possible at this point and most in this forum need to come to reality about that.

We need for this car to be cheaper than the current. Everybody is in agreement about that. But the only way to get the cost down and have a great car is for there to be single mfg. If we go with multiple chassis mfg. then the cars will cost more just because they have to recoup their investments with fewer cars sold.

I agree with the points you made. The DP01 did nothing to attract more people to Champcar.. It had about the same level of performance as the Lola and, other than give the fans a shiny new car to talk about, I didn't see that it made any difference in getting more people to watch. I think the same will happen if a new Indycar is introduced in 2012. It'll still be a spec series and that seems to draw little interest outside the current fan base.

As you pointed out, without money coming from somewhere and manufacturers wanting to participate, there is little hope of bringing back competition to Indycar. That is the catch 22 that Indycar is in, damned if they do and damned if they don't.

[elan 02]

Wow , Nigels post 9 nailed it .Best idea being thrown around in the past three years of reading all this. Pool up all these exisiting cars Dallara , Dp1, SL, AR1,Lolas,give them a spec. sheet and say lets go racing for the next four years. I know the die hards would love it!

[call_me_andrew]

[\QUOTE]

That's a bad decision IMHO. Champcar and the IRL have shown a spec chassis doesn't sell tickets. They need CHASSIS competition as much if not more than engine competition to make the competion exciting.

Chassis competition will not singlehandidly revive AOWR. This is a step in the right direction. The IRL is choosing their path for the future, in order to have multiple chassis there has to be a starting point.

I hope I dont forget to buy more kool-aid at the store tomorrow.[/QUOTE]

I'm with Scheckterfan. We're race fans; we can tell the difference between a Lola B02 from a Dallara IR5 just by looking at them. But the average layperson doesn't know an F1 car from a Top Fuel Dragster.