A question concernig historic lap times.

[Spiderman]

Maybe someone can help me. In 1979 and 1980 IndyCar and F1 raced in Watkins Glen. Did they do the same track configuration and if yes, what were the times for pole position and fastest lap in the race?

[Hoop-98]

Maybe someone can help me. In 1979 and 1980 IndyCar and F1 raced in Watkins Glen. Did they do the same track configuration and if yes, what were the times for pole position and fastest lap in the race?

CART was a lot shorter, F1 was similar configuration., about 3/100 of a mile shorter.

Pole
Driver Italy Bruno Giacomelli Alfa Romeo
Time 1:33.291
Fastest lap
Driver Australia Alan Jones Williams-Ford
Time 1:34.068 on lap 44

CART ran the Grand Prix course in 81,
Pole was 1:43.4

http://www.ultimateracinghistory.com/race.php?raceid=10205

http://www.ultimateracinghistory.com/racelist3.php?trackid=165

rh

[Spiderman]

CART was a lot shorter, F1 was similar configuration., about 3/100 of a mile shorter.

Pole
Driver Italy Bruno Giacomelli Alfa Romeo
Time 1:33.291
Fastest lap
Driver Australia Alan Jones Williams-Ford
Time 1:34.068 on lap 44

CART ran the Grand Prix course in 81,
Pole was 1:43.4

http://www.ultimateracinghistory.com/race.php?raceid=10205

http://www.ultimateracinghistory.com/racelist3.php?trackid=165

rh

Thanks!

Did it rain in the indycar qualifyings. Or were the cars 10 seconds slower in reality?

[Hoop-98]

Thanks!

Did it rain in the indycar qualifyings. Or were the cars 10 seconds slower in reality?

Nope no rain..

[e2mtt]

Just a little thing to put lap times in perspective:... BMW's X5 (the sport utility) can lap Nurburgring faster than Jim Clark did in a '60s F1 car.

Cars, including race cars, have gotten a LOT faster. In 1990, a Corvette went 0-to-60 in 5.2, now they are doing it in 3.7.

Of course they've gotten a lot safer too... in 1980 hitting the wall often mean months in rehab, now the worry is getting the backup car set up in time to qualify later the same day.

[Hoop-98]

perspective:

At CART/Indycar's peak in 2002, they were about 6 seconds off F1 (Montreal)m about 15 MPH down on trap speeds. The current indycar is ~2 seconds a lap slower than the 2003 CART on a 80 second lap.

If we get a 700 BHP/1400 pound car in 2012, it will likely be the quickest (Road/Street) Indycar ever. Then we will find many other things to whine about I am sure :)

rh

[Civic]

Would've been interesting if F1 and CART ran Montreal the same year in 1996 or 1997.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Would've been interesting if F1 and CART ran Montreal the same year in 1996 or 1997.

The thing is, CART got within 6 seconds of f1 at Montreal...and that is a circuit that in a sense is the worst possible place for an Indy car to try to stay with an f1 car. I would have loved to have seen a Lola from the peak of CART go around Spa....all those fast corners and the big power would likely give it sections where it was faster than the f1 car.

I think it is in the brakes where the Indy car suffers...that and the weight. The carbon fiber and ceramics in an F1 car really give it that ability to maximize straights....and make the racing dull since you rarely see good braking duels in F1 anymore...

[DBell]

Just a little thing to put lap times in perspective:... BMW's X5 (the sport utility) can lap Nurburgring faster than Jim Clark did in a '60s F1 car.


This is hard to quantify because the Nordschleife has changed so much from the 60's. Besides the changes such as curbing, widening, guardrails and the shaving off of some of the famous crests, the layout was drastically altered in the early 80's when the current GP course was constructed. The original straight where the start line and the pits were is gone, plus the north loop and the parallel straight the ran behind the original pits. This took well over a mile of the old configuration. No matter what configuration is run now, it's very different than the one F1 raced on back in the 60's.

[Hoop-98]

Would've been interesting if F1 and CART ran Montreal the same year in 1996 or 1997.

They are/were quite different animals. The CART/Indycar was 500 pounds heavier on the grid but was allowed much more aero. The F1 was much more of an accell/decel car while the CART/Indycar was more of a momentum car.

Thus the large differences in trap speeds. The thing is, neither car was/is comparable. Both have been slowed way down by rules, just different approaches.

Comparing CART/Indy to F1 since the 80's is like saying a Seiko keeps as good a time as a Rolex for 1/100 the cost, just different worlds entirely.

imho
rh

[Civic]

My interest in the comparison is that CART times at most road courses since the late 90s were generally the same year to year up to 2006 while Grand Prix cars got faster based on comparing 1996 laptimes to 2006 laptimes.

I don't know if the Montreal Grand Prix course changed from 1996 onwards (I seem to remember a temporary chicane for 1995 after the 1994 fatal accidents of Senna and Ratzenberger) but from what I remember, the 1996 times might've been closer to the CART times of Montreal.

[Mark in Oshawa]

They are/were quite different animals. The CART/Indycar was 500 pounds heavier on the grid but was allowed much more aero. The F1 was much more of an accell/decel car while the CART/Indycar was more of a momentum car.
.

imho
rh

Using this theory, which I subscribe to; would you agree then on a fast flowing circuit, would there be one place maybe where the Indycar could lap a similar time? I know that in a race, the F1 would win because of how it races and how the lines it would take would just mess with what you would need to do get an IRL car around with its inferior braking.....

[Hoop-98]

Using this theory, which I subscribe to; would you agree then on a fast flowing circuit, would there be one place maybe where the Indycar could lap a similar time? I know that in a race, the F1 would win because of how it races and how the lines it would take would just mess with what you would need to do get an IRL car around with its inferior braking.....

That's where you would be the closest but still not too close IMO.

rh

[Hoop-98]

If the new car achieves1380 plus driver/fuel it will be at about 2.2 pounds per HP for road courses., the 2010 F1 is about 1.9 pounds per HP, the current Indycar is about 2.8 and the DP01 was about 2.4 and the 2001 Lola was about 2.3.

This controls acceleration to a great extent. The DP01 was quicker on high speed courses than the Lola because they had no rules to overcome on the tunnels.

Depending on Aero the next gen Indycar could probably run high speed courses within a couple percent of F1, depending on future F1 rules.

rh

[fan-veteran]

Recently a watched a documentary about CanAm , they said that at 1972 CanAms were faster than F1 at Watkins, as in 1971 ... :) ... oh what a terrific cars were those CanAms ... almost 40 years ago.

[Hoop-98]

F1 and CanAM ran pretty close for awhile. use this link:

http://www.ultimateracinghistory.com/racelist3.php?trackid=165

and you can follow then pretty easily.

rh

[fan-veteran]

F1 and CanAM ran pretty close for awhile. use this link:
http://www.ultimateracinghistory.com...hp?trackid=165
Thanks. Yes, it can be seen that the CanAm pole is about a second better than F1 in 1972 and 1973 , but the race overall average speed is on F1 side. What could be the explanation? Difference of weight and fuel? Does seasons difference (July vs October) have strong significance?

[Hoop-98]

Thanks. Yes, it can be seen that the CanAm pole is about a second better than F1 in 1972 and 1973 , but the race overall average speed is on F1 side. What could be the explanation? Difference of weight and fuel? Does seasons difference (July vs October) have strong significance?

Too many variables to say. Could be pit stops, caution flags, fuel loads/mileage and pressure from cars behind (or lack thereof).

rh