PDA

View Full Version : The case for a spec chassis for CART & IRL. (long crosspost)



ChrisB
02-26-03, 01:25 PM
OK, here goes... :)

<edited at author's request>

Let's face it... to most fans, chassis just isn't something that matters much. I really don't see a lot of "chassis fans" in the way there are fans for the engine manufacturer marquee. There aren't many "Reynard fans" or "Dallara fans" like we see "Honda fans" or "Ford fans". Chassis are generally a commodity that most fans take for granted. Nascar has already figured this out, and commoditized their chassis with templates. Fans there don't cheer for the "Monte Carlo" or "Intrepid", they cheer for "Chevy" or "Dodge".

Historically in American formula/OW cars, one chassis eventually tends to overwhelmingly dominate, and since that's what's gonna happen *ANYWAY*, why not embrace it in a way that it can be worked with? Spec a chassis, one that's well tweaked for good competition (IE: more undertray, less wings, etc) and be done with it. Costs will plummet, competition will improve, and nobody will care that everyone is in the exact same Lola or Dallara (or Swift or AAR or Reynard or whoever wins the contracts). All the fans pay attention to is the engine label (or drivers) anyway.

The arms race to make chassis faster (only to be needed to be slowed down some other way) is expensive, and not worth the miniscule attention chassis development gets from fans. The R&D money that would have gone toward making the chassis faster can now go to making it safer. There would be no more of guys like Carl Haas having the best stuff before everyone else. Chassis freezes don't work... because the one chassis that gets it right the first time is the winner... the others must wait until the next cycle. Open supply rules for upgrade kits don't work either... because of the endless need to upgrade to stay quick. Spec the chassis and be done with it.

Besides, chassis makers don't promote a series the way that engine manufacturers do. It's still in the interest of both series to have as many engine marquees as possible (which I would hope CART will do in '05).

There would still be innovation. The chassis could be revised on a 2 or 3 year cycle based on things learned on-track or in the lab. But the innovation emphasis would shift from making the chassis faster to being more safe and efficient. Aesthetics could also be considered... there's no need to have big intakes or winglets all over just to gain a competitive edge... because if everyone is in the same chassis, it's a wash. The design of the car could become simpler and more elegant.

There's also an extra angle for the IRL... the sprint-car drivers thing. An Indy car could be designed which puts more emphasis on the things sprint drivers are good at, like mechanical setup (shocks, bars, springs, etc) rather than aero.

One more thing to consider... apparently F1 is down to only *10 teams* for this year, and Max is considering allowing customer chassis to help flesh out the field. F1 is stepping down a notch and is no longer going to be the "everyone must construct their own car" series. Reality is hitting, and ya gotta do what ya gotta do to survive. I don't see anything demeaning about CART or IRL becoming a spec single chassis series.

datachicane
02-26-03, 02:05 PM
Originally posted by ChrisB
Reality is hitting, and ya gotta do what ya gotta do to survive. I don't see anything demeaning about CART or IRL becoming a spec single chassis series.

IMHO, that's not survival.

If I had a favorite uncle who was (possibly terminally) ill, would transforming him into a flesh-eating zombie just so I could have the comfort of seeing him knock around for a few more years constitute 'survival' for him?

He wouldn't be my uncle anymore, and what you're describing wouldn't be racing, either. This year's spec engine is a harsh necessity made barely palatable only by the fact that it's only for two years. Without that light at the end of the tunnel, you've effectively crossed the line from sport to pure entertainment. BTW, those who don't have a problem crossing that line are, more than likely, already NASCAR fans, and they already have a series to spend their money on.

racer2c
02-26-03, 02:08 PM
Good post Chris.

If it would help Champ Car survive long into the future, I'd support it.

NASCAR fans don't care about the templates, solid rear axles, pushrod, carbureted V8's. Why should we care about spec formula cars who's design, material and construction is already high tech?

I couldn't care less about catering to the sprint car gang though. The days of 'Indy on their mind' are long over with.

Axel
02-26-03, 02:51 PM
Chris

This idea is ideal........

The casual fan doesnt even no the difference in the cars, you have 13 car already in the same car already. And i always like the best driver to win. I am not one who wants lots of passing for the lead if the leader is the fastest driver.
Lola has never put a commercial on TV or sold a car to the fans to drive on our roads.

Keep the chassis the same and let the teams try there best to get the best setup on the car, But let as many engine suppliers in as
they can, but they have to be available to all teams not just the ones they pick. All the engines should have a set price limit to control there development expenses.
Cart should keep working to get more sponsor and distribute them to the blank spaces on some of the cars...

Similar engines, chassis, tires makes the best team/driver win. No excuses..

KobySon
02-26-03, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by datachicane
This year's spec engine is a harsh necessity made barely palatable only by the fact that it's only for two years. Without that light at the end of the tunnel, you've effectively crossed the line from sport to pure entertainment. BTW, those who don't have a problem crossing that line are, more than likely, already NASCAR fans, and they already have a series to spend their money on.

I didn't think it would be all that great for the sport either, but then I went to the race last weekend... It was really cool seeing who could get on the power best out of the corners without the aid of traction control.

I don't care if it's in the rules or not, when you have mulitple engine mfgs, you're going to have traction control. Sanctioning bodies just can't police it. F1 couldn't, nor could cart.

Having one engine mfg guarantees the absence of TC. I kind of like it.

cart7
02-26-03, 03:24 PM
While I like the differences in chassis and how one chassis works better with one engine or vice-versa, or how one chassis is dominate on Ovals but a dog on roads and streets, I can see where a mass audience of fans could care less. I think different engines would make it interesting, but if you had to go spec with one or the other, I'd go with Chassis.

ChrisB
02-26-03, 04:45 PM
I didn't think it would be all that great for the sport either, but then I went to the race last weekend...

Yep.. as much as the "spec" thing gets disparaged, it worked out real well last weekend.

I think different engines would make it interesting, but if you had to go spec with one or the other, I'd go with Chassis.

That's part of the point... instead of multi-chassis/single-engine as now, it would flip-flop to multi-engine/single-chassis.... which is better becuase the fans care MUCH more about the engine than chassis marquee.

pchall
02-26-03, 05:18 PM
Tony George would never agree (thank goodness).

The last thing he wants is for there to be a chance that teams from a revitalized CART show up and kick the collective butt of his stupid oval series every May for only the price of a one race engine deal.

Notice how thoroughly he scuttled the 2003 Lola common chassis project that would have allowed just that.

JLMannin
02-26-03, 05:50 PM
Tony George has recognized that CART will continue to exist - in essence, CART now has the permission of TG to exist now and continue to exist in the future. CART's unpeaceful coexistance with USAC is over, and it is time to move on. Our chassis and our engines need to be optimized for out type of racing - no more building a speedway chassis and having to deal with it every place else.

F1 has incompatible chassis with the IRL, and they seem to get along fine. Indycentrics (fans and team owners alike) need to go back home to Indiana and leave us alone.

racer2c
02-26-03, 05:57 PM
Here here!

:thumbup:

FortyOneFord
02-26-03, 06:35 PM
I'm a fan of the Lola CART chassis.

I'm not of fan of the crapwagons.

The two should stay seperate.

pchall
02-26-03, 07:57 PM
Originally posted by FortyOneFord
I'm a fan of the Lola CART chassis.

I'm not of fan of the crapwagons.

The two should stay seperate.

Exactly.

Always remember that the IRL is the series that rejected Lola in favor of the Falcon program.

ChrisB
02-26-03, 09:32 PM
Guys, this is not about a common spec to bridge both series, but that each series should maybe go to *it's own* single supply spec appropriate for the style of racing they each do. (I shouild have made that clearer, because some folks on the other forums thought that's what it was about too)

FortyOneFord
02-27-03, 03:07 AM
Ahh, I now see your point chris, but I disagree.

1. I don't give a crap about what earl does now or does in the future. They'll prolly be drivin' around in stock cars in the near future anyway.

2. Even with the known advantages the Lola has this year, it seems people are doing okay with the Reynard. As long as someone builds the chassis to proper specifications, I say let them race. It allows to the cars to better evolve from a safety standpoint, aesthetically, and of course performance wise. Now, obviously things will have to be kept in check for awhile until teams can afford spend lots of money on development. As long as CWS sticks to the basic rules CART has always allowed, we'll be okay. F-1 is too far in one direction, but single spec is too far in the other.

ChrisB
02-27-03, 11:50 AM
It allows to the cars to better evolve from a safety standpoint, aesthetically

Well, consider that a constructors top priority is to SELL CARS relative to other constructors. Therefore, performance takes top priority, and safety and aesthtics take a back seat. Everyone wants to buy the chassis that wins, and constructors will do anything to make that winning chassis, safety and aesthetics be d@mned. If saftey wasn't mandated by the series, the constructors wouldn't persue it... they just want to build and sell winning cars. And the majority of fans could care less.

JLMannin
02-27-03, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by ChrisB
Guys, this is not about a common spec to bridge both series, but that each series should maybe go to *it's own* single supply spec appropriate for the style of racing they each do. (I shouild have made that clearer, because some folks on the other forums thought that's what it was about too)

OK, now I understand, and I agree with you. Whether or not it was intended, TG basically set this in motion when he rejected Lola as a supplier to the IRL.

John