Why does amount of horsepower matter...?

[vintage]

I like that Honda video - seems to me I have seen a similar one with Mercedes? Ok, how about Kurt Busch lights out of the Indy pits in his stock car while Power is putting on his gloves. Power get belted in, lights up the tires, and passes Kurt before the finish line?

[Daddy of EQ]

Watch ovals..you wont have the pig coming off a corner issue then...

second...ya 1000 hp with drivers not burning the rear tires off...guess ya never heard that wonderful NOT! sound of traction control. Ya carties had it..the bap bap bap..sounding like the 1000 hp car that the drivers couldnt keep from burning the tires off..sounded like the car was farting...ya, the good old days eh???

What a flipping joke!! Nothing worse than seeing someone defend the mediocrity that AOWR has become. The cars should have lots of HP, less downforce and be damnned hard to drive, so that only the best attempt to drive them. That would mean no more Milka's, Roths, racing dentists, and other assorted amatuers being allowed to drive in what is supposed to be a top tier racing series. All aspects of amatuer racing need to be dumped ASAP before Indy Car can begin to think about regaining its place as one of the top racing series in the world.

[Canth]

HP matters because it matters to the public... who wants to pay $100 to see cars with nearly the same power as the one I drive everyday? 350+hp cars are EVERYWHERE. A 550hp mustang is $53k.

HP matters because its matters to the drivers, who want to drive in a series that pushes their ability. The ability to modulate and control beastly cars turns a driver on as much as anyone.

HP matters because it matters to the engine builders and manufacturers, who want to show to the public that they can build monster beasts of engines, to sell cars.

HP matters because it matters to the fans, who want to see powerful, hard to control cars powering through corners. Pushing the limits of man and machine.

HP matters because this is racing, goddamnit. Not a high school dance.

I agree with everything in this post.

[Sybil D. Sobydianz]

Let's knock off the Split-crap stuff.

[jcmark611]

Everyone seems to have passed judgment on a car they've yet to see.

[Daddy of EQ]

Brings back memories of a great Honda promo tape that was sent out to their motorcycle dealers in the mid-80's... Laguna Seca with a street car vs. street bike vs. 500cc GP with Freddie Spencer on board...:

Yep... it's dated, but it never gets old...

That is back before Laguna added the infield section. Turn 3 ( now turn 5 ) was a much faster 45 degree turn, instead of the 90 deg turn it is now. I remember in the early 70's seeing Can Am cars fly through T3 and leave tire puffs of smoke as they hit top gear going up the hill to T4 - particularly Donahue's 917-30 Turbo Panzer in '73. All of those cars were twitching all over the place under acceleration, because they had so much power.

[Daddy of EQ]

I want to see cars that are hard to handle under the accelaration, because they have so much power. I don't want to see 300 HP cars that are exercises in super efficiency, just so some PC types can get in touch with their rather prominent feminine sides and "feel good" about the direction IICS is going. Eff that PC posturing crap anyway - just keep that regressive BS away from Indy Car.

[Danny Noonan]

The formula that's been around for the past few decades is just an absolutely flawed concept in terms of "racability." Sure you can make them as fast as you want and it's fun to watch a single car on the track. But the aerodynamics that have been used for the past few decades are just no longer condusive to good racing. F1 has tweaked and tweaked their formula in hopes of better racing but it never makes any significant impact. The wings, the high tech breaks, driver aids....all of it makes a car run faster but it makes for poor racing.

The current open-wheel formula should have been completely redesigned in a truly evolutionary way. The Delta Wing was obviously too radical in appearance but had it made an actual on track appearance I think people would have been blown away with what the car could have done and how racey they would have been with multiple cars on the track.

Our best hope now is that with multiple manufacturers and aero designs there might be a .2% difference in on track performance that might result in a few more passing opportunities. I don't think the cars will be more difficult to drive in any material way.

[Daddy of EQ]

The formula that's been around for the past few decades is just an absolutely flawed concept in terms of "racability." Sure you can make them as fast as you want and it's fun to watch a single car on the track. But the aerodynamics that have been used for the past few decades are just no longer condusive to good racing. F1 has tweaked and tweaked their formula in hopes of better racing but it never makes any significant impact. The wings, the high tech breaks, driver aids....all of it makes a car run faster but it makes for poor racing.

The current open-wheel formula should have been completely redesigned in a truly evolutionary way. The Delta Wing was obviously too radical in appearance but had it made an actual on track appearance I think people would have been blown away with what the car could have done and how racey they would have been with multiple cars on the track.

Our best hope now is that with multiple manufacturers and aero designs there might be a .2% difference in on track performance that might result in a few more passing opportunities. I don't think the cars will be more difficult to drive in any material way.

The Delta Wing was a rip off of Craig Breedloves Spirit of America Bonneville Salt Flat car. The open source CONCEPT of DW was appealing, but I never liked the look of the DW, although I realize the final version may have looked quite different. I wouldn't have minded seeing Delta Wing as PART of the mix, and not as the entire solution, as I am not a fan of single manufacturer "spec" racing, anyway. Having competing cars/engineering philosophies/innovation was once what Indy Car was all about. In that regard, I could see having DW as part of the mix, but not as the single, sole design of the series just to make a green statement and make some PC sheeple "feel good" about Indy Car.

[gonzo]

Not another Delta Wing debate......

[Danny Noonan]

The Delta Wing was a rip off of Craig Breedloves Spirit of America Bonneville Salt Flat car. The open source CONCEPT of DW was appealing, but I never liked the look of the DW, although I realize the final version may have looked quite different. I wouldn't have minded seeing Delta Wing as PART of the mix, and not as the entire solution, as I am not a fan of single manufacturer "spec" racing, anyway. Having competing cars/engineering philosophies/innovation was once what Indy Car was all about. In that regard, I could see having DW as part of the mix, but not as the single, sole design of the series just to make a green statement and make some PC sheeple "feel good" about Indy Car.

It certainly had an awkward design but with the lack of wings I think we would have seen IndyCar racing completely revolutionized. Cars would be been able to race closer than they have in decades without "losing their air" and there would have been a much bigger (multiple) racing groove.

I wouldn't have wanted it as the sole design either, but there was no reason they couldn't have created a safety cell like they did with the Dallara and let teams innovate. Had the DW raced against any of the other designs with an engine that had remotely close to the same HP, it would have blow them off the track. Current formula cars are like trying to as fast as you can with a parachute in the back. Too much unnecassary drag.

[Canth]

Not another Delta Wing debate......

+1

[christcc2]

Wow things have been getting lively here now that some of us from the IndyCar forums popped on here.

[Mike Kellner]

Danny Noonan wrote...

The formula that's been around for the past few decades is just an absolutely flawed concept in terms of "racability." Sure you can make them as fast as you want and it's fun to watch a single car on the track. But the aerodynamics that have been used for the past few decades are just no longer condusive to good racing. F1 has tweaked and tweaked their formula in hopes of better racing but it never makes any significant impact. The wings, the high tech breaks, driver aids....all of it makes a car run faster but it makes for poor racing.

You only have to look at Moto GP to see how good racing is with no aero downforce. I believe that is the difference, that it is the aero that has taken overtaking out of racing. In a zero downforce Indycar, 700 HP would be so much it would be all but undrivable. Laps at Indy would be close to 200, but it would be 185 - 190 in the turns, 225 max on the straights, and braking into the turns! Sounds great, where do we sign up?

The question is; how to get back to zero downforce? A big problem is, the first little bit of downforce is what has the most effect on performance, so everyone would be looking for small aero-tricks that would add a MPH in the turns, especially on big ovals. The other problem is, the less downforce you have, the more you are affected by the car in front of you, exactly because of the large affect the first small amounts have. This means that if downforce creeps back into the designs, it will have an immediate deleterious effect on the racing.

It would take a total spec chassis that was wind tunnel tested to have neither downforce nor lift, and clever aero mods would have to be tightly policed. If you let people build their own cars, they'd all look for every ounce of DF they could squeeze out of the rules. Would people accept a hard spec, zero tolerence for clever ideas regime? That is what it would take to enforce it.

I know someone will post, well we just want less so drivers are back in control. They haven't absorbed what I have said about five different ways acoss two threads. Low downforce cars are affected by the car in front more than optimum or high downforce cars, which means they lead to parades.

Secondly, super high power cars on road courses may be dramatic to watch, but they will reduce passing and create parades because they reduce the time on straights which increases the performance difference required to pass the car ahead of you.

There really isn't a way to go back. The good old days have faded into the mist of time. Open wheel cars are what they are today, and we have to learn to jigger the rules to get good racing without speeds going orbital.

Every one of the adults in charge of racing is worried about a car flying into the stands, recreating the anti-racing frenzy after the Mercedes went into the crowd at Le Mans in 55. This has a lot to do with why there are limits of power and speed.

I have high hopes for the new car. No one has turned a lap in one yet. Let's give it a chance before we demand a return to a past remembered for its golden moments and minus its flaws. There was plenty of squawking about the lack of passing and boring races when CART had 900+ HP cars.

mk

[Spike]

A Prius can go 100 MPH.

110 if you push it over a cliff.