Changes In Eng. Specs, For Road Racing?

[GP Racer]

Sorry testure, I was just trying to answer the question of what keeps a top level driver interested in oval racing.

Its really what a driver does in that pack, that makes him stand out testure. Some drivers are masters at it. They can do things in traffic that others can't or won't do. Hornish has that ability, and he also creates racing grooves that other drivers can't follow. So talent still matters.

Abit off topic, but: There is a new IRL simulation game out, called IndyCar Series. I think it really shows the player, just how difficult oval racing is, and just how hard it is to pass someone at 220MPH. Any mistake, and there easy to make, especially in traffic, can be catostrophic to both you and half the field. While I never thought IndyCar racing was easy, I didn't really appreciate the difficulty, until I played this game.

Maybe its worth a shot?

[Testure]

Ah, I know the game! It was developed by a British company, "Brain in a Jar" and simulates the 2002 season, correct? I confess I've never played it, but the reviews I read were positive. Actually, I remember more than a few reviews being unable to get past the fact that it was oval racing - "It's a great sim, but it's ovals! Arrgghh!" If I saw it discounted, I'd probably pick it up; it's been out a while now.

I don't think anyone would be silly enough to imagine IRL racing to be "easy", but my impression (and you almost sound like you might agree...) is that it requires bravery ('nads of steel ) in greater quantities than innate skill (throttle control, braking, etc.)

[Testure]

Just remembering more about that game now... The company had been developing a Ferrari road-car racing game, as I remember, but couldn't find a publisher. So they kept the game engine, but changed the setting to the Indy Racing League. Now isn't that just the most useless piece of information you've heard in ages?

[GP Racer]

Originally posted by Testure
Now isn't that just the most useless piece of information you've heard in ages?

Its right up there!!

Bravery is a good way to put it, actually nads of steel is even better. But skill is still required, although they are different than the skills employed by the road guys.

But plenty of oval racers are in demand to do road course races these days. Just look at Stewart, Dale Jr., Robby Gordon, and Jeff Gordon, Dixon, Sharp, and Hornish, to name just a few. So they are obviously talented, and respected by their peers.

[evo]

Originally posted by GP Racer
nads of steel

Sarah Fisher?

[GP Racer]

Originally posted by evo
Sarah Fisher?

oops!


I found a very good article on www.crash.net that pretty much answers all of our questions on engines, set-ups, the IRL cars on road courses, the series, and all the other stuff we've been asking about. Its called "Q&A With The Heavy Hitters" and it interviews Dixon, Kanann, Hornish and Castroneves. Got the IRL page to find it.

Its along read, but I think its well worth it!

[Snrub]

Originally posted by GP Racer
Snub, you say that IRL racing as it stands now is just not enough to keep top-level drivers interested. I beg to differ.

If going around a super speedway at 220MPH or so, and tucking in behind another car, which they do with regularity with there aero package, getting a draft, and then shooting around for a pass, sometimes going 3 wide, with multiple cars involved, is not enough to keep a driver interested, than maybe they need to look for another series, where the parades are much more orderly, and theres not so much action and passing going on to distract them.

CART is all about driver involvment, but that being said, why are so many of there races a bore?

220mph sounds impressive, but that's not what makes the racing intersting for drivers. I know that sounds hard to believe. There's stratagy involved in positioning ones self in the right place to get a draft, but once you get by someone you they can simply take you back using the same stratagy. That's intersting, but only if the situation is not at an equilibrium point where it will simply continue with no advantage gained for either driver for 3 hours. Picture this situation, a 250-500 mile straight peice of road that could fit 3 cars wide with 1 inch between. It would have the same appeal of the flat out racing, drafting, and close calls. Do you think the drivers would like it? More importantly would it be interesting for you? Personally I wouldn't watch. Corners make racing intersting, they are the defining aspect of racing because they force drivers act, unlike when they go flat out. (drag racing obviously not included)

220mph without interuption is of little significance to racing. Speed only maters when it forces a driver to react in a more significant manner. For comparison: Highways are designed to handle the speed so that you are not taxed as a driver. Drive 70mph through a 25mph residential zone and it's more difficult to negotiate turns, intersections, etc. It requires a much higher level of skill. If you saw someone drive by on a major highway at 70mph, would you look twice? If you saw someone flying through an empty residential neighbourhood I bet you'd be watching in interest. Please don't think that the highway vs. street comparison is ment to make any association with oval vs. road courses. It's ment to describe the difference between a car is able to negotiate a corner more easily than another.

I'm very insistant that in 2003 both IRL and CART oval races had much more in common with driving at highspeeds on a higway rather than a street.

2002 and 2003 weren't CART's finest years, but my point is not so much about CART, it's about the IRL. But as a sidebar I agree that CART's aero setup could stand to be more condusive to drafting.

[Testure]

Originally posted by GP Racer
Its along read, but I think its well worth it!

Yup, an interesting read, thanks for the link GP! I think they're right in that ultimately the engine designers will have the new formula delivering the same amount of horsepower before long. Perhaps a danger until then, though, is that the setups that the drivers use might be a bit knife-edge, which isn't good. Will be interesting to see how the race engineers cope and how the cars "behave" in race conditions.

I'm always worried when the drivers talk about safety issues, though. Check out this from Sam Hornish:

We had a great race in California. We had five, six, eight guys that were fighting for the win, able to run real close together, but it wasn't the whole field like it was at Texas. You get that many cars running together for 300 miles or whatever it is, it's just kind of sometimes a recipe for disaster, because there's so many things that you have no idea what's going to change, what's going to affect somebody. You can have a tyre go down or an engine problem and you take out four or five cars - it's just not very good for the series if we don't have cars finishing races.

Reminds me of some quotes we saw last year:

When asked how much he'd enjoyed the three-car bump and grind to the photo finish at Chicago earlier this season, Bryan Herta replied: "That wasn't fun."

"It's (bad) for the drivers but great for the fans," said Scott Dixon after capturing the 2003 IRL title with a second place finish.

[GP Racer]

I read that Robin Miller piece you linked testure, and it seems to be a pretty good slam against the IRL. I mean are Champ Cars any safer on the ovals than IndyCars? I doubt it, its just that they don't do them as often, hence there lower injury rate.

There is no doubt that open-wheel oval racing is probably the most dangerous series out there. But it is far safer than the 60's and 70's, the USAC days, when ovals were all they did. Mario Andretti said that losing 5 or 6 racers a year was the norm, and was expected. I mean the safety standards today are light years ahead of those dark days.

I feel that drivers talking about safety issues is a good thing, it keeps the subject on the front burner, and gets safety issues resolved. I think that both Herta's and Dixons one sentence comments though, could have easily been taken out of context. I hope they continue trying to make this series as safe as it can possibly be, and there on there way with safe wall technology, new catch fencing, and lowering speeds. Could it be time for fenders though?

Time will tell, whether lower speeds due to less HP helps, or is there a better way? Or is there just no way to make it any safer at all?

[Snrub]

Given the number of ovals that were part of CART a few years back (similar to IRL's modern numbers) the safety is clearly not related to the amount of time on an oval. Besides I'm not convinced that ovals are more dangerous than roadcourses. I think it's more the circumstances of IRL racing and perhaps partially the cars.

[ukracer inSOCAL]

Having read the posts with interest I thought I would share the following with you.....

The 3.5ltr engine finshes after Motegi this year all though it is likely that 3.0ltr engines will have run on track before then.
In 3.0ltr form the engine will continue until end 2006 and then a new engine will replace the current one.
In 3.0ltr form you have closed areas (heads, block, sump) and open areas of development (crank, rods, cams, pistons, intake system). This means no special heads for road racing as port sizes, valve size and angle remain unchanged until end 2006.
It is possible to develop new cams / exhaust systems etc that could be road racing specific but you can't change the head design.
The IRL in changing to 3.0ltr format may believe that it is only a case of changing cranks and rods but in reality you will change pistons, cams, intake system, airbox etc. A massive on cost to what is supposed to be cost concious formula! Why didn't they just investigate air intake restrictors as in ALMS is beyond me!
The problem if the current aero regs are kept is that with the reduction in horse power (cira 620bhp) that the power to grip ratio will be wrong - look at a F3 car if you want an example of that. The level of grip from the tyres, aero and chassis will far out weigh the performance from the engine and many circuits will end up being flat-out - hence Dario's concern. Other than at places like Phoenix, Mil, Naz most places will end up flat out. Homestead is flat out now with 3.5ltr (740bhp) due to the banking change etc - rather than reduce speeds the cars are 4-5mph ave faster this year at HSD than last year - even with the slot in the airbox!
Oh and Cosworth does send engineers to the track, they just wear GM shirts! GM runs the cars with Cosworth help! The current Gen IV engine will remain till end 2006.
I hope that this clears up some of the debate!

[GP Racer]

Wecome to the forum ukracer!

I was one of those under the impression that to de-stroke an engine, its really only a matter of changing the crank and rods. But your talking a full on rebuild. If true, that is going to cost some bucks.

Why would the IRL go to the trouble of going with the smaller engines, if the the cars aero package is to much for it? I mean, these guys have to know what they want to achieve, and how to get it, don't they?

What do you think there ultimate goal is here, and how should they go about it?

[macdaddy]

Yes, welcome to the forum ukracer! And thanks for the informative post!

[GP Racer]

Originally posted by Snrub
Given the number of ovals that were part of CART a few years back (similar to IRL's modern numbers) the safety is clearly not related to the amount of time on an oval. Besides I'm not convinced that ovals are more dangerous than roadcourses. I think it's more the circumstances of IRL racing and perhaps partially the cars.

You could very well be right about road courses being as dangerous as ovals, although it seems as if all the attention is on oval safety at the moment.

Hopefully the IRL can have a relatively safe season this year, and start focusing on the things there doing right.

PS-Some good points made in your previous post, about road racing.

[ukracer inSOCAL]

The ultimate goal - I am not sure... but I believe that the IRL was under a lot of pressure from the legal profession to act following the accidents involving Kenny Brack and Tony Renna. I think that it is a knee jerk reaction, the need to show that they are doing something about it.
Unfortunately it was not handled that well - the discussion regarding reduced capacity came up some months back over the summer but nothing more was said until the 3ltr rule came out. As for costs well I guess the likes of Toyota and Honda can cope with the on cost to program but you have to wonder about the professionalism of the ruling body to implement this type of rule change at such short notice.
For what is sold as a fixed 3 year deal regarding both chassis and engine there have been a tremendous amount of changes over the winter months after only one season of the current deal. I know that the chassis manufacturers were not best pleased at being told that they had to redesign their cars to cope with the needs of road racing....

Editted, simply to fix a double-post.

[rustyfan]

Originally posted by Snrub
Given the number of ovals that were part of CART a few years back (similar to IRL's modern numbers) the safety is clearly not related to the amount of time on an oval. Besides I'm not convinced that ovals are more dangerous than roadcourses. I think it's more the circumstances of IRL racing and perhaps partially the cars.

While I don't have the list in front of me here at work, I seem to remember that the number of Champ Car injuries between 1996 and 2003 on ovals far outnumber the injuries suffered on non-ovals.

I'll check the list and post the numbers when I get home.

[Testure]

Originally posted by ukracer inSOCAL
Oh and Cosworth does send engineers to the track, they just wear GM shirts! GM runs the cars with Cosworth help! The current Gen IV engine will remain till end 2006.

Ah, that's very interesting, thanks! When they announced this engine I wondered how things like maintenance were going to work.

[Hazza]

What happens is CART goes belly up and Ford wants to join the IRL

And if CART goes belly up, do you think that the IRL would adopt a turbocharged V8 package similar to Champ Cars? Because when they got that right it worked exceeding well, and I'm not flaming here, but was better than any of the "restrictor plate" racing that we get nowdays.

okay enough morbid stuff

[rustyfan]

Originally posted by rustyfan
I'll check the list and post the numbers when I get home.

I knew there was something I forgot to do last night after coming home from work. I'll get it done today instead.

[GP Racer]

Geez rusty, you act as though you have other things to do! Get your priorities straight, man!

[rustyfan]

Originally posted by GP Racer
Geez rusty, you act as though you have other things to do! Get your priorities straight, man!

Darnit, I forgot about it again - I'll just bring the list to work tomorrow and get it done on the morning coffee break

[rustyfan]

Ok, here's the list. Not exactly the right thread perhaps, but might be of interest to some anyway;


Champ Car injuries

1996

[Homestead]
Parker Johnstone - minor brain concussion, bruised right knee

[Rio]
Scott Goodyear - fractured vertebra in mid-back
Mark Blundell - broken right foot

[Toronto]
Jeff Krosnoff - massive head injuries and multiple fractures; fatal

[Michigan]
Paul Tracy - chip fracture of the spinous process vertebra
Emerson Fittipaldi - fractured cervical vertebra, fractured left shoulder blade plus a partially collapsed and bruised left lung; career ending
Parker Johnstone - bruised knees


1997

[Surfer's Paradise]
Christian Fittipaldi - broken right fibia and fibula plus a broken left foot

[Michigan]
Parker Johnstone - helmet impaled, bruised forehead

[Fontana]
Alex Zanardi - brain concussion
Arie Luyendyk - brain concussion


1998

[Homestead]
Danny Vitolo - broken finger
Helio Castroneves - bruised knee

[Gateway]
Arnd Meier - brain concussion

[Milwaukee]
Christian Fittipaldi - knocked unconcious


1999

[Homestead]
Al Unser Jr. - fractured right ankle
Naoki Hattori - double compound fracture of left leg

[Gateway]
Mark Blundell - brain concussion

[Gateway]
Christian Fittipaldi - knocked unconcious, subdural hematoma to the brain

[Gateway]
Robby Gordon - bruised leg

[Laguna Seca]
Gonzalo Rodriguez - basal skull fracture; fatal

[Fontana]
Greg Moore - massive head injuries and massive internal injuries; fatal


2000

[Homestead]
Dario Franchitti - non-displaced fractures of the pelvis and hip as well as small multiple contusions to the brain

[Milwaukee]
Shinji Nakano - knocked unconcious and bruised brain

[Detroit]
Tony Kanaan - knocked unconcious, broken left forearm, punctured left lung, fractured ribs as well as a brain concussion

[Michigan]
Takuya Kurosawa - knocked unconcious, brain concussion and bruised left foot

[Motegi]
Noberto Fontana - knocked unconcious

[Chicago]
Christian Fittipaldi - knocked unconcious and a brain concussion

[Fontana]
Alex Tagliani - bruised back as well as a bruised lung


2001

[Long Beach]
Patrick Carpentier - fractured left wrist

[Detroit]
Tony Kanaan - brain concussion

[Road America]
Memo Gidley - bone contusion of right femur

[Lausitzring]
Alex Zanardi - both legs severed, brain concussion as well as a fractured pelvis; career-ending


2002

[Vancouver]
Adrian Fernandez - fractured pelvis

[Surfer's Paradise]
Adrian Fernandez - two thoracic fractures (below the neck)



Twenty-six of the thirty-five listed injuries/fatalites occured on ovals.

Also, while I have listed some as having just been knocked unconcious I included them because I noticed in several other cases that while the initial report was that a driver "just" had been knocked out, I could later find that they had indeed suffered a brain concussion. Overall it wasn't easy at times to find reports on injuries, especially from the early years, and while I can't remember someone else actually getting hurt in 2002 and 2003, I got tired of wading through articles over at motorsport.com

[GP Racer]

Originally posted by Snrub
Given the number of ovals that were part of CART a few years back (similar to IRL's modern numbers) the safety is clearly not related to the amount of time on an oval. Besides I'm not convinced that ovals are more dangerous than roadcourses. I think it's more the circumstances of IRL racing and perhaps partially the cars.

Hey rusty, that was great work, and I'm sure rather tiring! We should keep this handy as a reference, when people get down on the IRL for safety problems.

Snrub, I think that if you look at these numbers, and injuries/fatalities, the safety record of CART in general, but especially on ovals, is not very good. There is not much room to be criticising others here.

Its just a fact, open-wheel oval racing is dangerous! But that doesn't mean it should be villified, and its drivers made to feel like its a death sentence, and they "have to get out". Thats racing, plain and simple. You either accept it and race on, or you get out, and open up a florist, or something. Danger, and the men(and women)who face that danger, is part of what draws us to this sport. If it were easy and safe, we'd all be doing it.

[MLM]

Originally posted by GP Racer
Hey rusty, that was great work, and I'm sure rather tiring! We should keep this handy as a reference, when people get down on the IRL for safety problems.

Snrub, I think that if you look at these numbers, and injuries/fatalities, the safety record of CART in general, but especially on ovals, is not very good. There is not much room to be criticising others here.

Its just a fact, open-wheel oval racing is dangerous! But that doesn't mean it should be villified, and its drivers made to feel like its a death sentence, and they "have to get out". Thats racing, plain and simple. You either accept it and race on, or you get out, and open up a florist, or something. Danger, and the men(and women)who face that danger, is part of what draws us to this sport. If it were easy and safe, we'd all be doing it.

Good post, GP and good work, rusty!

[Testure]

Originally posted by GP Racer
Danger, and the men(and women)who face that danger, is part of what draws us to this sport.

Speak for yourself! I know that some nutcases watch races just to see crashes, but I'd like to think most race fans find the danger abhorrent? :confused: For me, it's all about driving skill, technical knowledge, reflexes, fitness and ability to think and react incredibly quickly.

Thanks for the list rustyfan! Is there a similar listing for the IRL races over the same period?