The Future

[macdaddy]

Kevin Kalkhoven:

I also briefed them (the team owners) on the discussions that have been held in the past with the IRL and with Mario.

I told them that we were fundamentally committed to the Champ Car World Series. We have a strategy and that's what we're going to pursue independent of anything else happening or not. The owners were very comfortable with that...

We're continuing our discussions with Honda, but it may not be about unification. It may be about other things.

...while we're not going to turn this thing around in a few weeks or a year, we're very positive about where things are going. We intend to announce our 2006 schedule in August and the television schedule as well.

Maybe the year after we could do more races but in '06 we're going to do sixteen races...

Korea's on the schedule and the track is being built as we speak. I don't anticipate there being any major problems.

I think the engine regulations are pretty much going to be where we are now. I don't think there will be any big surprises. The engine formula has worked very well.

The key to building for the future is in our fans and I think some of our new races will introduce a whole set of new fans to the series and from there we will continue to build.

This article also hints upon the specs for the future ChampCar, making them "smaller, lighter and more maneuverable for city street racing which is becoming so popular".

There is talk about making the Atlantics more-affordable, and mentioned "a scholarship system with the champion earning a Champ car ride".

Good read.


As for the engine specs...


The "scholarship"...


The schedules coming out in August...


Honda...


The fans...

[mac]

Very interesting.

I have a lot more faith in Kalkhoven than in most previous Champ Car/ CART bosses. He appears to be quite an intelligent operator.

[Mike_Wooshy]

this is all looks very good for champ cars, talking to honda AND not about reunification ..... hmmm intresting ....

[Omega99]

Well, I expect Honda is talking about unification, and Kalkhoven isn't. But really, now that Forsythe and Mr. K own Cosworth, would having Honda really be a great idea?

[sr230772]

im with omega99 whats with honda and 16 races i was hopeing for 2 more i guess it will be the sane schedule as 05 with bejing inculeded

[macdaddy]

I'd like to see the same schedule, sr230772, but I don't think it's likely.
I'm worried about Milwaukee, for instance.
I keep hearing rumours about South America, even Africa, and in order to keep the same number of races something will need to be sacrificed.
At least this year we should know by August.

[macdaddy]

Scot Elkins, (Director of Technology):

We’re making the car a little smaller. We’re making it lighter and we’re making it faster. We’re always fighting to be on the cutting edge of technology, but not be so far out that it’s another cost option.

Link

[macdaddy]

Dick Eiswick:

The (Grand Prix of Cleveland) is a tradition, and tradition is important in Champ Car. We believe that the city of Cleveland deserves a race of this caliber, and we will continue to work with the business community to seek their support. If the Cleveland business community continues to be reluctant, we will need to reevaluate the performance of the race in terms of its financials.

Twenty-five years (next year)is an important milestone for any Grand Prix, and we think the race in Cleveland is very special. Our plans are to redouble our efforts with the business community to make sure this is a stepping stone for the next 25 years.

Link.

[mountainstar]

There was a rumour recently on one of the boards(trackforum I believe) that originated from someone from within Honda that they were running old turbo champcar engines on the dyno. Who knows, it may or may not be true, but we know for a fact Honda has been talking to Champcar and it is surely something of significance, as we can be certain they're not chatting about the weather.

Many have not been happy about the growing number of street races on the schedule. One has to remember, that racing on the streets is the purest form of racing, predating ovals or any other type of track. From 1895-1955, road racing was mostly done on closed public roads and I'm glad to see champcar adding so many street races to the schedule. While it is sad to see the demise of permanent courses like Road America, which have their own traditions, maybe those circuits need to find a way of reinventing themselves to make them viable again.

I'm pretty happy with the way things are going as these guys have a plan and they are taking action. They know where the weaknesses are and the positives and are working to make it better for all. It looks like Cleveland is being evaluated much like Portland was last weekend, so let's hope tomorrow is a big day.

[The Snout]

Originally Posted by mountainstar

One has to remember, that racing on the streets is the purest form of racing, predating ovals or any other type of track. From 1895-1955, road racing was mostly done on closed public roads and I'm glad to see champcar adding so many street races to the schedule.

Thankyou

[cybersdorf]

Originally Posted by mountainstar

[...] Many have not been happy about the growing number of street races on the schedule. One has to remember, that racing on the streets

with production cars

is the purest form of racing, predating ovals or any other type of track. From 1895-1955, road racing was mostly done on closed public roads and I'm glad to see champcar adding so many street races to the schedule. [...]

...because there was nothing better available. But IMHO the purpose-built racecars of today really belong on purpose-built tracks.

[Liz]

If you want to lead the parade: Find out where the parade is going and get in front of it.

The parade was not going to Milwaukee. The parade was going to Cleveland, and is going to Toronto, Montreal, and Mexico City.

Street racing is lots of fun to watch, the events related to it are fun, and those of us who don't drive appreciate the ease of reaching these venues. A dedicated track as in Montreal is also great racing if you have easy access to a large city nearby (easy access meaning "not involving personal automobiles.") Even Le Mans will be putting in a tram from the city to the track beginning next year. If you build it, they will come.

P.S. Robin Miller again mentioned that Toyota will be announcing their exit from the Other Series is imminent. Why would Honda remain if that is in fact the case?

[sgw2]

Honda will stick IRL because they have nowhere to go.

Toyota spend ten years building a relationship with NASCAR, becuase it is run by Americans and funded by US Sales. So they have a future mapped out. Not so Honda. You can't just tell NASCAR you are going to enter. They put up barriers, designe dto keep foriegn makes out. Toyota was willing to go through loops, and make an old fashioned iron push-rod motor. They were also willing to race in the lesser series for half a decade without fanfare. Honda didn't.

Honda wont fold shop, and they don't have a viable alternative to IRL now. I'm sure Honda would be happy to lease engines in CCWS to defray costs some. They may even have interest in the off shore races in Asia and Australia - their funding comes from US and Japan, allowing them to blow out anybody else on budget.

I think its pretty clear that Honda Japan wants an international success, given their huge failed F1 effort. They want the Pacific races (and more of them) of CCWS and the US races, especially Indy of IRL. The problem is nobody in IRL wants that. Robert Clarke is in a no-win situation, appease the US dealers or appease his bosses in Japan. Honda has got to be extremely frustrated t the box they are in. They want to race, but nobody likes their terms.

[jjspierx]

Originally Posted by sgw2

Honda wont fold shop, and they don't have a viable alternative to IRL now. I'm sure Honda would be happy to lease engines in CCWS to defray costs some. They may even have interest in the off shore races in Asia and Australia - their funding comes from US and Japan, allowing them to blow out anybody else on budget.

I think its pretty clear that Honda Japan wants an international success, given their huge failed F1 effort. They want the Pacific races (and more of them) of CCWS and the US races, especially Indy of IRL. The problem is nobody in IRL wants that. Robert Clarke is in a no-win situation, appease the US dealers or appease his bosses in Japan. Honda has got to be extremely frustrated t the box they are in. They want to race, but nobody likes their terms.

Honda's huge failed effort? What effort are you referring too? In just a few years after re-entering F1 they had the number 2 team. This year they've had a ton of bad luck, but I don't think anyone could hardly say Honda's F1 effort is a huge failure.

[Snrub]

KK mentioned that he was discussing things with Honda. Originally it was about a possible merger, but it was something else this time. Perhaps it is about being a sponsor of one or more of the Asian events?

[Amar7605]

Originally Posted by Snrub

KK mentioned that he was discussing things with Honda. Originally it was about a possible merger, but it was something else this time. Perhaps it is about being a sponsor of one or more of the Asian events?

It's probably this and nothing more. I can't see Honda re-entering Champ Cars at this time. Their focus is on F1, and even though they have had some bad luck this year they are still a top-tier team.

I am so hoping that Toyota never comes back to Champ Cars. It seems like that wherever they go they leave things in a political and financial mess. If I was running Champ Cars I would never do business with Toyota again.

Take heed, NASCAR... beware of who you are dealing with.

[Muzza]

It seems that some people fear Toyota as much as Satan!

Originally Posted by Amar7605

[...]

I am so hoping that Toyota never comes back to Champ Cars. It seems like that wherever they go they leave things in a political and financial mess. If I was running Champ Cars I would never do business with Toyota again.

[...]

This is far from being fair. Can you please cite one example of "a political and financial mess left over by Toyota", in any form of motorsports?

Having dealt with Toyota RD in the past, and seeing how much this company has supported many series - even those in which its engagement would not be justifiable either from a technical or marketing pespective, such as Atlantics and sportscars, as well as recalling the many times when it tried to put people together in the same table (as in the case of the flopped 1993 negotations to avoid the end of the World Sportscar Championship, where Toyota was quite frankly one of the few parts talking some sense) - I can only disagree with your statement.

(the only case I remember of Toyota personnel acting unfairly in any shape or form was in the case of the 1995 World Rally Championship when the works team created a device that would vary the size of the turbo inlet, what was absolutely against the rules - it was plain cheating. The team was banned from the championship, and that was a major embarrassment, in my opinion only comparable to the banning of Tyrrell from Formula 1 eleven years before. And even in that case it was proved, after independent investigations, that the decision to use such "cheating devices" was the result of the initiative of a few people and that the team managers had no idea of what was going on. This was extensively covered by magazines such as Autosport and Autosprint at the time.)

Let's also recall that if there is one manufacturer that "play the fool" during the ridiculously-managed CART engine rule writing of 2002, this one was Toyota.

I'm sorry, Amar, but words reminds me of those of team managers that complain when Toyota enters a series because "they win everything they compete in"...

Originally Posted by sgw2

[...]

Toyota spend ten years building a relationship with NASCAR, becuase it is run by Americans and funded by US Sales. So they have a future mapped out. Not so Honda. You can't just tell NASCAR you are going to enter. They put up barriers, designe dto keep foriegn makes out. Toyota was willing to go through loops, and make an old fashioned iron push-rod motor. They were also willing to race in the lesser series for half a decade without fanfare. Honda didn't.

Wait a second: what is run by Americans? I can't believe you think that Toyota is... Also, most of Toyota profit does not come from US operations...

Believing that Toyota is run by Americans (an falacy created and repeated ad nauseam by the NASCAR management to appease the typical mindset of the clientele this series caters to) you are prone to think that Mercedes and Chrysler merged, instead of simply understanding that the first bought the latter fair and square...

Additionally, Toyota did not circumvent the rules by building a push-rod engine. This is absurd. The NASCAR rules specify that only push-rod engines can compete, so Toyota developed a specific racing engine under strict NASCAR supervision, you might like to know.

Originally Posted by sgw2

[...]

I think its pretty clear that Honda Japan wants an international success, given their huge failed F1 effort. They want the Pacific races (and more of them) of CCWS and the US races, especially Indy of IRL. The problem is nobody in IRL wants that. Robert Clarke is in a no-win situation, appease the US dealers or appease his bosses in Japan. Honda has got to be extremely frustrated t the box they are in. They want to race, but nobody likes their terms.

Wait a second... As jjspierx said, what hugely failed Honda F1 effort?

What the heck is going on here? Some “Fear the Japs” paranoia?


Muzza

[Snrub]

I realize this thread is suppose to be about the future, but I want to address Muzza's point. Case for Toyota messing around with Champ Car:
1. Pop off valve contriversy. They whined that everyone else was cheating. Champ Car acted an annoyed Honda. If I recall correctly it didn't seem to make any difference in the race.
2. Engine specs. Toyota kept attempting to blackmail Champ Car into having a n/a 3.5L V8 to be compatable with the IRL or else they'd bail. Champ Car felt they had no choice but to go with the 3.5L to keep Toyota in the series. Toyota bailed anyway. Honda and Ford wanted a smaller displacement turbo engine. Honda felt betrayed once again and this was a main impetus for the implosion of the series.
3. When Toyota left they waved money in front of Ganassi to get them into the IRL. Possibly Penske as well, but I'm not sure on that one because they left a year earlier when the implications were clear. I'm not blaming Toyota for the near death of the series, but they played a substantial roll.
4. Toyota provided uncompetitive garbage for years. They created an uneven situation where Toyota drivers didn't stand a chance. When they finally got their act together (a bit) in 2000 they had a very unreliable engine that unquestionably effected the outcome of races and the championship. Without Ganassi's switch to Toyota in 2000 (free $$$), there's little question that JPM had the championship in the bag. I firmly believe that it wasn't a matter of ability to make a decent engine, but of will.

[mountainstar]

Honda is having ANOTHER meeting with Champcar very soon as reported by Gordon Kirby. Wonder why?

[Muzza]

This is an interesting debate, Snrub!

Although I do not defend Toyota inconditionally (as I don't defend anything nor anyone inconditionally), in my opinion the actions of this manufacturer - and of other ones as well, incidentally - have been used as smoke screen by the real guilty parts to explain the misery of CART (and of other subjects as well).

You took some good points. My opinion on them:

1.) Pop-off valve controversy
As far as I understand, and I think this was demonstrated by the CART Technical Team, Toyota was the only manufacturer running engines with the pop-off valves stricly as per the rules, in a "purest" (or "purist") interpretation, and Honda particularly was way off it (one can argue that the rules were unclear, and indeed they were).
How can someone disagree with a competitor (Toyota in this case) complaining about other parties when the latter are wrong?
Also, I seem to recall that Honda never denied CART statements on the subject - that means, it did not clearly deny wrong-doing - but, instead, focused on blaming Toyota for complaining...

2.) CART (failed) engine rule debate
How can someone disagree with the fact that an engine manufacturer (Toyota in this case) pushed for a single-engine formula for CART and IRL? Isn't this logical? Isn't this what almost all of us that want to see a single, strong open-wheel formula in North America want?
As a fact, let's please keep in mind that Toyota's announcement was made as soon as it declared intention of supplying engines to IRL, some six months ahead of the beginning of the CART engine rule debate. Toyota had no IRL engine, but IRL had an engine formula already set; thus Toyota had to develop an engine only for IRL. Since CART was about to change its engine formula, but had no idea what to do, Toyota took the first step and proposed the same rules as IRL. After a long while CART balked, just because it wanted to differentiate itself from IRL and keep turbos, what I understand.
The whole debacle was cause by supreme incompetence on CART's part on several regards, including its inability to manage its relationship with engine manufacturers, and not by Toyota's lobby.
Finally, Toyota left for the IRL because a.) CART changed the rules too late, b.) CART required a number of engines supplied per year that was, quite simply, absurd and c.) Tony George told the manufacturers "us or them" (that means, a manufacturer could not supply engines to both series) and Toyota decided that IRL made more marketing sense.

3.) Waving money to teams to jump ships
This is not a surprise. What engine manufacturer would not have done that? What engine manufacturer has not done that? Or, more important, is that unfair? Is that unsportive?
What if a engine manufacturer comes to Champ Car and offers money, or technical support, or resources of any sort to attract teams from the IRL? Would the same people be crying "this is unfair"?
(this reminds me of the diference between a converted and a traitor - by, if I am not mistaken, Berthold Brecht: a converted is one of them that joins our front, a traitor is one of us that joins them...)

4.) The long time it took Toyota to develop an engine
I agree that it took a long time for Toyota to develop a competitive engine, but isn't this... bad to Toyota? Why should Toyota be nailed for it?

My general point is that there is an interesting "social", or "cultural" fact about Toyota and motorsports in North America. The usual default is that Toyota is the Darth Vader of the manufacturers, the one that "gets in to win" (well, isn't this the purpose?) and that must be feared, or hated.

A antipodal "cultural" aspect is Ferrari in Formula 1: Ferrari must be cherished, loved, pampered, favoured in all sorts by the powers-to-be (I am not talking about the 2005 United Grand Prix, in which Ferrari played no role, but about motorsport history as a whole), the one without which "Formula 1 cannot exist". As if Enzo Ferrari was, of all things, Obi-Wan Kenobi.

I am glad that even though you, Snrub, and I disagree in the points above at least we can talk on logical, rational terms. My disappointment, instead, is directed to the childish manner of treating Ferraris as angels, and Toyotas as demons.

Cheers, and keep it coming my man,


Muzza

[Fogelhund]

Just a couple of thoughts re; Honda.

It is within the realms of possibility that Honda could sponsor CCWS or Atlantics, and have the "Cosworths" badged as Honda's. Certainly an easy and cheaper alternative for Honda, and would provide further funding and sponsorship for CCWS or Atlantics. Of course, the same speculation could suggest that they are having the same discussions re; IRL.

Of course, this is purely speculative, but possible.

[Snrub]

Since you've asked for more:

1. I'm not going to blame Toyota 100%, but it obviously it wasn't a surprise that both Honda and Ford were doing that and it wasn't an advantage to Honda & Ford. The biggest problem was definately CART's actions on it, but ultimately Toyota had to whine about it to cause the problem.
2. There's no question that CART's incompetance was part of the equation, but ultimately I think it had to do with trying to keep Toyota. Again no 100% blame for the situation on Toyota, but they were part of the problem. A. Doesn't make sense. B. I have a hard time believing it could have been that bad or couldn't have been negotiated if the specs were changed for Toyota alone. C. Would TG really tell Toyota to take a hike? I have a hard time believing that.
3. It's not a matter of money being unfair, but it did destroy the series.
4. Developing a lousy engine hurt Toyota, but their lack of commitment hurt the series so I can still point a finger at them as doing something detremental.

I think the "gets in to win" mentality is because Toyota sees only measurable immediate value to competing. eg. In the IRL they've whined that Honda has basically made all the teams works teams, whereas Toyota wants to be able to give lesser equipment to some teams. There's an impression there that Toyota's commitment is purely cold calculated, whereas Honda wants to win for the sake of winning and competing, while being less worried about the ROI. Toyota is all about the ROI. The same holds true for the manufacturers leaving CART. Toyota didn't like spending $200M in 2001 to compete with Honda, whereas Honda didn't like the way CART behaved. Which one do you have more respect for? Honda is also in it to train engineers and build a reputation that is more longstanding than "look at this year's trophy, now we're done." Last year in the IRL Honda wanted to be able to win every race. There's no real benifit in that, it's more of the old style mentality for posterity's sake.