Champ Car tracks for 2006

[drewdawg727]

The layout for the Houston Texas race has been confirmed.
http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/champcar/20673/
It doesn't look half bad actually. I think i like this layout better than one prior to 2001.

And San Jose has also made some changes to their layout for 2006 - including smoothening of the railroad tracks and also making the corners wider.
http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/champcar/20671/

Champcar is taking steps in the right direction, i must admit.

[Tim Northcutt]

Originally Posted by drewdawg727

The layout for the Houston Texas race has been confirmed.
http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/champcar/20673/
It doesn't look half bad actually. I think i like this layout better than one prior to 2001.

And San Jose has also made some changes to their layout for 2006 - including smoothening of the railroad tracks and also making the corners wider.
http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/champcar/20671/

Champcar is taking steps in the right direction, i must admit.

I'll reserve judgment on San Jose until I see the positive changes....that course sucked...and it does not sound like the changes will be enough to make it a decent race course...

Cars at these speeds should "Never" run over railroad tracks....period!!!!

[Rob29]

Originally Posted by Tim Northcutt

Cars at these speeds should "Never" run over railroad tracks....period!!!!

Rubbish.IMHO car designers & tyre manufacturers should adapt their product to suit the venue. If you want smooth high speed bowls stick to IRL.If you need acres of space to spin off try F1. San Jose was about the most spectacular circuit I saw this year.

[Tim Northcutt]

Originally Posted by Rob29

Rubbish.IMHO car designers & tyre manufacturers should adapt their product to suit the venue. If you want smooth high speed bowls stick to IRL.If you need acres of space to spin off try F1. San Jose was about the most spectacular circuit I saw this year.

If it was so spectacular, why are they making changes to it???

They had to spend the weekend making changes and messing with it due to the complaints from drivers and teams...

You're entitled to you opinion, even if it is wrong, Rob29...

[luke]

The bottom line is it was a successfull event just look at the attendance like most of the CCWS races.
The only problem was it wasn't organised properly and loop holes will be covered for the second annual race.
You can never have a perfect first race. On a street circuit that is..Although I am not denying the track was micky mouse.

[Silk Cut Jaguar]

Houston being run as a night street race should be interesting.

[codename_47]

Originally Posted by luke

The bottom line is it was a successfull event just look at the attendance like most of the CCWS races.
The only problem was it wasn't organised properly and loop holes will be covered for the second annual race.
You can never have a perfect first race. On a street circuit that is..Although I am not denying the track was micky mouse.

Surely they need to improve the race though, otherwise it doesn't matter how well it's promoted, Hundreds of thousands of people won't come to be bored....

I seriously hope they do something to improve that dire layout.
The FIRST thing they should do is pay attention to turn 3 and it's runoff so that piddly little chicane can be removed and we can have at least one passing place.

This event really needs some work from a racing standpoint.
I hope they won't settle for the fact a large crowd turns up whatever and try to improve the track for passing oppertunities.

However, that said, it did take them a lot of trial and error with the Denver race before that managed to become one of my favourite races of the season, so an optimist would say it's likely!

A pessimist would say it's unwatchable unless they improve it.

[Amar7605]

I agree with codename_47. It's not just to simply have a street course and expect crowds to come. People will come the first year out of curiousity. The key is to build a track that has a number of passing zones, so that the racing can be exciting. Then people will come back year after year.

Having all of the gimmicks at a street race is fine and dandy i.e. bands, expositions, car shows, etc. But eventually the novelty wears off and people care about seeing a good race.

[indycool]

Agree, Amar. I've now read two stories where the cars will slow to 15-20 mph on that 30-degree corner at Houston. I can go faster than that on any rental kart somewhere.

But, per the thread title, '06 will again see only four permanent courses -- Portland, Milwaukee, Vegas and Mexico City -- on the CC schedule (I suppose some might call Montreal "permanent"). Milwaukee and LVMS are likely to be gone after '06 and that'll leave two, unless CC picks up some.

KK has said as much about the direction of CC, that ovals are on their way out and urban street circuits are on their way in. Time will tell how good or bad for CC that might be.

[Snrub]

Originally Posted by indycool

Agree, Amar. I've now read two stories where the cars will slow to 15-20 mph on that 30-degree corner at Houston. I can go faster than that on any rental kart somewhere.

But, per the thread title, '06 will again see only four permanent courses -- Portland, Milwaukee, Vegas and Mexico City -- on the CC schedule (I suppose some might call Montreal "permanent"). Milwaukee and LVMS are likely to be gone after '06 and that'll leave two, unless CC picks up some.

As for the first point, who cares? There's lots of tracks where they're at fairly slow speeds right now. However, I absolutely agree that there needs to be at least one and preferably more passing zones on every course.

Montreal is permanent for all intensive purposes. Just because they let people walk around the track and limit the racing doesn't mean that it's not a track. Monterrey isn't a street circuit either. I think the airport circuits add some spice too. They're a unique format of track too.

[Amar7605]

What if Champ Car added more airport circuts? This is because when you go to a permanent road course, or street circut, the problem is that you generally cannot see everything. You are able to see a tiny part of what's going on. This includes some ovals as well. But at an airport circut you can see virtually the entire course. Its all open, and at some airports you can configure the track is so many ways because of the various taxiways.

I guess it's just a fantasy!

[codename_47]

Originally Posted by Snrub

As for the first point, who cares? There's lots of tracks where they're at fairly slow speeds right now. However, I absolutely agree that there needs to be at least one and preferably more passing zones on every course.

Montreal is permanent for all intensive purposes. Just because they let people walk around the track and limit the racing doesn't mean that it's not a track. Monterrey isn't a street circuit either. I think the airport circuits add some spice too. They're a unique format of track too.

On the first point, yeah, I dunno why he's using that to beat CC over the head with, think of most of the corners of Monaco and especially the Hairpin when they almost come to a dead stop or even the old Long Beach final hairpin which was also very tight....
I don't see why it's an issue since overall the Houston track is quiet nice.....on paper anyway.
But hey, if you sling enough mud....right?

And both the airport tracks put on some great racing this year.
They might be the perfect combination for a road racing series, in that they allow for fast straights, wide corners for passing, the fans can see all of the action (which is unusal for a road race) AND if drivers make mistakes they're not nesscessarily going to be wall banging and out of the race.....

An excellent combination!

[mjolnir]

Originally Posted by Silk Cut Jaguar

Houston being run as a night street race should be interesting.

aye, was watching the re-run of porsche and v8 utes races run at night at surfers - that looked pretty wicked

[Purist]

The road course events could work again if they would stop moving the dates around and actually promote those races.

Amar, you should talk to Tim Northcutt about those airport courses.

Ovals would work, but the cars have to be such that it makes the driving and racing interesting. It can't just be flat-out all the way around, and promotion of those events wouldn't hurt either. I would love to see open wheelers go back to Pocono.

I have no particular problem with street circuits, but one of the great and unique aspects of this series has been the variety of courses they run on. That aspect has set it apart from both F1, and, for the most part, IRL as well.

BTW, KK said on Wind Tunnel on Sunday that there are talks underway with Philadelphia city officials about the potential race there.

[indycool]

Purist, yeah, another street race. There seem to be considerable CC fans who are having difficulty getting their arms around the diversity issue that is the CART historical benchmark and what it actually means today to the series, me included.

The fact is, for the second straight year in '06, CC will have as many ovals (Milwaukee and Las Vegas) as permanent road courses (Portland and Mexico City).

Your statement about flat-out oval racing wasn't the case 10 years ago when CC fans championed the U.S. 500 at Michigan that was going to bring Indy to its knees.

CC fans are a bit disconsolate that the series has lost the great permanent U.S. road courses like Laguna, Mid-Ohio and Road America. In reading a bunch of the boards, there's not a lot of support among posters for the racing part of San Jose.

CART/CC traditionalists (me included) are just having a lot of trouble using the word "diversity" these days, they miss the corkscrew at Laguna, they miss the brots at Road America and the enthusiasm at Mid-Ohio. We seem to like the "good ol' days," that, as we all age, is a natural phenomenon. But just what is it that we have now?

[codename_47]

Originally Posted by indycool

Purist, yeah, another street race. There seem to be considerable CC fans who are having difficulty getting their arms around the diversity issue that is the CART historical benchmark and what it actually means today to the series, me included.

The fact is, for the second straight year in '06, CC will have as many ovals (Milwaukee and Las Vegas) as permanent road courses (Portland and Mexico City).

Your statement about flat-out oval racing wasn't the case 10 years ago when CC fans championed the U.S. 500 at Michigan that was going to bring Indy to its knees.

CC fans are a bit disconsolate that the series has lost the great permanent U.S. road courses like Laguna, Mid-Ohio and Road America. In reading a bunch of the boards, there's not a lot of support among posters for the racing part of San Jose.

CART/CC traditionalists (me included) are just having a lot of trouble using the word "diversity" these days, they miss the corkscrew at Laguna, they miss the brots at Road America and the enthusiasm at Mid-Ohio. We seem to like the "good ol' days," that, as we all age, is a natural phenomenon. But just what is it that we have now?

Erm, a series to support?
Which we couldn't have had if we continued doing the things lamented in your post.

All we'd have is history if it weren't for the new motto: Race only where we are wanted.

[Purist]

We'd be wanted in more places if CART had gotten the word out better, and those venues might well still be drawing respectable crowds if they hadn't kept fiddling with the schedule, particularly Laguna Seca and Road America.

Here's a question. Has CART in the past, as a racing series, been better than it is now by following the "traditional" strategy? I think we all know the answer to that. If it has been done, it can be done again. Although, it may take more work this time around.

[Omega99]

Personally, I consider Monterrey and Montreal permanent road courses, and Korea (provided it happens in '06) is also a permanent road course. So including Mexico City and Portland, there will be 5 permanent road courses by my count.

[rustyfan]

Originally Posted by Omega99

Personally, I consider Monterrey and Montreal permanent road courses, and Korea (provided it happens in '06) is also a permanent road course. So including Mexico City and Portland, there will be 5 permanent road courses by my count.

I sure would like to see some elevation changes though. I mean, is there any elevation changes what so ever on the Champ Car schedule right now?

[indycool]

Good points, Purist. CART's strategy was diverted when Pook took over and the losses of Toyota and Honda and a bunch of teams as things evolved. Pook started the finite move to the streets and CC has continued and expanded that thinking with KK & Co.

Pook had to put down a promoter revolt as soon as he took office because the promoters were losing money. That resulted in lower sanction fees at many places because CART had "topped that out" and beyond through previous managements or several of them would have pulled the plug then. The biggest losses for the promoters were in promotion, ticket sales and hospitality to corporate manufacturers and sponsors, which diminished.

This move to more street races is a continuation of the process Pook started, just under a different management.

And Omega99, understand your thinkin' regarding Montreal and Monterrey about considering them permanent courses and figured some folks probably WOULD consider them permanent. I consider them temporary because neither are "purpose-built" fulltime road courses but I also concede you have a point. As for Ansan, it ain't either one until somebody actually runs a race there.