View Full Version : I'm sorry... Champcars look fat & slow on roadcourses.
A few years ago, F1 coverage on ESPN was kinda spotty... and CART was running a lot more ovals. There really wasn't a lot of direct comparison between the two. Today, it's different. F1's coverage on Speed-TV is more consistant, and CART is showcased almost entirely on road/street races.
The result is that after watching F1 on Sunday morning, and then watching CART later the same day, the Champcars really look fat and sluggish on a road course. Not just this past Sunday, but many times this past season, particularly 2 weeks ago when they were on at the same time (switching channels) at IMS and Miami.
Not only do the Champcars have a more bulky appearance compared to F1, they just don't have that "superfast-running-on-the-edge" look like F1. The Hp/wt ratio isn't even close, and the result is that they look like fat pigs in comparison.
One more time... There's no more need for the cars to be fat, underpowered and "oval-worthy" for a dying oval market. Trim 'em down... crank the boost a bit... shorten the wheelbase and fatten the tires. Make these Champcars into really AWESOME road racing machines!
Meanwhile, in other news, Las Vegas reporter Jeff Wolf says in this article (http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2003/Oct-10-Fri-2003/sports/22341835.html) that despite CART loyalists who laud the series for it's combination of tracks, that "the series sorely needs an identity, and ditching oval-track racing would help CART forge one."
Fenster
10-14-03, 11:45 PM
CART's identity is diversity. Why don't people get that? It is not that I am not in favor of ditching ovals... I am (and Brack's crash shows you why)... but IMO the issue is not idenity. The issue is marketing (among others).
And as far as looking sluggish and 'fat'... I think it has all to do with the coverage. Speed's F1 coverage is a feed from 'Bernievision'. A lot of money has gone into the production and we are only seeing the generic verison. Imagine what the paying folk in Europe get! Spped's CART coverage is from Speed itself.
What I mean by all this is camera angles, mostly. They have a whole lot to do with projecting speed in two demension. You see, it is easy to man some Joe on a camera and get a wide shot through a turn. Or sit them at the end of a straight and track focus them down the straight and into the breaking zone. Those shots all make the car look slow. However, when you are up closer on the cars and switching between onboard cameras, etc. the cars 'look' a whole lot quicker on film.
Pay attention to the footage. Watch the angles. That's what it is all about.
To me it is like taking a still picture with a high shutter speed and freezing the tires. That car could be going 200mph, but you'd never know it by the shot because some Joe froze the thing solid. Get in close and pan that sucker with a big lens and slow shutter and all the sudden you got yourself speed on film.
True, F1 cars are far more 'nimble'. Their acceleration, breaking, and cornering are all better performance. But go to a CART race... I bet you money CART cars don't look sluggish and 'fat' to you then. Juan Pablo and Cristiano don't think so either. They still hold CART in very high esteem... and they should know first hand.
Just my three cents on the topic.
--Fenster.
Robstar
10-15-03, 12:23 AM
Originally posted by Fenster
But go to a CART race... I bet you money CART cars don't look sluggish and 'fat' to you then.
Deja Vu !
Still a good call ! :thumbup: :thumbup:
Lizzerd
10-15-03, 12:26 AM
I'm not so sure that it's the coverage that makes a Champ Car appear to be slower. They are slower around a twisty track. Witness Montreal, a "horsepower" track, meaning that the cars were at full throttle and top speed for a long time during a lap at very nearly the same top speed. Yet, F1 times were five to seven seconds quicker than the Champ Cars. Those five to seven seconds were made up on a relatively small percentage of the entire track. Sure, carbon on carbon brakes and a few hundred pounds lighter makes a big difference.
Regarding the chassis, during the course of this season, I've realized more and more that I couldn't care less if all the ovals were taken off the schedule. It's not that I dislike ovals, it's more of a ho-hum attitude now. The current chassis isn't far off from what it was in 1995 re weight, wheelbase, etc. At that time, CART raced at IMS, Michigan, Phoenix, Nazareth, Milwakee, and New Hampshire. That was one third of the season. I agree that Champ Cars could/should be lighter and with a shorter wheelbase now. If it means not racing at Fontana or any other 220+ oval, so be it. Roads and streets are the future of CART/OWRS. Unfortunately, now is not the time to radically change chassis specs. 2005, maybe, but not now. Not until CART is sound and the teams are firmly in grip with their finances.
And Fenster, "Bernievision" went away last year. The only "Bernievision" race seen in the States was the 2002 USGP on ABC. Speed has always gotten the local feeds.
Jonezzy_33
10-15-03, 01:13 AM
They're unique to me on road/street courses. I love F1 and those cars are by far amazing to watch, but for me I like the current formula of the champcars. The diversity of the series is what I wish people would focus on, just goes to the NASCAR Entertainment thing that show is everything which is more important these days it seems. I don't want to see them ditch all ovals, a couple on the schedule is nice, plus they take me back whenever I'm watching a race on one.
Then again, if they would happen to go on the suggestions like you brought up, then they might have a little better show on some street courses like Miami.
Fenster
10-15-03, 01:27 AM
Lizzerd... I agree with you that F1 cars are quicker. I'd be a fool not to... it is fact. Their 'nimbleness' is very obvious through twisty tracks. Your observation about Montreal is correct. But for this guy to be calling the cars 'fat' and 'sluggish' is what I have a problem with. Clearly if you go to any of the tracks and really watch them hustle trough a turn, you will not think they are so sluggish nor fat.
I would like to add that I think Speed, for the most part, has good coverage. I did not mean to imply otherwise. TV Azteca's coverage on the other hand was rather poor IMO. Like I said... the camera thing plays a large role IMO.
--Fenster.
Lizzerd
10-15-03, 02:05 AM
Methinks ChrisB was saying that as a comparison to F1, the cars look sluggish and fat, not that they actually are. (Feel free to chime in any time, ChrisB).
Heck yeah, I've been to 30 - 40 CART road/street races (RA, Belle Isle, Cleveland, and M-O), and I agree that in person it's freakin' awesome. I've also been to all the USGPs at Indy. And, at any of those venues if PT in his Lola and The Chin in his Ferrari were on the track at the same time, the Lola would indeed look fat and sluggish by comparison, when indeed they are not.
Champ Cars are still designed for high speed crash survival (MIS, Fontana, Indy), and a new formula is prudent for more exciting concrete canyon races. With that, I agree with ChrisB too. Champ Cars should and can be lighter, more powerful, and shorter wheel based.
Warlock!
10-15-03, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by Lizzerd
And, at any of those venues if PT in his Lola and The Chin in his Ferrari were on the track at the same time, the Lola would indeed look fat and sluggish by comparison, when indeed they are not.
...And if there was a 7 second difference at Montreal, just think of what it would be like at Suzuka. Mexico and Suzuka last weekend, both having an extremely "essey" portion, really showcased the difference in the two cars. Yeah, they're sluggish compared to F1, but they're still pretty f***in' cool. :cool:
Warlock!
I love 'em but they looked sluggish as hell to me through the senna curve in montreal last year compared to the f1 cars 2.5 months before. they had to brake soooooooo early and just wade through that curve so slowly where the GP cars were just tearing it up in the race to beat the guy coming out of the pits.
Miami was a furious race in tight confines which looked faster than it was. Are you implying F1 is our target, as in we need to be like F1 to have an identity? I disagree strongly. We ain't F1, we are CART and we have an identity and part of that identity is the diversity of tracks we run. Until that changes our purpose built chassis fits like a glove.
If sleek machines were to be where it's at why isn't F1 #1 TV rated motorsport in the Americas? Or even go-karting?
don't you want a bigger fan base of intelligent formula car loving people?
RaceGrrl
10-15-03, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by Chief
We ain't F1, we are CART and we have an identity and part of that identity is the diversity of tracks we run.
Agreed. We don't need to be more like F1 to be accepted. The problem with OW racing in the US is bigger than that.
Formula One is, well, Formula One. With CART you had cars that could be bought "off the shelf" without the giant buggets needed to run F1. There was never a question of which series had the quicker cars. Not only was the diversity special, but so was the travel. Champcar racing is an American Sport, which until a few short years ago took place for the most part inside our borders.
If they are going the street route (and it appears if they go anywhere, they are going to the street concept) than Im all for the smaller car (smaller engine as well)
and a feeder series which is small block powered and cheap!
Ziggy
I'd like to add Jeff Wolf's credentials may be impeccable, but I figure him out to be an IRL shill. He wants CART's identity changed so he can have an IRL race. That's all.
All the major NASCAR series, the Indy Racing League's Indy 500, Formula One and drag racing's NHRA U.S. Nationals race in Indianapolis, either at the cherished speedway or the dragstrip and .686-mile short track at Indianapolis Raceway Park. The only missing series is CART Champ Cars. Oops, forgot we're talking about major racing series. But even then, CART has its headquarters in Indianapolis.
It's likely our local track will drag its executive heels until the last minute in 2004 to put together a date for 2005. By then, CART will be dead and the IRL will be courted by circuits in North America and Mexico that want to replace CART races. - From August 8, 2003 article
But the series sorely needs an identity, and ditching oval-track racing would help CART forge one. The Indy Racing League has a stranglehold on the country's top ovals -- including Indianapolis Motor Speedway -- each of which is run by IRL chief Tony George.
That's why Gentilozzi should pass on racing at the speedway's oval and instead work to secure a suitable venue adjacent the Strip for a temporary street circuit.
I'm sorry... Champcars look fat & slow on roadcourses.
Never stopped AJ.
Robstar
10-15-03, 10:45 PM
Originally posted by Ankf00
don't you want a bigger fan base of intelligent formula car loving people?
What do you mean by that ?
:confused:
Guys, I've seen Champcars at Trenton, Pocono, Meadowlands, & Nazareth, and I'm well aware of how fast they are in person. The problem is that the speed on road/street looks especially bad on TV when contrasted against F1 now.
Someone mentioned Montreal... If I did the math right, at about 6 sec/lap a Champcar would be lapped at Montreal by an F1 car in about 12 laps... and in a 200 mile/74 lap race... going at full speed... the Champcar would be down about 6 laps at the end. Yikes!
As for the "diversity" thing, if one studies the oval situation, they're going one-by-one. ISC will boot CART outta Fontana, and the IRL will dilute CART's attendance at Milwaukee. LVMS will have to be a rental. CART would be left as a defacto road-racing series using cars designed for the 1995 Indy 500. I still say putting the turbo Cosworth into a modified P1 chassis (http://www.netaxs.com/~gg1/race/Premier1ReynardHi_reduced.jpg) might work.
If you watched the F1 race from Malaysia, you would see F1 cars look slow. Racing on tv requires good camera angles to capture the sense of speed that the cars have. Apparently it isn't an easy thing to do. The broadcasts that do get it right are head and shoulders above the others as far as viewing pleasure is concerned. I'm sure F1 spends a great deal of money on production to get it right, while CART is not in that position these days. Some CART races do have the right camera work and you see how fast and violent the cars are.
jonovision_man
10-18-03, 07:46 AM
Originally posted by jons
If you watched the F1 race from Malaysia, you would see F1 cars look slow. Racing on tv requires good camera angles to capture the sense of speed that the cars have. Apparently it isn't an easy thing to do. The broadcasts that do get it right are head and shoulders above the others as far as viewing pleasure is concerned. I'm sure F1 spends a great deal of money on production to get it right, while CART is not in that position these days. Some CART races do have the right camera work and you see how fast and violent the cars are.
Exactly... I remember watching the SAME RACE one time, F1 at Monaco. The first time I saw it was on the "world feed", and it looked like just a regular F1 race. Next was on ABC when they were using Bernie's pay-for-view digital feed, and it looked so incredibly fast by comparisson! Same race, same cars, looked faster.
CART has too many shots from up high, not enough trackside.
jono
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.