Am I the only one that thinks this abut the IRL cars?

[Rogue Leader]

So heres TG changing to a 3.0 liter formula to keep speeds down and keep the cars safer. The problem is back 10-15 years ago when we had Champ Cars racing at Indy (and FASTER I might add) we didnt have these problems, and still now Champ Cars dont have thes problems of cars flying off the track. Now Tony Renna is dead, Kenny Brack was 2 inches from becoming a parapalegic, Mario Andretti almost got splattered, and the solution is slow em down??? I think even to stop that stuff youd have to slow em down to about 60 mph... Why isnt someone seeing that there HAS TO BE some sort of SERIOUS aerodynamic problem with these cars that causes them to lift off. F1 cars dont fly off the track, neither do Champ Cars, and they can hit the same speeds, so there has to be something wrong here.

Maybe I'm re-hashing some points already shown here, but as a person hoping one day to become a race car driver, I think at this point I would turn down a contract from Ganassi or Penske because its not worth the exponential risk beyond other forms of racing. (beside the fact I prefer Champ Cars and road courses anyway) Why add more useless danger to an already hugely dangerous profession?

[cart7]

SUPPOSEDLY...... the reptilian type fin running the length of the tub along with some purported undertray changes are supposed to take care of a problem that doesn't exist, according to the irl. The 3.0 only slows the speed of debris heading towards the catch fencing.

[RTKar]

If I were Charles Lindberg you couldn't get me in one of those things.

[Madmaxfan2]

The screwed up rules governing the IRL with restricted HP and flat bottom tubs, ( there may be rear end air channel diffusers, but no venturi tunnels) have resulted an unstable package that can take off, apparently instant postive lift is generated

[DaveL]

One look at the circa 1974 wings should tell you something about why they take off. That's a whole lotta airfoil hitting the air once it obtains a postive atttitude.

[Brickman]

People are seeing it, even IRL management seemed to, but NOW their tune is changing and they are pretending there was never a problem. In my mind leave the PR to the PR people and be up front and open about the technical side. Barnhardt ain't listening to me. :thumdown:

[B3RACER1a]

So, lets say they've fixed theier flying problem that doesnt exsist.

Now how about rear end collision problems? To fix this, it will take a whole redesign of the chassis.

[Brickman]

So, lets say they've fixed theier flying problem that doesnt exsist.

Now how about rear end collision problems? To fix this, it will take a whole redesign of the chassis.

I don't think they have a rear end collision problem... now. The sure as hell did before.

[Chief]

Injuries? They're just a number....

Don't worry though they've got it covered, the EArL moves with nimble swiftness as soon as someone gets killed.

[JLMannin]

They need to address the technique of making the rear end squat down at speed to get that billboard of a wing out of the air (negative chasis rake)

NASCAR, a series that the IRL seems to want to emulate, had a simalar problem several years ago with their teams putting real soft springs on the rear at the superspeedways so the cars would squat in the rear and get the spoiler down out of the air. Their fix was to hang a 50 lb weight on the rear in tech inspection and set a specification for maximum spring deflection.

I don't know if the crapwagons are soft in the springs or if the negative chassis rake built in.

[Hot Daug]

From this 1997 article, Champcar drivers recognized that the IRL cars could fly.

It only took the IRL 7 more years to figure it out. :shakehead

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/motorsports/1998/indy500/flashback/1997.html


Some CART drivers expressed concerns about the safety of the new IRL cars. They noted that one consequence of reconfiguring the design was to reduce ground effects, the aerodynamic properties that help prevent cars from becoming airborne.

[Rogue Leader]

Im just wondering hw many talented drivers have to get killed before thye REALLY fix the problem... I hope Scott Dixon heads to F1, and at least Fogarty did the right thing....

[Ziggy]

They still have the rear impact problem. How many IRL cars have you seen hit the wall with anything but the rearend? ToraToraTora was the latest. Its like throwing one of Tony's hammers. They got to the point of liftoff when turned around backwards (or sideways for that matter) but if they make it to the wall, rest assured it will be rear end first. The best thing a guy can hope for is enough adhesion to rotate the car even more, bringing the front end to the wall. (and hope for the side, tank slapper sort of crash) nice time to have those wheel theathers, eh?

How often do you email Brainfart? He only listens to boobs, so you got a shot

Keep trying

Ziggy

[Brickman]

Im just wondering hw many talented drivers have to get killed before thye REALLY fix the problem... I hope Scott Dixon heads to F1, and at least Fogarty did the right thing....

They have had one too many already. I will be following with much interest if the changes (not just speed) were effective. Fingers crossed.

[JT265]

They still have the rear impact problem. How many IRL cars have you seen hit the wall with anything but the rearend? ToraToraTora was the latest. Its like throwing one of Tony's hammers. They got to the point of liftoff when turned around backwards (or sideways for that matter) but if they make it to the wall, rest assured it will be rear end first. The best thing a guy can hope for is enough adhesion to rotate the car even more, bringing the front end to the wall. (and hope for the side, tank slapper sort of crash) nice time to have those wheel theathers, eh?

How often do you email Brainfart? He only listens to boobs, so you got a shot

Keep trying

Ziggy

:rofl: :thumbup:

[B3RACER1a]

Brickman, while I havent done the research and I wont, because its late, I KNOW there are plenty of injuries resulting in major contusions or fractures with the current generation of cars.

[Brickman]

They still have the rear impact problem. How many IRL cars have you seen hit the wall with anything but the rearend? ToraToraTora was the latest. Its like throwing one of Tony's hammers. They got to the point of liftoff when turned around backwards (or sideways for that matter) but if they make it to the wall, rest assured it will be rear end first. The best thing a guy can hope for is enough adhesion to rotate the car even more, bringing the front end to the wall. (and hope for the side, tank slapper sort of crash) nice time to have those wheel theathers, eh?

How often do you email Brainfart? He only listens to boobs, so you got a shot

Keep trying

Ziggy

I was referring to the rear impact with the older cars where the placement of the gear box created horrible consequenses. No mild injuries, ask a long time Lake Tahoe favorite... Jones or Sam Schmidt.

Here is the list of their terrible record. http://www.autoracing1.com/MarkC/2003/DriverInjuryStats.htm

Although they run nothing but ovals, their percentages are still awful, but they aren't numbers, they are people. Compare them to CART, absolutely shameful. I was at Phoenix last year when Andretti clipped Gil. Yes they hit like a ton of bricks, what race cars don't? It would be interesting to see how many hits were tank slappers, or the rear ends coming around.

I have never e-mailed Brain Barnhardt. Quit being a {edit} calling people names, you have the ability to discuss an issue without reverting to {edit}

Maybe I'll e-mail MarkC later and get specifics on who was injured...

[B3RACER1a]

The web link you have there Brickman shows that there were 7 head or back injuries that year, and I'm going to say most if not all were resulting from a rear end collision.

So they still have a rear end collision problem.

Not only is it the placement of the gearbox the problem, its the TYPE of gearbox. It it basically an alluminum box thats longer than it is wider, and stretches very far back. Fill that box up with a bunch of steel gears, linkage....all that stuff and you have something that doesnt crush. When it doesnt crush, the time of total inpact DECREASES, meaning the total accel (g's) of the impact is much greater. Putting the attenuator on is just a bandaid, and it doesnt work.

Champ car rear end collisions dont happen nearly as much because they dont have that awful airbox. But when they do, the car absorbs much more energy. I remember seeing one hit the wall at Gateway extremely hard, Scott Pruett I believe. The whole back of the car was destroyed, and the gearbox actually broke apart and gears and pieces of gearbox were laying all over the track. You never see that with an IRL car.

Just goes to show that the IRL car still have that problem.

[Brickman]

I asked MarkC and am now asking The Faithful and will pass on what I learned.

[Spicoli]

I asked MarkC and am now asking The Faithful and will pass on what I learned.

Pick a side. If you like TF and post there, then I wish you a flat tire today and everyday.

Screw them. You want the truth?

[Ziggy]

Look, Mr Steve Levinson wrote the article on AR1 with the name

"You want the numbers, here are the concrete facts"

Robin Miller sucks eh Rakeman? Hope you dont "Zing" him as well

all the best

Ziggy

[Brickman]

Look, Mr Steve Levinson wrote the article on AR1 with the name

"You want the numbers, here are the concrete facts"

Robin Miller sucks eh Rakeman? Hope you dont "Zing" him as well

all the best

Ziggy

It's Brickman. Miller sucks to the faithful when he puts them down and is praised for his reporting when he puts Champ cars down, vice versa or Crappies and others, people have the same view of AutoWeek and forum posters... they want to hear what they want.

[Brickman]

The web link you have there Brickman shows that there were 7 head or back injuries that year, and I'm going to say most if not all were resulting from a rear end collision.

So they still have a rear end collision problem.

Not only is it the placement of the gearbox the problem, its the TYPE of gearbox. It it basically an alluminum box thats longer than it is wider, and stretches very far back. Fill that box up with a bunch of steel gears, linkage....all that stuff and you have something that doesnt crush. When it doesnt crush, the time of total inpact DECREASES, meaning the total accel (g's) of the impact is much greater. Putting the attenuator on is just a bandaid, and it doesnt work.

Champ car rear end collisions dont happen nearly as much because they dont have that awful airbox. But when they do, the car absorbs much more energy. I remember seeing one hit the wall at Gateway extremely hard, Scott Pruett I believe. The whole back of the car was destroyed, and the gearbox actually broke apart and gears and pieces of gearbox were laying all over the track. You never see that with an IRL car.

Just goes to show that the IRL car still have that problem.

Well… I asked and here are the results. First off as I originally stated “I don't think they have a rear end collision problem... now. The sure as hell did before.” So I asked MarkC for a list and the faithful for what they recall. As far as the gearbox it is 13.9 inches shorter and 14 pounds lighter, evidently by pushing the gearbox forward it alters the center of gravity. There is four times as much structure (more car to absorb impact energy) than before. It’s an aluminum alloy cased transmission. We all know the previous design was was bad, this is much better in weight, placement, design.

Old http://www.xtrac.com/images/IRL%20Gearbox%201.jpg vs New http://www.xtrac.com/images/295-11-thumb.jpg

The first generation was a piss poor design, with too much gearbox behind the axle.

http://www.yearone.com/enthusiast/articles/indy500/images/garage/garage5.jpg


As far as injuries I asked and came up with these for 2003. Lots of pics of lots of wrecks.

Gil de Ferran was injured at Phoenix, right in front of me, clipped by Michael, his would have been considered back into the wall from contact, he suffered a concussion & fractured vertebrae. http://www.megspace.com/cars/jdh919/Crash_Pics/Scans5/2003_Gil_deFerran_and_Michael_Andretti_Phoenix_IRL .jpeg

Tony Kanaan got together with Dixon at Motegi, suffered a broken wrist/arm and Dixon suffered a broken wrist/hand. One went in backwards from the contact.

Arie Luyendyk suffered unspecified injuries to upper back, was cleared and the uncleared. I think his brain cells kicked in and realized being retired wasn’t such a bad thing.

Airton Dare swacked the wall in Texas suffered broken hip, pelvis, leg and arm. http://www.taipeitimes.com/images/2003/06/07/20030606204924.jpeg

Felipe Giaffone also swacked the wall at Kansas. Suffered a broken pelvis & right thigh.
http://www.augustachronicle.com/images/headlines/070703/8301_512.jpg

Vitor Meira broke a wrist at Kentucky. Car swapped ends, Menard packed and left.

Sarah Fisher http://www.bellydance.com.br/images/sarah_fisher9.jpgOops wrong one...


The other Sarah crashed at Nazareth was airlifted, suffered a contusion of the back http://sportsmed.starwave.com/media/rpm/2003/0903/photo/a_fisher_i.jpg

Kenny Brack was of course contact. http://sportserver.nandomedia.com/ips_rich_content/686-wreck.jpg

This doesn't cover the issue of flying cars, I believe there was enough evidence to indicate that they took flight, Brian Barnhardt is simply wrong and in my mind to indicate otherwise. They should have parked the cars right after Texas, not allowing any testing. (that's my opinion and I'm sticking with it) I also believe they should have gone with a 3.0 or smaller engine when they announced Toyota was coming to their sandbox, it was a no brainer that $peed$ would increa$e.

I'm guessing three of these accidents could be swapped end accidents, Sarah, Vitor and Dare. It could be the talent or that Ziggy is right, that the cars are still too tail heavy. I suppose one could figure out how many accidents and at what amount of G's occured and what was the injury rate. Maybe Ziggy can e-mail Barhardt, or walk down the street and pay him a visit if he wanted to know. :gomer:

[B3RACER1a]

So basically they still have the same problem as before. Thats a lot of injuries in one year.

Cutting 14 inches off the back of the gearbox doesnt do a whole lot, because there is nothing else in there to contact the wall before the gearbox does. The whole back end of the cars just doesnt break apart like they need too, period.

Great job on the research, though. :)

[JoeBob]

Does anybody have the quote from Tony George early in the IRL era in which he was talking about how CART was too expensive and said that teams shouldn't have to replace the gearbox every time a car backed into the wall?

Gearboxes were a big area he targeted for cost reduction. He wanted them built cheap. Even back in 1995, Champ Cars were designed with lots of deformable structure behind the rear wheels. Notice all the stuff that would break before hitting the gearbox. You've got a wing, you've got tires, some suspension, etc.
http://www.indyphoto.com/CONTENT/Photos/scottp/pruett06.jpg

If you can't picture it, here's a demonstration courtesy of Lyn St. James:
http://www.indyphoto.com/CONTENT/Photos/lyn/stjame05.jpg

For some reason (seemingly, cost control), the IRL deviated from the then (and still) standard, design, which had been proven to be safe. Then, in the name of continued cost controls, they stuck with that design. They promised that significant components from the 2002 gearboxes would continue to work in the "so much safer than last year's that we banned the old ones" edition unveiled for 2003.

You would think that an organization that spends so much time talking about how safe their cars are would ask one of the teams they poached from CART if they had an old Lola or Reynard laying around they could take a look at to study the gearboxes. They don't even need one of the new Lola's Fernandez is sitting on.

[Brickman]

So basically they still have the same problem as before. Thats a lot of injuries in one year.

Cutting 14 inches off the back of the gearbox doesnt do a whole lot, because there is nothing else in there to contact the wall before the gearbox does. The whole back end of the cars just doesnt break apart like they need too, period.

Great job on the research, though. :)

The article I found most of interest in stated the rear of the cars crash worthiness was now similar to the nose. That there was 4 times more area to absorb than before. The pic from Xtrac's site clearly shows that the new shorter gearbox won't be the first thing that gets the impact. I didn't do much research, trust me. ;)

[Rogue Leader]

So now besides the flight problem we've established the problem with the gearbox which is extremely obvious. I bet these rearend wrecks are causing a lot more physical damage to the structure of the race cars compared to a champ car hitting the wall.

So now the question is how long is TG going to bull**** us about the "safety" of these cars? Is it going to endup when someone sues him, IMS, Dallara, G-force etc after someone ELSE gets killed????

[Brickman]

Does anybody have the quote from Tony George early in the IRL era in which he was talking about how CART was too expensive and said that teams shouldn't have to replace the gearbox every time a car backed into the wall?

Gearboxes were a big area he targeted for cost reduction. He wanted them built cheap. Even back in 1995, Champ Cars were designed with lots of deformable structure behind the rear wheels. Notice all the stuff that would break before hitting the gearbox. You've got a wing, you've got tires, some suspension, etc.

For some reason (seemingly, cost control), the IRL deviated from the then (and still) standard, design, which had been proven to be safe. Then, in the name of continued cost controls, they stuck with that design. They promised that significant components from the 2002 gearboxes would continue to work in the "so much safer than last year's that we banned the old ones" edition unveiled for 2003.

You would think that an organization that spends so much time talking about how safe their cars are would ask one of the teams they poached from CART if they had an old Lola or Reynard laying around they could take a look at to study the gearboxes. They don't even need one of the new Lola's Fernandez is sitting on.






Yes supposedly 70% of the same internal parts as the old gearbox. But if you think their design is just as unsafe as their old one it's fine by me.

http://www.xtrac.com/enlarge/IRL%20Gearbox%201.jpg
Old

http://www.xtrac.com/enlarge/295-11-large.jpg

2003-2005



http://hillhaven.dyndns.org/homeweb/photogallery/Indy2002/TeamGreen2.jpg

2002

http://homepage.mac.com/mfc143/race/images/champ_cars/porsche_indy_90_1.jpg

1990

http://www.openwheelracing.com/images/TitW-Fontana_026_-_Miles_Nelson.jpg

2003

http://www.yearone.com/enthusiast/articles/indy500/images/garage/garage5.jpg

Old Gearbox

They now have wings and tires to absorb energy, and an attenuator that's bigger than their old one. To buy into Tony's Visionspeak of lower costs is just buying the idea of a vision, just from the other side of the fence.

[B3RACER1a]

Look how sweet that champ car looks!

That current IRL spec looks crappy even compared to the 1990 Champ Car..lol.

[Ziggy]

Bump, for picture purpose. BTW, the picture of the old gearbox mush have been taken from about 400 yards

Ziggy