Opinions on this as a basis for a future Champ car

[Jag_Warrior]

What do you folks think of this car? Just the car, not the series. At 1320 pounds, it's 200 pounds or so lighter than the current Champ (or IRL) car. I believe it's also narrower, but I can't find the link I had before. Oh yeah, let's assume the airbox could be modified as a roll-hoop. ;)

http://www.autoandtracknews.com/Lola%20A1%20Grand%20Prix%20auto.jpg

[Cam]

I think you missed the WTF? :saywhat: option. :D

[Sean O'Gorman]

No thanks.

http://www.motoring.co.za/site/30/picdb/article0/0/a/27034

http://www.motoring.co.za/site/30/picdb/article2/1/7/27035

Why would a formula car need wheels that big? That's like bling, y0. :gomer:

[Jag_Warrior]

I think you missed the WTF? :saywhat: option. :D

I actually thought of something along those lines... along with there's nothing wrong with keeping the same field of Lolas for another 20 years! But I figured 5 options would be too many. :laugh:

I finally watched my Road America tape last night. And I had a Toyota Atlantic race from another event on the same tape. I started thinking, why is it that the Toyota Atlantics can pass and put on great shows, and the Champ cars can only do it at Cleveland and Road America? Watching the Champ Cars going down the front stretch, they just seemed so wide. Is size (of car and course) one factor? And if it is, what chassis are in existence (I have doubts about an open call for Champ Car chassis redesign being very successful) that are lighter and smaller, but could still handle higher horsepower engines? This is about all I could find.

Just curious about what Champ Car fans think the future should look like...

[cart7]

Very art-deco looking.

[Jag_Warrior]

No thanks.

http://www.motoring.co.za/site/30/picdb/article0/0/a/27034

http://www.motoring.co.za/site/30/picdb/article2/1/7/27035

Why would a formula car need wheels that big? That's like bling, y0. :gomer:

So, it's the wheels you have a problem with? Mr. O'Gorman, let me ask my manager, but if I can have the boys in the back slap some smaller wheels on that car, are you ready to buy today?

[Sean O'Gorman]

Well, the wheels obviously can be changed, and I doubt they have rotors big enough to require 17"s or whatever those are, but my problem with it is using a spec chassis as the basis for a new formula. I would hope that Champ Car could find someone else who is also interested in building cars, and thus it would be a bit pointless to use a car that was designed with no competition in mind as the basis for the new Champ Car.

And you aren't the only one wondering about the Atlantics v. Champ Car comparison. Atlantics have good races at tracks where Champ Car has bad ones, and they have awesome races at the tracks where Champ Car has good ones. I don't know if you caught the Atlantics race from Road America when it aired last week, but that was a very intense race. I've said it for quite awhile now, but Champ Car needs to have a formula with the characteristics of the Atlantics car, but with alot more power so that the cars aren't as easy to drive. :cool:

[pchall]

I've said it for quite awhile now, but Champ Car needs to have a formula with the characteristics of the Atlantics car, but with alot more power so that the cars aren't as easy to drive. :cool:

Atlantics sized would be an interesting move, but the cars would need a bit more wheelbase to get a good sized fuel cell in unless they go to gasoline. The last time I looked Atlantics (77 in) were nearly as wide as a Champcar (79 in) but twenty inches shorter (104 in) in the wheelbase (124 in). Get half that extra wheelbase out of the car and I think we'd have the more nimble Champcar we've wanted for street and road courses for several years now. Also taking 50 -100 kg out of the car would help a lot.

ps: no raised noses and no diffusers

[nz_climber]

just say NO to airboxes!! :eek:

[KLang]

the Champ cars can only do it at Cleveland and Road America?

After today you might want to add in Denver. :thumbup:

[Ziggy]

It looks like a poorly executed homemade Ferarri. Lose the airbox, make the wheelbase a little wider, and the wheels are ugly

otherwise, I would not mind seeing Tony George hit something very solid with it

[Mike Kellner]

How about an Atlantics car turbocharged up to 600 HP?

Again, my proposal. Less power, in a lighter shorter car, wider tires, and free up the aero rules. The more they have restricted the aero and tires to slow the cars, the less passing we have had.

Get rid of the chicanes!!!!

Standing starts.

Find a way to clear wrecks without full course yellows.

No spec cars/motors. Publish rules, and let 'em race any car that passes inspection.

mk

PS I think problem with the tires in the car pictured is not the size, but the low profile. They look like pimp-mobile wheels . They need those spinner things to complete the look. And some fly-girls dancing in front of it.

[Jag_Warrior]

How about an Atlantics car turbocharged up to 600 HP?

Again, my proposal. Less power, in a lighter shorter car, wider tires, and free up the aero rules. The more they have restricted the aero and tires to slow the cars, the less passing we have had.

Get rid of the chicanes!!!!

Standing starts.

Find a way to clear wrecks without full course yellows.

No spec cars/motors. Publish rules, and let 'em race any car that passes inspection.

mk


Works for me. I don't know enough about chassis design to know what various chassis can deal with in horsepower. So could they mod something like an Atlantic to handle double the horsepower?

As long as the guys at OWRS can provide some direction to potential players, maybe something good will show up in the future. But if they sit on their thumbs (like CART did with the engine formula), Lola will need to churn out the current design for some time to come.

BTW, great race today. I was really surprised.

[pchall]

Very art-deco looking.


I'd prefer something a bit more in the Bauhaus at Dessau idiom.

[mueber]

I’d like to see the cars run better in traffic and test the drivers. Therefore, I guess I am looking for less wing, flat bottoms and horsepower comparable to today’s engines.

[jonovision_man]

Hope we get TV coverage for A1, would love to see how the car does when it hits the track!

jono

[Mike Kellner]

mueber writes:

I’d like to see the cars run better in traffic and test the drivers. Therefore, I guess I am looking for less wing, flat bottoms and horsepower comparable to today’s engines.

***

I agree with the goal, but don't think that it will work, and here is why. You will end up with a car that is very sensetive to turbulence. Teams will find a way to produce downforce from a flat bottom, but it will lose more downforce when following closely. Ditto for a small wing, which will be turned up to near stall, and will be tripped into stall by any disturbance of the airflow. Less ground effects, less wing is the same old prescription they have been treating OW cars to for twenty years. It hasn't worked yet. Why should it start working now.

The problem is, the cars are too powerful. Rather than force the engine makers to spend big money for new smaller motors, they go for areo and tire fixes, which make the cars harder to drive. They need to cut power back to about 600 HP, and open up the aero rules. Back when CART & F1 had 700 HP motors, and lotsa ground effects and wing, they had great racing. With the inprovements in aero, tires, and chassis, these days a 600 HP car would be real fast. If the aero rules are flexible, the teams will create cars that can pass, since that is their goal.

mk

[nrc]

The problem is, the cars are too powerful. Rather than force the engine makers to spend big money for new smaller motors, they go for areo and tire fixes, which make the cars harder to drive. They need to cut power back to about 600 HP, and open up the aero rules. Back when CART & F1 had 700 HP motors, and lotsa ground effects and wing, they had great racing. With the inprovements in aero, tires, and chassis, these days a 600 HP car would be real fast. If the aero rules are flexible, the teams will create cars that can pass, since that is their goal.

mk

The state of aero development back in the day wasn't such that the cars could develop massive downforce without excessive drag. In this day and age I think open aero rules would generate way too much speed for ovals or some of the road and street courses and probably produce cars that are way too stuck (in the IRL tradition).

[Rogue Leader]

I agree with some of the ideas... but no way on the flat bottom, unless you want cars flying to planet krypton when they wreck ala IRL...

[Clown]

The Earl can have it :p

[Mike Kellner]

nrc writes:

In this day and age I think open aero rules would generate way too much speed for ovals or some of the road and street courses and probably produce cars that are way too stuck.

That is why I am also calling for a large power reduction, and wider tires. The power reduction and wider tires will slow the cars on ovals while the ground effects will allow passing. If you don't have spec series cars, with manditory wing settings and oversized wings, the teams will right size the aero and oval races will return to a more natural mode. Neither contrived passing festivals, or no passing parades. Cutting power will reduce road course speeds a lot, as the cars won't have the motor to pull huge wings. It will also increase the time spent on straights, which will make for more passing opportunities.

The current approach of restricting aero and tires has been tried for 20 years. If this method improved the racing, we wouldn't have all these no passing parades. It is time to do something else. If you are in a hole, the first step is to stop digging.

mk

[mueber]

I'd like something like this:

http://www.powerfulpictures.com/F1%20POWERFUL%20PICTURES/JIM%20CLARK%20(RESIZED).jpg

[pchall]

I'd like something like this:

http://www.powerfulpictures.com/F1%20POWERFUL%20PICTURES/JIM%20CLARK%20(RESIZED).jpg
OMFG!!!

That would make me do puberty all over again!!!

[Mike Kellner]

You could write rules that eliminated downforce. They would have to be quite restrictive. I think sidepods are a must, because they provide crush space in a side impact. On the upside, without downforce, 500 HP would be a lot, the cars would raise the value driving ability, and passing would return as a common manuver.

[FRANKY]

I'd like something like this:

http://www.powerfulpictures.com/F1%20POWERFUL%20PICTURES/JIM%20CLARK%20(RESIZED).jpg


I think everyone would like to see cars like that.

They should develop a baseline, add into it the safety improvements. Write the rules so that aero BS doesn't screw up the cars and go racing. "Retro Racing" at it's best, goodbye wankers.

[rabbit]

It's ugly.

(The first one. Not the Lotus :cool: )

[nrc]

Yeah, while we're at it lets move the engine back up front where it belongs! :gomer:

[Mike Kellner]

"Yeah, while we're at it lets move the engine back up front where it belongs! "

Only for the IRL. (They could use NASCAR small block V8s) That would create product differentiation between IndyCars, and real racecars.

mk

[pferrf1]

NO AIRBOXES>

[datachicane]

I'd prefer something a bit more in the Bauhaus at Dessau idiom.

...especially since the Earl seems to have a lock on Dadaism.

:D

[Hard Driver]

Let's look at the reality, the amount of interest from manufacturers to build new engines and chassis is limited. The MAIN thing is to have them. So while I agree that a whole set the rules and let them bring what they may that passes tech is ideal, a la F1, that is not going to get peopel to invest hundreds of milllions in the Champcar series right now. If a new chassis is going to be introduced, it will need to be inexpensive. Just being realistic.

That sounds like to me one that is limited to spec in regards to the tub and such. And if you allow teams to turn their Renards into Renskies, the cost will deter smaller teams that the series needs right now. So in the spirit of lower costs and keeping Champcar a drivers series, I say that any new chassis would basically need to be a spec chassis.

[Jag_Warrior]

OK. OK. Here's another radical design I found. Whaddya think of it?

Perfect! (http://www.autoworld.co.za/SizedPics/news/aw/fp/zoom/zoomart400-4992_Champ_Car_event_planned_for_Durban.jpg) :laugh:

[Mike Kellner]

It looks great, but... There is a danger in locking in the past. Our cars are already several years old. The series is already addicted to not having to spend money on new cars every year. Unless we break out of this cycle, we will rapidly become Formula Ford with bigger cars. No matter how modern and ultra hip a racecar is, it is old news in a few years. Those few years have already passed us by.

I still think stock derived 1.8 L DOHC 4 cyl turbo, in a new smaller chassis designed for road racing has a ton of potential, both as a racecar, and as a formula that will garner interest from fans and car makers.

While a zero downforce car would be grand, it ain't gonna happen, and legislating either too much or too little downforce to control speed creates racing that sucks. The only answer is to free up the aero, and reduce power to control speeds.

mk

[mueber]

What I want is Fabio free racing. Give me a chassis that will sift out the wankers and allow for the possiblity of passing, and I will be happy.

[Sean O'Gorman]

What I want is Fabio free racing. Give me a chassis that will sift out the wankers and allow for the possiblity of passing, and I will be happy.

The theoretical chassis that gets rid of the Fabios is one that helps produce the racing needed to attract fans and sponsors, so Champ Car teams don't have to resort to drivers like him, IMO.

[Turn7]

The theoretical chassis that gets rid of the Fabios is one that helps produce the racing needed to attract fans and sponsors, so Champ Car teams don't have to resort to drivers like him, IMO.

WTF is that supposed to mean?
The theoretical chassis that gets rid of Fabio and draws fans and sponsors??? And that theoretical chassis would be? :confused: :gomer:

You sound like a freaking marketing guru. Words and nothing but words. Give me some dimensions, aero, engine, something other than the theoretical.

[Sean O'Gorman]

WTF is that supposed to mean?
The theoretical chassis that gets rid of Fabio and draws fans and sponsors??? And that theoretical chassis would be? :confused: :gomer:

You sound like a freaking marketing guru. Words and nothing but words. Give me some dimensions, aero, engine, something other than the theoretical.

What the hell do you want me to say? A 900 lb car made out of wood with a 7,000 hp solar powered motor? I'd say its a pretty safe bet you wont see Fabio driving one of those if it was the Champ Car spec.

Does that answer the question better for you?

[Turn7]

What the hell do you want me to say? A 900 lb car made out of wood with a 7,000 hp solar powered motor? I'd say its a pretty safe bet you wont see Fabio driving one of those if it was the Champ Car spec.

Does that answer the question better for you?

Yes.

At least now you sound like an idiot to go along with the rest of it.

[Jag_Warrior]

Hmm... Feel the luv! :rofl:

Lola doesn't have a lock on Champ cars. Are the principles inviting any other firms to develop a new chassis? Are they even thinking about it? I hear rumblings about engines. What about the chassis??? And what's so magic about 1500+ pounds?

[oddlycalm]

What I would like to see most is the series survive. That's going to take more than half a season with half the field still sans outside sponser. Once that's been accomplished we should know if there will continue to be oval tracks on the schedule. If not, I'd like to see the wheelbase chopped substantially and the cars made lighter. If we are going to continue with ovals I can't see the overall dimensions and weight changing much. Nobody is going to want to see what happens when 1150lb cars with substantially shorter wheelbase start hitting the walls at Las Vegas at 225mph.

Mike has stated for years now that wider tires (more mechanical grip, more drag) and more downforce from the undertray (less turbulence) are a good thing, and I agree.

The picture of the Lotus from the era of very small engines and cars well illustrates that there is more than one way to have top level road racing competition. Incredibly dangerous, but entertaining to drive and to watch.

oc

[L1P1]

It looks great, but... There is a danger in locking in the past. Our cars are already several years old.

I agree. If we're going for a certain look, before long we're going to find ourselves watching the fifth fastest cars running in North America.

What should Champ Cars look like? Probably very similar to the one that won the previous race. We need diversity. We need new ideas. Sure, we need to limit the speeds, but that can be done in general ways. I think Champ Car needs to focus on safety first, the elimination of defensive aerodynamics (i.e. turbulence) second, and the rest can enable Champ Cars to be the fastest, coolest and relatively safest form of motorsport.

A current Champ Car, let off of its leash, could probably compete with an F1 car on many tracks. Yeah, sure, the F1 car has a leash too. But in both cases the leash exists for safety. If the Champ Car platform was inherently safer, it could go faster. Personally, I don't care if that means fenders or condoms. Just keep the minimum supply rules that were in effect prior to the Ford spec.

[Mike Kellner]

"Once that's been accomplished we should know if there will continue to be oval tracks on the schedule. If not, I'd like to see the wheelbase chopped substantially and the cars made lighter. If we are going to continue with ovals I can't see the overall dimensions and weight changing much. Nobody is going to want to see what happens when 1150lb cars with substantially shorter wheelbase start hitting the walls at Las Vegas at 225mph."

Good point. But, even if we do continue racing ovals, the cars could be made lighter. The current cars weigh 1550 lbs, but carry over 100 lb of ballast. Right there, the cars could be reduced to 1425 dry. If a new smaller motor and attendant smaller transaxle is part of a new formula, a 1350 lb car could be made that was just as safe as the current cars.

I don't think chassis strength is the biggest issue in oval safety. The worst injuries have occoured when cars strike something other than the concrete outer wall. The catch fence poles above the concrete are major dangers. They shred cars when they get into them. It appears to me that the most lucrative place to improve safety would be to sanitize the tracksides. Other things not related to car weight, such as the new carbon fiber helmet in F1, continuing to improve the HANS device, and continued improvement of driver packaging in the cockpit could also yield big improvements.

Remember where the weight and fuel tank size rules came from. I think it was 65, Micky Thompson brought very light weight cars with large fuel tanks filled with gasoline to Indy. His strategy was to run a one stop 500 and make up for a slower car with fewer stops. Dave McDonald and Eddie Sachs were burned to death in a first lap crash involving one of Micky's cars. After that, tank size was cut, and the weight of the cars was raised. Indy being Indy, mandated methanol, set fuel tanks to 40 gallons, and set the minimum weight to that of a Offy roadster, which forced the rear engine cars to redesign, and penalized their performance, while leaving the roadsters untouched... (Big surprise there, hunh?) We still have the same car weight 40 years later. In fact, the entire ChampCar spec is a relic from the Indy era. It is so old, even Indy has changed the rules, perhaps it is time for CC to make a new formula as well.

mk

[Jag_Warrior]

Looks like the test (final?) version went for the Rosie O'Donnel Award. :shakehead

http://www.msomail.co.uk/siteimages/users/Lola/dmc0425au47.jpg

At least Sean got the wheel/tire package that he wanted. :laugh: