On a scale of 1 to 10

[rabbit]

Rate your opinion of the new chassis.

[racer2c]

I gave it a 7 (F1 cars being 9's and 10's) I think it's atractive and a good progression from the Lola. I think it has more graceful lines. I dinged it for the louvers which remind me of an IPS car and I think it could have bigger tires. This is just based on an artist's conception picture though and the real thing might look less "specish", but I think it does have sort of an GP2, spec look to it.

[Gnam]

5 out of 10. Girl next door. The looks have issues, but she'll do. I am satisfied with the performance side if they can deliver on faster, lighter, stronger, smaller, and cheaper.

[nrc]

Obviously only the final product will tell, but it still looks like a champ car. I don't care for the raised nose and the relatively flat plane across the top of the nose and up over the cockpit.

[fourrunner]

It doesn't look like a Crapwagon .... And it has an attractiveness about it ...
If it performs well ?

I gave it a 10

[formulaben]

While everyone seems to be stuck on its looks, I am very excited about the long overdue onboard starter, weight deduction, and power increase! This is all very good news. I think 850-900hp for road/street courses is more appropriate though.

[Robstar]

I gave it an 8... I reckon it will be quite sexy :thumbup:

[FailureByDesign]

It'll take some getting used too :saywhat:

[rosawendel]

i give an 8 to the design of the new chassis. i am still enthused. let's get two mock-ups together and put 'em on the track. then i'll tell you what i think about the chassis themselves.

[cart7]

I gave it an 8 w/o comment.

[Lizzerd]

I gave it a 9. Nothing's perfect. Though in this case, it's as close to perfect as I can imagine. More HP, maybe.

[dando]

8...based on what we know now. Until we have a real car and real performance numbahs, this is still based on what we see on paper (or dsesgn mocks). Based on the specs so far it does appear to meet important requirements of lighter, faster, lower co$t, and improving aero issues, while maintaining or improving safety. I deducted points for the nose and the mirror configgeration, which does not seem to be realistic. In addition, I'm sceptical about design sepcs until I can see one or more in action.

-Kevin

[Opposite Lock]

I'm in with a 9 too. Looks-wise, I'd only go 7.5, but there is still plenty of refinement time, ([cough] no A1GP tusks [\cough]). Although not visible, extra point for on-board starters. Rounding up, 'cause I can. Not a 10 yet, but could still get there. Maybe even an 11 eventually. :) Still need to see an actual prototype.

Definite :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: 's

[Twisty Bits]

8, 10 if there was improved HP.

[dando]

8, 10 if there was improved HP.
There is. +25 HP.

-Kevin

[Cam]

8, 10 if there was improved HP.

After school detention for you! Pay attention!!!! :p ;)

[TurboTodd]

I gave it a 10.

The increased performance pushed me to 8.. the onboard starter 9..

And the Renault shark-gill sidepods brought me to the climax of 10.

[Lizzerd]

There is. +25 HP.

-Kevin

I'm wagering that Twisty meant the same as I said, but not explicitly enough, I guess.

More than +25 HP.

Same to you, Cam...

[jonovision_man]

Still looks like a Champ Car, performance sounds like it'll be better and cheaper to potentially add more to the grid. What's not to love?

I'm giving it a 10 for now, we'll see what happens when it hits the track.

jono

[G.]

I dinged it for the louvers which remind me of an IPS car and I think it could have bigger tires. This is just based on an artist's conception picture though and the real thing might look less "specish", but I think it does have sort of an GP2, spec look to it.
You probably noticed some of the radiator exits. Those are just visual cues. The biggest things going forward is that this car, and I hope you've noticed it in the renderings,

[FRANKY]

http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/champcar/20113/

If the side by side illustration says anything it's that the back wing needs to be changed. Not very sponsor friendly.

[pchall]

I suppose they raised the nose just to get the Philadelphia race. :p

[oddlycalm]

I give the artists concept a solid 8. Still looks like a Champ Car and it'll sound like one as well. I'd hoped for another 100hp more, 100lbs. less but I'll live.

Now if they really wanted to get some volume business they would offer a collector series that shipped with a cold beer tap and a grid girl from Surfers Paradise for an even $500,000...:gomer:

oc

[racer2c]

Good usage of bold tags! You get a star sticker. :gomer:

[Classic Apex]

Ocho.

[Insomniac]

7. I want to see an actual car.

[Andrew Longman]

That's an impressive distribution. Nearly 70% rated it 8 or better. Nearly 85% rating it 7 or better. Noone rating it below a 4.

Bush 43 can only wish for those approval ratings. Oops, eyes straight ahead. Back on topic :)

Seriously, CCWS must be please with the general response from this and other fan forums. Most critique comes around the high nose, which is for safety reasons and to get less downforce from the wings. If those are the reasons I think most will accept it. Other than that the complaints are from the usual lunatic fringe about phantom cost savings

[G.]

That's an impressive distribution. Nearly 70% rated it 8 or better. Nearly 85% rating it 7 or better. Noone rating it below a 4.

Bush 43 can only wish for those approval ratings. Oops, eyes straight ahead. Back on topic :)

Seriously, CCWS must be please with the general response from this and other fan forums. Most critique comes around the high nose, which is for safety reasons and to get less downforce from the wings. If those are the reasons I think most will accept it. Other than that the complaints are from the usual lunatic fringe about phantom cost savingsBut dood, it's being posted on OC fercrissakes. Not exactly an unbiased group.

(yeah, we can be pretty vocal and opinionated, pro or con, but CC provided a car design based on what WE wanted, what the drivers wanted. No surprise to me, I guess.)

[JT265]

I can't count. However, I followed the majority into one of the higher ranges. :)


I will admit that it's way prettier than Mapguy though. :p




:rofl:

[RusH]

10, just like I pictured it.

[Rocketdoc]

Champ Car has to contiinue its upward direction, and hopefully, it will utterly destroy the "league".

Not that I want the IRL teams to die; not at all.
All I want is those people to have jobs and careers in a very healthy Champ Car ...I only want Tony George to get out of the equation, other than running the Indy 500.

[racer2c]

At least we didn't get this!


http://www.220mph.com/images/Menards%20Prototype%20005.jpg

[Jervis Tetch 1]

I gave it a five. Like a poster said earlier, it will take some time to get used to, and I liked it when we had some variety like Reynard, Lola, Swift, March, etc.

But it still looks better than a crap wagon. Now if you compare the two, the car gets a 12, while the crapper gets its typical 0.

[IH8TG]

9. Considering all the requirements they were trying to satisfy (size reduction, shift downforce to tunnels, safety improvements, driveability, asthetics, cost containment, multi-purpose), they hit a home run.

[DjDrOmusic]

I gave it a 5, I want to see the real thing first, not just a drawing!

[Andrew Longman]

But dood, it's being posted on OC fercrissakes. Not exactly an unbiased group.

(yeah, we can be pretty vocal and opinionated, pro or con, but CC provided a car design based on what WE wanted, what the drivers wanted. No surprise to me, I guess.)

I'm not surprised they listened because they thought enough to seek input. They've been putting feelers out there for a year.

I'm just saying they must be pleased to have achieved what they set out to do.

Imagine how they would feel if their die hard fans hated it. I don't remember a lot of love on any forum when the IRL debuted their chassis. People still say daily how they hate it and no one expresses any love. I know several people who gave up any curiousity with the IRL simply because the cars look so silly.