@@nfitz11 IMSA has been...mostly out of it since the merge. It's biggest crimes at the moment are mildly eyebrow raising policies on manufacturer eligibility and it's newfound love for duplicate categories and putting Xs in the name.
Hot Take: Indycar should ignore current design trends and should model the new chassis (plural!) after 1998-2001 CART with only modern safety advancements altering its design from how it looked back then. You don't make a splash by following trends. You make a splash by breaking them!
@@nickz4993 similar, but the look was completely different. Older indy-cars were longer, lower, and had greater length behind the driver. They looked like fighter jets from outer-space.
The height of indycar's popularity was the '90s. There were five different chassis manufacturers five different engine suppliers and teams were allowed to modify aerodynamics within a set of rules. And this is back when carbon fiber was extremely expensive. This was very Formula One like and they still put on amazing races. It was not like going down to the traffic circle and watching cars go round and round. To get my interest back to that level this is what it would take. Just a thought.
You had cubic yards of tobacco funding. Those days are long gone. Money is the issue. Racing used to be a loss leader ad spend and the budgets are not there . Everyone keeps saying multiple manufacturers. Reynard and Lola are bankrupt. OEMs are not building chassis. Even in Sportscar where they do spend, they almost always have either Multimatic or Dallara as partners and they can add some marketing around the styling. You can't do that with an OW race car.
That same thing is responsible for the demise of CART and the split. If you allow teams to develop, the small teams go away and Indycar will die. This is not the way.
I mean i agree but why come to indycar? there is less brand recognition in open wheel cars. these engines aren't going in street cars. why spend millions upon millions for a single application engine?
I don't believe in having multiple tire manufacturers in series that race on ovals. Look at the NASCAR tire wars eras. Lots of drivers getting injured due to super soft tires that blow too easily. Everything else? YES. but make the multiple manufacturers build a car they think will work best on that same tire.
@@McLeod917don't use manufacturers like that, have them badge it as a Honda but itl actually be built by Steve kinder, or something make it badges on top of engines built by gale banks or something
They do BOP but the manufacturers see a return in the series. They don't get that in Indycar. You can make a GTP have styling cues that remind you of the street cars. Indycars cannot really do that.
Important to mention that this style of rear wing first appeared in the updated SF23 Superformula car in 2023, and will also feature in the new F3 car, so it might well be a Dallara design feature that they are incorporating into their cars, likely as a result of the experience they've had in the designs of the recent Haas F1 cars.
Every single owner, minus Ganassi, is completely and totally missing the point. If we're going the spec route, then first and foremost, the car HAS to race well. If you put out a bunch of X2010s, but they're all 4 seconds apart, what's the point. The racing has to be the primary focus behind only safety, looks are secondary.
I will go on a tangent point and say that a good car will look good. The best way to make it look great is make it run great. That creates the excitement about the car to where people will love how they look.
They need to take a page out of imsa GTP's playbook with a spec chassis, and mostly open development with the stuff bolted onto it. Spec tire would keep everyone in check.
@@mcchicken7000LMH cars are eligible for GTP, and they by definition run bespoke chassis. The Valkyrie LMH certainly doesn't run a spec chassis, that thing is utterly alien compared even to other LMH cars.
There is no development in IMSA. The biggest moves in the off-season involve sand bagging at Daytona tests and negotiating beneficial BoP. BoP sucks as it ends up being a situation where teams are given their turn to win.
Trying to look "futuristic" is a fool's errand. When the future comes and looks different, you'll just look silly. If you want to spark excitement with the car's design, you should lean on the forms which have always sparked excitement in car designs. As cool as the Formula E car looks, the best-looking car in this video is the 499P right above David's head.
Formula 1 have shown the latest concept car for their 2026 rules -- it just looks like an F2 car, it's nothing special (granted the actual team cars will look different to that). The next generation Indycar doesn't need to be anything remarkable either (it would be nice if it had more of the proprtions and sound of a 90's Indycar though, but that's by the by). Since the Indycar will likely be a spec car, that indeed should allow for smoother more elegant lines like the 499P or similar as you say, since performance isn't the only consideration.
I’d honestly be happy if they rolled out the Panoz DP-01 that car looks better, sounds better, cheaper to run than anything Dallara could come up with. Male that with an aerosceeen built in done
I know the aerokit era was a bit of a disaster, but I like the concept of it. Why not do something akin to GTP where you have Honda and Chevy each team up with a different chassis manufacturer instead of having them do it in house? And instead of hybrids, slap a big old NA V8/V10 in the back to distinguish yourself from GTP.
Just give us the CART era cars, 90s cars, IMO the best looking cars the series has ever had, they looked different from eachother and sounded fantastic
Literally just make a modern version of a 90’s Reynard. Sleek and stealthy. Something that looks fast standing still. Indycar already has a visual identity. The only ones who forgot are the series and team owners.
The X1 would be unraceable and prohibitively expensive. The same owners complaining that the hybrid is a n expensive new for the sake of new addition, are wanting an expensive new for the sake of new chassis. Just fix the issues with the DW12 and don't fix what isn't broken. Hinch says what's most important is the sound of the car and the people driving it. And I'm inclined to agree. F1 exploded in popularity not due to the cars, but because of the drivers, their inherent technical skill, and their clashing personalities.
The "Cars" part was probably more valid 10 or 20 years ago. Those Nick Oliveri-esque V10 and V8 motors were one of the main draw of F1 in those days.......
"Just fix the issues with the DW12 and don't fix what isn't broken" I think it's a problem that you can accidentally watch the 2019 Portland Grand Prix instead of the 2024 Portland Grand Prix and not even notice the difference! It's an incredible level of stagnation IMO.
iirc it is actually the car that prevents FE to go to actual circuits because the lack of topspeed and the amount of lifting they then need to finish the race
The high nose concept for F1 started in the early 90’s and only disappeared with the redesign that took to the track in 2022. The X1 was a concept car, it should stay that way. If the team owners and series owners want Newey to design them something, I’m sure he could. One of his first jobs in Motor racing was being a race engineer in Indy Car back in the 80’s.
at span of current dw12: - formula 2 had 3 chassis (GP211, F2 2018, F2 2024) - formula 3 had 5 chassis (GP310, GP313, GP316, F3 2019, and the upcoming F3 2025) - formula e had 3 chassis (Gen-1, gen-2, gen-3, could be gen 4 in 2027) and each chassis had 1 aero-kit update each chassis (which means they had 6 aero kit in span of the lifespan of dw12) - japanese super formula who only races 7 tracks in single year, had 4 chassis (swift 016.n, dallara sf14, sf19, and sf23). Seriously, how did they coup those money back? - NASCAR had 3 cars (CoT, gen 6, and gen 7)
WTF is this timeline we're on? The 2026 F1 car is gonna look more like a Super Formula/IndyCar and now IndyCar wants a 2027 car that looks like a futuristic F1 car? Lost the Plot doesn't begin to explain the level of disillusionment some people in this sport seem to have... Edit* This is why Sportscar is gaining popularity so fast. Fans wanted to get back to the GTP/Group C era of having a LOT of cars on track with a LOT of manufacturers and WEC/IMSA made that happen in a BIG way with a lot of design freedom. F1 and even more so IndyCar are losing any semblance of a clue as to what the fan is looking for out of their discipline of the sport.
@@nickz4993 Not too dissimilar, but with proportions that are better than the DW12 and a lot better than the old Dallara IR-05s. One step is going back to USAC CART tyre sizes which were a bit wider and better looking than the narrower tyres used in the IRL.
I agree that IndyCar should differentiate. F1 is all about aero with ground effect and movable wings and soon active aero but with locked down spec engines that aren't developed, and have to last 6 races or more. Endurance is all about aero and engines that are focused on reliability as well. The Formula E car is power limited. IndyCar should zag, make a jet fighter inspired chassis that is low drag and minimalist. Allow a simple, adjustable, pair of wings and focus the series on engine power. All the other series are power limited so they spend all their time and money on aero. Give IndyCar teams fixed aero and make it a series about mechanical grip and power with cars sliding around instead of running on rails trying to avoid turbulence from other cars.
Remember when Ferrari wanted to build their own chassis for the Indy500? There's a parallel universe where Dallara, Ferrari, and McLaren are chassis suppliers and the series is filled with innovation and competition.
Thank you for being a voice for the fans David. I can't tell you how bad I wish Indycar would listen to you. Forward thinking is what Indycar needs if it wants to wow people and set itself apart from other series.
Personally, the cars never looked better than they did in the 90s CART cars. Simple, elegant looking in its basicness, and most importantly, LOUD, AND FAST!!!! Jeremy Clarkson had it right with "power and speed". Thats all we want.
I totally agree. Something need to be opened up in the regulations if IndyCar is going to be more compelling moving forward. F1, NASCAR, WEC, IMSA, all have variation between the cars. The only variation between the cars In IndyCar are the engines and dampers which are not even able to be appreciated by the fans because the are effectively hidden. Racing fans are engineering fans. Let there be innovation in the engineering of the cars and the true racing fans won't be able to stay away.
The car is important but the series needs to get serious about better promotion. F1 is as big as it’s ever been and most diehard fans don’t love the current formula.
I think in that case x2014 fan car would look more appropriate 🤔 Also the x2019 and the x2014 standard have the same external features so the x2019 is still outdated by 10 years
I'm not very literate in Indycar but I believe it would be interesting if Indycar tried something similar to WEC, set dimensions, drag and downforce values and see what different brands come up with. Now I do understand that WEC works because of the BoP but that's mainly because different cars have different powertrains. Set a power train, power figures, Drag and Downforce and see what different designers can come up with?
so not a spec series. Should Indycar go the lmdh route? make it look how they want, but no more than x horsepower and x downforce? different chassis manufacturers to choose from?
I'm afraid we are stuck with one chassis (lower cost) and it's not going to move the needle. But truthfully, the key is you need the car to be affordable enough to have 20 to 25 cars run the series and 33 cars fill the one event that supports the entire series, the 500. But the one thing you did mention that excited me was to go to a high revving V8, V10, or V12 and get that glorious sound!
We can't really rely a rather outdated "Cyber Formula"-type car like the Red Bull X-series for the next IndyCar car design tbh. If only Dallara adapted the new car from the current chassis, plus fixing the flaws of it, then fit it with an Inline 4 engine like in Super Formula series in Japan (maybe I4 Hybrid) then maybe they'll be off steam. I mean, come on. Indycars used to run 4-pots before. Remember the Offys?
I've been advocating for a formula built off of 2.0 I4 turbos for years. Every MFR has one. To that end, why wait for MFRs to enter? Allow the engines to be bought straight from the MFRs and let tuners or the teams themselves work on them, using any brand they can acquire. They'd be cheap and if these street racers can build them with 800 hp, I'm pretty sure Indycar teams can. Moreover, if BMW could build a WDC winning engine from a 318i block 40 years ago, the newer engines should be amazing platforms to build from.
As long as they’re loud and sound somewhat aggressive, I don’t think the fans will care about cylinder count too much. The v6’s already sound great imo
@@Spike-sk7qlIf you're worried about power, Super GT and Super Formula's i4 engines punch out over 600 horsepower and sound unbelievably angry, like a rally car on PCP. Even a straight swap with the current V6 wouldn't lose too much power, and they'd also be a bit lighter on top of that.
David I agree the cars need to be different. But let's not kid ourselves Indycar is never going back to team building their own cars. None of the teams can afford it, including McLaren who's primary ownership would deny Zak any more funding to build a race car for a fundamentally impoverished racing league. Indycar doesn't get enough ROI to warrant any team to spend beyond 10 million per car. Already half the teams are taking up pay drivers because they can't afford to run what they have. The way to do this is to invite dedicated chassis builders like ORECA, LIGIER, MULTIMATIC, and of course DALLARA. Have them all design there own chassis based on existing engine regulations that IMSA and WEC use for their GTP/Hypercar class. The result should have 4 different looking cars with different engine brands. Even if it remains Chevrolet and Honda, it's worth having a diverse body styles.
I'd add that Zak Brown has made it clear that IndyCar McLaren has to be self-sustaining and there will be no cross subsidy from either the racing or road car part of the business.
The should open up the engine regs and allow the teams to have freedom to design the bodywork of their cars so they can each have some personality. If they simply said "all engines must be 3L displacement and have a max power output of 850/900 hp but you can run anything from an I4/6 too a V12" with the caveat that the smaller engines will be allowed restricted forced induction to get the same power output as the 10's/12's and smaller engined cars will be required to carry ballast to make up for their weight difference it would solve the problem making "the show" more memorable. And allowing teams to design the bodywork of their cars (within reason) would allow for visually distinct designs.
18:50 this is my thought exactly. The early 2000's F1 V10s are remembered so fondly even though the cars were somewhat ugly because of the glorious sound. And to bring it to IndyCar, what do old timers always talk about? The old Novi and Offy engine sounds. It might sound silly, but if they focus on something that sounds good, it will get people's attention.
I just don't get. Penske is trying to keep the costs down for the teams by having a interative design so that all of the development in the current car isn't wasted. It looks similar but will be lighter and have stuff packaged internally better. If team are complaining about looks fine. full clean sheet and they can pay out the nose for it and they can complain about the money indycar is gonna make them spend. we can have 10 teams in the series max. we will loose all the stock piles of parts and investment in the dampers. so that's all just money wasted. I get wanting to have something new and fancy but they don't want to pay for it, they were already complaining about hybrid costs. A new chassis plus spare parts will cost astronomically more than now. The same point unfortunately applies to a new ICE. Hopefully with the shift away from electric only maybe we can get manufacturers to change their mind on that.
@@ApexwithDavin I disagree. There is no point having 30 cars on the grid, if 15 of them are filled by mediocre drivers (often pay drivers) and fans don't care. While having quantity is good, having quality has to be a higher priority compared to pandering too much to small-time Indycar teams. Formula One has all the eyes on it because it's important, it's the big league. Arguably the only important race in the Indycar series is the Indy 500, and many of the other events are like glorified club races... Indycar does NOT have a cost problem, it has a low commercial profile problem.
I hope it is not too radical. The current car looks fine, but it definitely needs to be updated as far as weight distribution and aero configuration. Indycar needs to look like an Indycar. Plain and simple.
Indycar needs to look back at the golden era. It was the opposite of F1 with longer, lower, and wider cars with higher top speeds. There was a chassis war, an engine war, and at some point even a tire war. All of these factors can be made articially too with two or more different chassis manufacturers, different aero, and of course the engine war, and different tire compounds. Indycar needs to find it's own identity.
Too many corporate managers and accountants having a say and not the drivers/team owners. Indy have a wealth of experienced driving talent who know what makes exciting racing.
Maybe the prime factor in design should be minimizing the number of fragments created in a crash. They're gonna wreck most of them anyway, the faster the clean-up, the bigger benefit to running a tight race.
Funny but actually a smart way to look at it. Historically when F1 goes too far into having complicated front wing endplates and too many little turning vanes and winglets all over the place then you end up having a season where at every race parts are coming loose or breaking off.
I have said it for years, change the car design, have multiple chassis' manufactures, have multiple engine options and put some spice back into Indy car racing. Back in the 1970's I was a teen and loved Indy Car racing back then. There were Eagles, Penske's, Wildcats, McLarens, Lightnings, Coyote, Chaparral and at the end of the decade you had M.A.R.C.H. For the most part everyone ran a Ford Cosworth DFX engine at the end of the decade. Though some still ran, for a while a Drake-Offenhauser. To compete with the Cosworth, they were given more boost. You even had Longhorn Racing make a deal with Williams F1 and brought a Williams to Indy Car in the early 80's. It was a wild and wonderful time. Today, I keep trying but I just can't get excited about the racing. To me, it seems flat and unexciting. Everyone is going in a circle, and you only have three teams who can win, Ganassi, Andretti, and Penske. Back in the 70's you had Penske, Foyt, Patrick Racing, McLaren, and Dan Gurney's Eagles that could win on any weekend. We need to change the formula for Indy Cars. Let the teams design a car within a set of rules and set a cost cap for how much the chassis can cost. That will control the cost and bring in some differences. Do the same with the engine. We need more than two engine options and much more than one chassis. The cars are boring, the racing is boring, and even one of my favorite drivers is in the series, Scott McLaughlin, I just can't get excited about IndyCar today.
Adrian's lawyers will be paying close attention to these developments. 😂 Like, you're not supposed to say 'hey the best F1 car designer in the history of, ever, had some pretty handsome designs, let's just do that.' AI brain rot has infected these humans already, not even a hint of a new idea in their heads. There's no future for Indycar if this all they can come up with.
no money to afford but they are all opening 100s of millions of dollar factories and hqs , dumping money into other series , having engineering wars with the other teams to get the best people from each other . the money is being spent , its not being spent of cars/engines because some teams have a vested interest in the status quo and remaining very successful in its confines.
Surely the problem is the poor commercial return of Indycar? McLaren and Andretti have no qualms about spending 10x or 20x as much on their Formula One operations. So it has to be all about making Indycar less Indy 500-centrc and raising the profile of all the other events in the season.
I'm sure he would be willing to do a concept design for a fraction of that price! As it is Indycar already has access to McLaren Racing F1 and the Andretti Cadillac F1 team, why not let either (or both) of those constructors do the design?
My attention has almost entirely left INDYCAR over the past 3-4 years. F1 just offers a better product to me personally.. I almost can’t even stomach sitting though and Indy car race due to the completely ridiculous number of commercials.
I'll look backwards a bit to CART in the mid/late '90s, there were multiple chassis (March. Lola, Reynard, and Swift) on the track and it produced some of the best racing ever. Keeping the hybrid concept is not a bad thing, but invite other MAJOR manufacturers beyond Chevy and Honda (Ford, Toyota, Porsche, etc.) to produce engines for the series to a specific displacement, again, something that worked well in the past and produced exciting racing. Put together certain chassis and wing specs. Wing dimensions and locations specs in relation to front and rear axles, overall length and width, wheel base length and track width are all things which can be put out there and any chassis manufacturer can work with. If you then have no manufacturers willing to provide chassis and/or engines, then yes, you will end up with a spec car, but not due to lack of effort!
That'd probably be as close to "road relevant" design as any. Street cars are going more to small displacement turbo engines anyway. Hell, run them on pump gas
I’m not a massive Indycar fan. I typically prefer to watch F1 and endurance racing as I tend to appreciate the technical side just as much as the sporting side, which I think in itself validates the argument that Indycar should probably open up chassis development to multiple manufacturers. A performance arms race will certainly make things more interesting. They just have to make sure they keep the money thing under control.
With the outrageous cost of Motorsport these days I think the only option to not have a spec car is to implement BOP unless you are formula 1. I really hate to say it but BOP is probably the only way we will see different cars on the grid of IndyCar.
as long as they are very broad BOP , a V8 turbo = v8 N/A = v6 hybrid with specs to equalize etc etc . if we get into individual race performances and setup limits and micro management of the BOP for artificial racing , then no thanks.
Imagine if they just put out an industry-standard RFP…and interested manufacturers came up with designs…and Indycar just picked the best one…or more than one…
The problem is, there is no interest in Indycar. There's interest in The Indianapolis 500, but no sane manufacturer wants to deal with Indycar management.
A few points that other commenters haven't considered: 1. Multiple chassis manufacturers may increase costs, which is why Dallara is the only supplier. 2. V10s: This isn't F1. V10s will likely be more expensive. 3. Related to previous two points, Indycar doesn't make the money necessary to encourage teams to spend the way they'd need to to make the previous two points into reality.
@@retromario96It didn't. They have been using tubs for years...the old series the cars were out of date after 3 years and you were buying all new cars. Plus the engine leases of that time were more.
@@marklittle8805 In most reasonable series (F2, F3, Super Formula etc) teams have no problems buying new cars every 3 or 4 years. That Indycar teams are so broke they can't even afford that is quite damning of the poor commercial return of Indycar racing. Something drastic has to be done to raise the profile of the races other than the Indy 500.
Adopting the GTP engine formula is a good way to get more manufacturers involved in IndyCar.I don't know if a GTP chassis could be adapted to make an open-wheel car.
Newey is automotive genius, think indy would learn a lot from his ideas. Yeah, the car might be from a computer game, but the latest version is real. Find it funny that he's kinda knocking f2 cars but there's more technology in those cars than indy cars, if you put the same engine that an indy cars have in an f2 car then the f2 would wipe the floor with it. Don't worry about having the same spec car at first as im sure updates will be added on during the seasons to come.
Kind of off topic, but I think electrification in motorsports is failing because they race in their own separate EV series rather than head-to-head against ICE cars.
F1 is a top series because the teams build their own cars. LeMans prototype is a top series because the teams build their own cars. NASCAR is no longer a top series because the teams don't build their own cars. Indycar is no longer a top series because the teams don't build their own cars.
Recommendation. Each Charter should send in their 2027 IndyCar concept/template to Penske and allow many designs to be molded together! Simple and everyone’s involved.
That's not how racecars work. Having different teams designing a car, you may as well just have them race those cars. If you start copy pasting components from one car, to another, you would likely end up with a worse performing car. Everything affects everything on a race car. Especially when talking about the witchcraft called aerodynamics.
Also…..going to be brutally honest here. Indycar has almost always, save for one event, been pretty second rate. And the tradition continues. In the modern era, it has and continues to be this really bad attempt at trying to be Formula 2 (not 1). It’s so sad. And as far as doing the engines….never happening. The manufacturers would never go for it, and you gotta have those or the sport won’t work.
Ok, so I realise that this is an unpopular opinion, but the aerokit era of the DW12 worked, because there was a difference between the two engine suppliers.
Just watched Conor Daly's interview of Simon Pagenaud yesterday. They brought up that chassis, and how much they liked it before the windscreen and later the hybrid system f'd up the balance of the chassis. Personally I think a new chassis that is balanced and gives us good close racing should be top of the "desired" list.
Interest was highest in the sport when each team had a different chassis. We watch Indy car because its the pinnacle of American open wheel racing. Having one engine and one chassis does not say pinnacle of motorsports to me, it says spec cars and also ran series. Let each owner choose from different cars and engines. Have a set of rules they must follow, but allow the creativity to run amok.
I don't care what it looks like, I only care how it can race. Can it increase the top end on the straights by 60+mph, can it nail the corners at 20+ mph faster than currently, can it cut through wind turbulence like a hot knife through butter?!?!
i think indycar should go the gtp/lmh route and have body styles that reflect the manufacturers design philosophy, the caddy gtp has he headlights of the cts and a big NA v8 engine and the lambo gtp looks like a lambo, etc etc. right now the honda and chevy indycars look the same. it would be cool if the hondas took design cues from acura and the chevy took design cues from corvette or whatever. if the honda indycar had a screaming turbo v8 and the chevy had a growling v8 it would appeal to fans and manufacturers.
Personally, I think the current car looks great. Just work on the some aero changes for better racing. Don't go making the same mistake NASCAR did and model your car after another series. Yeah, the intermediate races are great now, but the other races leave a lot to be desired due to the aero and gemometry of the car. It's just a flawed design and they won't get a 2.0 for another 5 years most likely, so we're pretty much stuck with this one. They won't even try more horsepower because they keep pretending like they're getting a new OEM and they have to cater to them. It's like, why can't you just be who or what you are? Stop acting like a needy person who craves validation and just do your own thing. Nope, can't do that.
I don't think anybody in Indycar can see past the logos on the formula e car. They just see the logos and say "Look at the sponsors! We should do that! No need for original ideas or pushing boundaries when obviously copying someone else and being years late to the party is going to be so lucrative!"
I wouldn't mind it if Indycar went toward F1, meaning no windscreen, but with a halo. The halo has proven itself to be a reliable component to F1 cars that stop the most dangerous parts of overturns. Also, I don't think Indycar has helped iself with the video game having been shelved.
The IndyCar aero screen IS a halo with a windscreen built around it. The primary function of the aero screen is to prevent heavier pieces of flying debris in a high-speed crash from entering the cockpit- protection from rollovers is a secondary function. For example, a conventional halo by itself would not have saved Justin Wilson at Pocono in 2015- that heavy piece of brake caliper assembly that hit his helmet would have gone right through the opening of a conventional halo, and it still would have gotten into the cockpit.
I think you made a great point with the sound David! I dont think many people understand the huge interest having that v8/v10 sound back in Motorsport would bring. That is one of the biggest complaints f1 fans have about the current f1 cars, and I think indycar can capitalize big time on that if they bring back the high pitch scream of the early 2000s
PS RedBull X1 looks like a 70s video game car. UGGLY. I do know your heart in the right place BUT your as all over the map as Indycar is ….Other that completely open chassis /aero design which is not as cost effective as Indycar rolls these days best would be a body work that there is a window that can be modified in. There is not an unlimited number of designs for cars that WORK To design some to NOT look like F2 is stupid if F2 ish is best aero etc then that is not a bad place to start your more worried about marketing than car design
It is totally nonsense that Indycar keeps sticking to a single chassis supplier, when even the feeder endurance series have at least 2 different chassis. And there are plenty of companies with skill and capabilities to do that (Dallaara, Tatuus, Ligier, Oreca, Lola, etc)
2007-ish Formula 1 cars were crazy different with all sorts of aero thingmajiggies that people would guess what they were supposed to do and then halfway through the race something would fall off and the car would go faster without the 'upgrade'. Some complained saying some cars looked silly but it was great fun.
A new IndyCar should sound meaner than a Formula 1 car, whether that means V8s, V10s. V12s, or a mixture, and give teams much more leeway to craft unique body designs, even if the chassis is spec.
@@nickz4993 The LMDH regulations work because they are mostly off the shelf parts. All the engines in the category come from existing engines. Open wheelers are built off being bespoke to an extent.
My god the best advice ever @18:55. Imagine if someone said yes ok let’s go bold. Let’s make smaller, lighter, more nimble single seaters with giant V8’s and just ripped them around as the loudest thing on the continent. That would be worth seeing every weekend.
Take the 1995 rule book, adjust the crash standards and cockpit dimensions to present, shrink the fuel tank from 40 gallons to 26.5, and then the 2.4 V6 hybrid engine with intercooling. More downforce, more drag, more power.
If IndyCar is committed to being spec for the rest of time, then they should look at the Chris Beatty Design (I believe he had a hand in the aero screen to some degree) Velocity concept car (you can look it up, it’s on his website) as the inspirational basis for the next chassis, even if the reality of bringing it to life would require huge technical compromise and changes. It looks modern, innovative and catches the eye. But IndyCar seems lost and confused as to what it’s purpose is, and - most importantly- who it is for. The RACER article didn’t surprise me in the slightest, and I suspect I’m not the only one.
But where are you going to get the money??? To have multiple chassis and manufacturers. What Honda has been whining for several years now about not getting their returns of the money exposure. And Chevy has had those complaints too. Has far chassis manufacturers who else is there to get??? Yeah in the past there were four. But has one or two chassis shows there the one to have the others went bye bye Swift Eagle Penske.... Ferrari sniffed around but they didn't want to run more than their team with three or four cars look at endro they are just running wec and no real plan to run IMSA in the future???
"But where are you going to get the money?" By promoting the series properly so it's not just a one race series where everything apart from the big race is basically a non-event.
I wanted to reply earlier, but have a couple of thoughts here. First, about 15 years ago they had the idea of using a universal tub but each team could tweak the aero packages in house, leading to different looking race cars. This to me is a good cheaper alternative. Share the chassis, use different control surfaces. Active aero is also en vogue, so might not be a bad idea. It's also visually more pleasing and obvious than "push to pass" or the battery thing. Fans can see the wing change and the burst of speed in F1. Next, the Formula E car did move the needle. It's one of the coolest looking open wheel cars ever (the 2nd Gen car you mention). It's the design that got me into Formula E. The issue with that series isn't the car, it's the network availability, the race schedule, and the fact that the cars sound like dentists drilling cavities. Lastly, more important than the video game angle (which is critical, I agree), is toy availability. If you want the next generation of fans, we need Lego versions of Indycars, hotwheels (not just "1:64 scale diecast" collectibles), etc. Make the series accessible, modern, and visible, and Indycar wins. Because on the track it's the best product on earth (if you don't count the very narrow street courses).
I kinda wished they did something with the original Deltawing Indycar concept back then. Yes its old & looks funky but makes sense to me for ovals. Half the power, half the drag, half the fuel consumption but still with similar speeds. Was genuinely a forward-looking concept in my books.
Yes to Cormiers comments about the time when there were multiple chassis and engine combos. What we need. I'm old enough to remember when a large part of the mystique around the Indy 500 was wondering how many different designs were gonna show up there
Open the engine and hybrid system regulations (say they have to meet certain performance requirements but no specifications on how to get there) If you go with a spec chassis, have OEMs or individual teams design the body work. Ideally have some kind of competition with chassis but that’s not realistic. Or pay IMSA/WEC a finders fee or license the LMdH/LMH power train regulations and build a chassis from there. That gives you 10 potential engine manufacturers. And combined with body work designed by OEMs or the individual teams/groups of teams build body work
It doesn't scream like a V8. Look up Rick Mears's pole run at Indy from 1991 right here on YT- that's how a proper Indycar powerplant should sound. If Chevy & Honda could just add two more cylinders to the current engines, presto! They would sound awesome again.
@@aerofence38 >It doesn't scream like a V8 thats mostly a problem of NA vs Turbo'd, you could add RPM and a bunch of other problems to the mix. the JGTC NSX from the early 2000s (the NA models) absolutely scream like nothing else despite being v6s themselvs
@@hertzwave8001 The low boost Indy V8s screamed and revved high as they were almost NA-ish. It really wouldn't add much cost to have two extra cylinders.
@@TassieLorenzoNot only that, but reduce the size of the cylinders and reduce the boost a little, that way it won't make the engine an untamed monster. I'd be happy with 720-750 horsepower- those were the horsepower figures of the early 90s Ilmor-Chevy V8s. The Ford XB & 1995 Honda Turbo V8s raised the game to about 800-850hp, but once the power starts climbing towards that figure, knock back the boost a bit. Allow small horsepower gains, but if it starts getting ridiculous, then the rulesmakers can step in...
As much as I hate BOP, I’ve recognized that the motorsports world no longer allows for a raw spending race any more. I just want an Indycar with BOP aero kits and open engines with a torque meter limit (like hypercar/LMDH/LMGT3)
If we look at this realistically... What else can Indycar do? Ganassi is not Ferrari, Penske is not Mercedes. The money will never be there to not be a spec chassis. The one strength Indycar has is close racing, and the DW12 privides that. Slap a bit of lipstick on it and keep going. That's the only option.
McLaren *is* McLaren though. An equivalent to Ferrari on the track and on the road. Surely McLaren F1 Team can afford to design the car for the series? Likewise Andretti *is* Andretti Cadillac F1 Team. That's hundreds of millions of dollars of funding and already 200 employees in the F1 valley Silverstone area.
@@TassieLorenzo it's a regional series that attracts underrated, but still not superstar talent. Indycar shouldn't have Formula 1 size dreams, F1 already exists. It would bankrupt the series and everyone involved if they try. That being said, I do believe there is room for them to succeed beyond where they are at now. But some of the commentary in and on this video seem wholly unrealistic. I get it, we love Indycar, but it is what it is.
![NISAMANEE - TADA (ท้าดา) [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hcQHEPMmJpU/mqdefault.jpg)
Being so frustratingly close to the right answer but never quite getting there sums up American open wheel racing since 1996
That's all American racing, save safer barriers
@@nfitz11 IMSA has been...mostly out of it since the merge. It's biggest crimes at the moment are mildly eyebrow raising policies on manufacturer eligibility and it's newfound love for duplicate categories and putting Xs in the name.
The current car is nowhere near the right answer
always 9/10
@@Parker-- Now, show me where I said anything of the sort
Hot Take: Indycar should ignore current design trends and should model the new chassis (plural!) after 1998-2001 CART with only modern safety advancements altering its design from how it looked back then. You don't make a splash by following trends. You make a splash by breaking them!
But this is following an old trend id argue this would be a bad move, id say make something based on the concept but go way out there
I like that concept, but the cars should be shorter and narrower -- ie smaller and weigh less.
This. You win. Best looking cars by a long shot.
If you take an old indycar and add modern safety, you get a new indycar.
@@nickz4993 similar, but the look was completely different. Older indy-cars were longer, lower, and had greater length behind the driver. They looked like fighter jets from outer-space.
The height of indycar's popularity was the '90s. There were five different chassis manufacturers five different engine suppliers and teams were allowed to modify aerodynamics within a set of rules. And this is back when carbon fiber was extremely expensive. This was very Formula One like and they still put on amazing races. It was not like going down to the traffic circle and watching cars go round and round. To get my interest back to that level this is what it would take. Just a thought.
More ovals would be nice too
lol go to the traffic circle. Yeah that’s pretty much what it is now a days
You had cubic yards of tobacco funding. Those days are long gone. Money is the issue. Racing used to be a loss leader ad spend and the budgets are not there .
Everyone keeps saying multiple manufacturers. Reynard and Lola are bankrupt. OEMs are not building chassis. Even in Sportscar where they do spend, they almost always have either Multimatic or Dallara as partners and they can add some marketing around the styling. You can't do that with an OW race car.
Great. Do you think you can convince 4 more companies to make distinct chassis and 3 more manufacturers to make engines?
That same thing is responsible for the demise of CART and the split. If you allow teams to develop, the small teams go away and Indycar will die. This is not the way.
Indycar went to Dallara, and said…
“Just take a little bit off the top…”
Accurate. It is the PenskeCar Club Series way.
The series would be better served with multiple constructors, engine suppliers and tire suppliers.
I mean i agree but why come to indycar? there is less brand recognition in open wheel cars. these engines aren't going in street cars. why spend millions upon millions for a single application engine?
I don't believe in having multiple tire manufacturers in series that race on ovals. Look at the NASCAR tire wars eras. Lots of drivers getting injured due to super soft tires that blow too easily. Everything else? YES. but make the multiple manufacturers build a car they think will work best on that same tire.
@@McLeod917don't use manufacturers like that, have them badge it as a Honda but itl actually be built by Steve kinder, or something make it badges on top of engines built by gale banks or something
Cool. Glad to see there is more than me on this idea.
@@FloridaManRacer I don't look at Nascar for anything. The days when Goodyear and Firestone were going at it in the 90s were awesome.
Follow what IMSA did with the GTP cars. That would give multiple manufacturers and chassis
They do BOP but the manufacturers see a return in the series. They don't get that in Indycar. You can make a GTP have styling cues that remind you of the street cars. Indycars cannot really do that.
Important to mention that this style of rear wing first appeared in the updated SF23 Superformula car in 2023, and will also feature in the new F3 car, so it might well be a Dallara design feature that they are incorporating into their cars, likely as a result of the experience they've had in the designs of the recent Haas F1 cars.
Every single owner, minus Ganassi, is completely and totally missing the point. If we're going the spec route, then first and foremost, the car HAS to race well. If you put out a bunch of X2010s, but they're all 4 seconds apart, what's the point. The racing has to be the primary focus behind only safety, looks are secondary.
I will go on a tangent point and say that a good car will look good. The best way to make it look great is make it run great. That creates the excitement about the car to where people will love how they look.
They need to take a page out of imsa GTP's playbook with a spec chassis, and mostly open development with the stuff bolted onto it. Spec tire would keep everyone in check.
GTP aren’t spec chassis but yeah
@eliteflite8395 gtp manufacturers have the choice of 4 chassis, so it's basically spec with extra steps
@@mcchicken7000LMH cars are eligible for GTP, and they by definition run bespoke chassis. The Valkyrie LMH certainly doesn't run a spec chassis, that thing is utterly alien compared even to other LMH cars.
There is no development in IMSA. The biggest moves in the off-season involve sand bagging at Daytona tests and negotiating beneficial BoP. BoP sucks as it ends up being a situation where teams are given their turn to win.
@@griffinfaulkner3514 I should have specified lmdh rules
Trying to look "futuristic" is a fool's errand. When the future comes and looks different, you'll just look silly. If you want to spark excitement with the car's design, you should lean on the forms which have always sparked excitement in car designs. As cool as the Formula E car looks, the best-looking car in this video is the 499P right above David's head.
Good choice❤
Formula 1 have shown the latest concept car for their 2026 rules -- it just looks like an F2 car, it's nothing special (granted the actual team cars will look different to that). The next generation Indycar doesn't need to be anything remarkable either (it would be nice if it had more of the proprtions and sound of a 90's Indycar though, but that's by the by).
Since the Indycar will likely be a spec car, that indeed should allow for smoother more elegant lines like the 499P or similar as you say, since performance isn't the only consideration.
@TassieLorenzo 2026 car Will look awesome imo, we'll see
I’d honestly be happy if they rolled out the Panoz DP-01 that car looks better, sounds better, cheaper to run than anything Dallara could come up with. Male that with an aerosceeen built in done
I know the aerokit era was a bit of a disaster, but I like the concept of it. Why not do something akin to GTP where you have Honda and Chevy each team up with a different chassis manufacturer instead of having them do it in house? And instead of hybrids, slap a big old NA V8/V10 in the back to distinguish yourself from GTP.
I prefer to be the one that makes the design others want to copy.
Ok but who's coping indy ATM? You need an awesome,good handling car to do that
@@fqeagles21All around great product to do it. This ain't it.
Just give us the CART era cars, 90s cars, IMO the best looking cars the series has ever had, they looked different from eachother and sounded fantastic
Literally just make a modern version of a 90’s Reynard. Sleek and stealthy. Something that looks fast standing still.
Indycar already has a visual identity. The only ones who forgot are the series and team owners.
That thumbnail is disturbing
Thought that car was in grand tourismo.
The X1 would be unraceable and prohibitively expensive. The same owners complaining that the hybrid is a n expensive new for the sake of new addition, are wanting an expensive new for the sake of new chassis. Just fix the issues with the DW12 and don't fix what isn't broken.
Hinch says what's most important is the sound of the car and the people driving it. And I'm inclined to agree. F1 exploded in popularity not due to the cars, but because of the drivers, their inherent technical skill, and their clashing personalities.
The "Cars" part was probably more valid 10 or 20 years ago. Those Nick Oliveri-esque V10 and V8 motors were one of the main draw of F1 in those days.......
"Just fix the issues with the DW12 and don't fix what isn't broken" I think it's a problem that you can accidentally watch the 2019 Portland Grand Prix instead of the 2024 Portland Grand Prix and not even notice the difference! It's an incredible level of stagnation IMO.
Looks like that owner played too much Gran Turismo…..
That car was crazy fast.
Sure but It would be awesome to use that car in indy irl
Well, Indy was a track on GT5 and 6.
I blame Formula E on not attracting fans because of the awful street circuits, not the car
Add terrible promotion and pay channels to that as well. Although that is true to IndyCar too, lol
They race a few blocks from me but I don’t go because the track is horrid
Well the Gene evo car Is worse than Gen 2 in look, there's that too
iirc it is actually the car that prevents FE to go to actual circuits because the lack of topspeed and the amount of lifting they then need to finish the race
The car is boring. It sounds like a vacuum cleaner ...
The high nose concept for F1 started in the early 90’s and only disappeared with the redesign that took to the track in 2022.
The X1 was a concept car, it should stay that way.
If the team owners and series owners want Newey to design them something, I’m sure he could. One of his first jobs in Motor racing was being a race engineer in Indy Car back in the 80’s.
at span of current dw12:
- formula 2 had 3 chassis (GP211, F2 2018, F2 2024)
- formula 3 had 5 chassis (GP310, GP313, GP316, F3 2019, and the upcoming F3 2025)
- formula e had 3 chassis (Gen-1, gen-2, gen-3, could be gen 4 in 2027) and each chassis had 1 aero-kit update each chassis (which means they had 6 aero kit in span of the lifespan of dw12)
- japanese super formula who only races 7 tracks in single year, had 4 chassis (swift 016.n, dallara sf14, sf19, and sf23). Seriously, how did they coup those money back?
- NASCAR had 3 cars (CoT, gen 6, and gen 7)
WTF is this timeline we're on? The 2026 F1 car is gonna look more like a Super Formula/IndyCar and now IndyCar wants a 2027 car that looks like a futuristic F1 car? Lost the Plot doesn't begin to explain the level of disillusionment some people in this sport seem to have... Edit* This is why Sportscar is gaining popularity so fast. Fans wanted to get back to the GTP/Group C era of having a LOT of cars on track with a LOT of manufacturers and WEC/IMSA made that happen in a BIG way with a lot of design freedom. F1 and even more so IndyCar are losing any semblance of a clue as to what the fan is looking for out of their discipline of the sport.
I follow Indy IMSA and WEC,F1 Is still on an up trajectory, and in 2026 with smaller Cars would be even Better❤
With Miller in Heaven Thank God we now have Land 👊🏁
go back to the days of CART do a modern design of what CART wouild look like if they were around it is a good idea.
Would that not just be an indycar?
@@nickz4993 look at cart before they were gone indycar needs new regs and a clean sheet of paper that is what they need no more spec.
@@nickz4993 Not too dissimilar, but with proportions that are better than the DW12 and a lot better than the old Dallara IR-05s. One step is going back to USAC CART tyre sizes which were a bit wider and better looking than the narrower tyres used in the IRL.
I agree that IndyCar should differentiate. F1 is all about aero with ground effect and movable wings and soon active aero but with locked down spec engines that aren't developed, and have to last 6 races or more. Endurance is all about aero and engines that are focused on reliability as well. The Formula E car is power limited. IndyCar should zag, make a jet fighter inspired chassis that is low drag and minimalist. Allow a simple, adjustable, pair of wings and focus the series on engine power. All the other series are power limited so they spend all their time and money on aero. Give IndyCar teams fixed aero and make it a series about mechanical grip and power with cars sliding around instead of running on rails trying to avoid turbulence from other cars.
Please don't do like F1 where the cars got so large that they can't pass anymore
They are shriking them in 2026, good starting point
@@fqeagles21 The thing is… the reduction is so minuscule we’d be lucky if it had little impact.
Remember when Ferrari wanted to build their own chassis for the Indy500? There's a parallel universe where Dallara, Ferrari, and McLaren are chassis suppliers and the series is filled with innovation and competition.
Add Swift
Thank you for being a voice for the fans David. I can't tell you how bad I wish Indycar would listen to you. Forward thinking is what Indycar needs if it wants to wow people and set itself apart from other series.
we need faster cars with more downforce over a new chassis
Personally, the cars never looked better than they did in the 90s CART cars. Simple, elegant looking in its basicness, and most importantly, LOUD, AND FAST!!!!
Jeremy Clarkson had it right with "power and speed". Thats all we want.
IndyCar continues to suffer a 50 year void in leadership
300mph and 8gs in the corners? Sign me up! 😂
I totally agree. Something need to be opened up in the regulations if IndyCar is going to be more compelling moving forward. F1, NASCAR, WEC, IMSA, all have variation between the cars. The only variation between the cars In IndyCar are the engines and dampers which are not even able to be appreciated by the fans because the are effectively hidden. Racing fans are engineering fans. Let there be innovation in the engineering of the cars and the true racing fans won't be able to stay away.
The car is important but the series needs to get serious about better promotion. F1 is as big as it’s ever been and most diehard fans don’t love the current formula.
I didn't but this year was Amazing,2025 will surpass It hopefully
Formula 1’s popularity is a little bit of marketing but it’s more like what racing was in North America in the 80s & 90s.
Obviously they shouldn't use the RedBull x2010... They should use the x2019
I think in that case x2014 fan car would look more appropriate 🤔 Also the x2019 and the x2014 standard have the same external features so the x2019 is still outdated by 10 years
Walking around the IMS museum, and see all the ingenuity, let the teams build their own cars!
I'm not very literate in Indycar but I believe it would be interesting if Indycar tried something similar to WEC, set dimensions, drag and downforce values and see what different brands come up with. Now I do understand that WEC works because of the BoP but that's mainly because different cars have different powertrains. Set a power train, power figures, Drag and Downforce and see what different designers can come up with?
I think the X1 looks like trash tbh. I absolutely love the Ir-18
I doubt it looks terrible, just outdated by today's standards. Even that's showing how anything Gran Turismo series-related has fallen off for years.
Yes, I like it’s too. I think it is important to design something that looks Indy ish. Not a Dallara that looks like a formula ladder series car
It’s not
Exactly there’s nothing to talk about besides shocks and valving in indycar and no one even talks about that anyways…
I liked the Panoz DP01
so not a spec series. Should Indycar go the lmdh route? make it look how they want, but no more than x horsepower and x downforce? different chassis manufacturers to choose from?
I'm afraid we are stuck with one chassis (lower cost) and it's not going to move the needle. But truthfully, the key is you need the car to be affordable enough to have 20 to 25 cars run the series and 33 cars fill the one event that supports the entire series, the 500. But the one thing you did mention that excited me was to go to a high revving V8, V10, or V12 and get that glorious sound!
We can't really rely a rather outdated "Cyber Formula"-type car like the Red Bull X-series for the next IndyCar car design tbh. If only Dallara adapted the new car from the current chassis, plus fixing the flaws of it, then fit it with an Inline 4 engine like in Super Formula series in Japan (maybe I4 Hybrid) then maybe they'll be off steam.
I mean, come on. Indycars used to run 4-pots before. Remember the Offys?
I've been advocating for a formula built off of 2.0 I4 turbos for years. Every MFR has one. To that end, why wait for MFRs to enter? Allow the engines to be bought straight from the MFRs and let tuners or the teams themselves work on them, using any brand they can acquire. They'd be cheap and if these street racers can build them with 800 hp, I'm pretty sure Indycar teams can. Moreover, if BMW could build a WDC winning engine from a 318i block 40 years ago, the newer engines should be amazing platforms to build from.
As long as they’re loud and sound somewhat aggressive, I don’t think the fans will care about cylinder count too much. The v6’s already sound great imo
The cars would have to go on a major diet to switch to a 4 cyl.
@@Spike-sk7ql the size of 4 cylinder engines would be also the part of it.
@@Spike-sk7qlIf you're worried about power, Super GT and Super Formula's i4 engines punch out over 600 horsepower and sound unbelievably angry, like a rally car on PCP. Even a straight swap with the current V6 wouldn't lose too much power, and they'd also be a bit lighter on top of that.
David I agree the cars need to be different. But let's not kid ourselves Indycar is never going back to team building their own cars. None of the teams can afford it, including McLaren who's primary ownership would deny Zak any more funding to build a race car for a fundamentally impoverished racing league. Indycar doesn't get enough ROI to warrant any team to spend beyond 10 million per car. Already half the teams are taking up pay drivers because they can't afford to run what they have.
The way to do this is to invite dedicated chassis builders like ORECA, LIGIER, MULTIMATIC, and of course DALLARA. Have them all design there own chassis based on existing engine regulations that IMSA and WEC use for their GTP/Hypercar class.
The result should have 4 different looking cars with different engine brands. Even if it remains Chevrolet and Honda, it's worth having a diverse body styles.
I'd add that Zak Brown has made it clear that IndyCar McLaren has to be self-sustaining and there will be no cross subsidy from either the racing or road car part of the business.
Add Swift
The should open up the engine regs and allow the teams to have freedom to design the bodywork of their cars so they can each have some personality.
If they simply said "all engines must be 3L displacement and have a max power output of 850/900 hp but you can run anything from an I4/6 too a V12" with the caveat that the smaller engines will be allowed restricted forced induction to get the same power output as the 10's/12's and smaller engined cars will be required to carry ballast to make up for their weight difference it would solve the problem making "the show" more memorable.
And allowing teams to design the bodywork of their cars (within reason) would allow for visually distinct designs.
18:50 this is my thought exactly. The early 2000's F1 V10s are remembered so fondly even though the cars were somewhat ugly because of the glorious sound. And to bring it to IndyCar, what do old timers always talk about? The old Novi and Offy engine sounds. It might sound silly, but if they focus on something that sounds good, it will get people's attention.
2000's F1 car imo were the best Looking One,look at 2004 grid❤❤,and add the glorious sound
I just don't get. Penske is trying to keep the costs down for the teams by having a interative design so that all of the development in the current car isn't wasted. It looks similar but will be lighter and have stuff packaged internally better.
If team are complaining about looks fine. full clean sheet and they can pay out the nose for it and they can complain about the money indycar is gonna make them spend. we can have 10 teams in the series max. we will loose all the stock piles of parts and investment in the dampers. so that's all just money wasted.
I get wanting to have something new and fancy but they don't want to pay for it, they were already complaining about hybrid costs. A new chassis plus spare parts will cost astronomically more than now.
The same point unfortunately applies to a new ICE. Hopefully with the shift away from electric only maybe we can get manufacturers to change their mind on that.
Finally, someone talking common sense.
@@ApexwithDavin I disagree. There is no point having 30 cars on the grid, if 15 of them are filled by mediocre drivers (often pay drivers) and fans don't care. While having quantity is good, having quality has to be a higher priority compared to pandering too much to small-time Indycar teams. Formula One has all the eyes on it because it's important, it's the big league.
Arguably the only important race in the Indycar series is the Indy 500, and many of the other events are like glorified club races...
Indycar does NOT have a cost problem, it has a low commercial profile problem.
I hope it is not too radical. The current car looks fine, but it definitely needs to be updated as far as weight distribution and aero configuration. Indycar needs to look like an Indycar. Plain and simple.
Indycar needs to look back at the golden era. It was the opposite of F1 with longer, lower, and wider cars with higher top speeds. There was a chassis war, an engine war, and at some point even a tire war. All of these factors can be made articially too with two or more different chassis manufacturers, different aero, and of course the engine war, and different tire compounds.
Indycar needs to find it's own identity.
Too many corporate managers and accountants having a say and not the drivers/team owners. Indy have a wealth of experienced driving talent who know what makes exciting racing.
Maybe the prime factor in design should be minimizing the number of fragments created in a crash. They're gonna wreck most of them anyway, the faster the clean-up, the bigger benefit to running a tight race.
Funny but actually a smart way to look at it. Historically when F1 goes too far into having complicated front wing endplates and too many little turning vanes and winglets all over the place then you end up having a season where at every race parts are coming loose or breaking off.
I have said it for years, change the car design, have multiple chassis' manufactures, have multiple engine options and put some spice back into Indy car racing. Back in the 1970's I was a teen and loved Indy Car racing back then. There were Eagles, Penske's, Wildcats, McLarens, Lightnings, Coyote, Chaparral and at the end of the decade you had M.A.R.C.H. For the most part everyone ran a Ford Cosworth DFX engine at the end of the decade. Though some still ran, for a while a Drake-Offenhauser. To compete with the Cosworth, they were given more boost. You even had Longhorn Racing make a deal with Williams F1 and brought a Williams to Indy Car in the early 80's. It was a wild and wonderful time.
Today, I keep trying but I just can't get excited about the racing. To me, it seems flat and unexciting. Everyone is going in a circle, and you only have three teams who can win, Ganassi, Andretti, and Penske. Back in the 70's you had Penske, Foyt, Patrick Racing, McLaren, and Dan Gurney's Eagles that could win on any weekend. We need to change the formula for Indy Cars. Let the teams design a car within a set of rules and set a cost cap for how much the chassis can cost. That will control the cost and bring in some differences. Do the same with the engine. We need more than two engine options and much more than one chassis. The cars are boring, the racing is boring, and even one of my favorite drivers is in the series, Scott McLaughlin, I just can't get excited about IndyCar today.
Adrian's lawyers will be paying close attention to these developments. 😂 Like, you're not supposed to say 'hey the best F1 car designer in the history of, ever, had some pretty handsome designs, let's just do that.'
AI brain rot has infected these humans already, not even a hint of a new idea in their heads. There's no future for Indycar if this all they can come up with.
Time to go the IMSA route, open Indycar to a couple more chassis suppliers, then balance itout with BOP.
Man, people dreaming about multi chassis constructors in Indycar with no money to afford this is just crazy.
no money to afford but they are all opening 100s of millions of dollar factories and hqs , dumping money into other series , having engineering wars with the other teams to get the best people from each other . the money is being spent , its not being spent of cars/engines because some teams have a vested interest in the status quo and remaining very successful in its confines.
@AlistairMaf2xwell77 F1 does all of that and updates the car,indy should too but scale It back a bit
Surely the problem is the poor commercial return of Indycar? McLaren and Andretti have no qualms about spending 10x or 20x as much on their Formula One operations. So it has to be all about making Indycar less Indy 500-centrc and raising the profile of all the other events in the season.
19:25 exactly David, lets hope they eventually understand this
Loud and fast
That’s what we want
Imagie if they offered Newey a gazillion dollars to design the next Indycar from scratch today
I'm sure he would be willing to do a concept design for a fraction of that price! As it is Indycar already has access to McLaren Racing F1 and the Andretti Cadillac F1 team, why not let either (or both) of those constructors do the design?
@@TassieLorenzo Good ideas
@@TassieLorenzoit’s just Cadillac f1
My attention has almost entirely left INDYCAR over the past 3-4 years. F1 just offers a better product to me personally.. I almost can’t even stomach sitting though and Indy car race due to the completely ridiculous number of commercials.
I'll look backwards a bit to CART in the mid/late '90s, there were multiple chassis (March. Lola, Reynard, and Swift) on the track and it produced some of the best racing ever. Keeping the hybrid concept is not a bad thing, but invite other MAJOR manufacturers beyond Chevy and Honda (Ford, Toyota, Porsche, etc.) to produce engines for the series to a specific displacement, again, something that worked well in the past and produced exciting racing. Put together certain chassis and wing specs. Wing dimensions and locations specs in relation to front and rear axles, overall length and width, wheel base length and track width are all things which can be put out there and any chassis manufacturer can work with. If you then have no manufacturers willing to provide chassis and/or engines, then yes, you will end up with a spec car, but not due to lack of effort!
Just give us an Inline 4.. 1000cc screamer ..... like a Japanese sport bike. WAHHHHHHHH
F600 in the SCCA run a sports bike motor and they sound pretty cool
1600cc A4GE also screamed like a baby V8
@@RazorSharp75426you mean 4AGE?
That'd probably be as close to "road relevant" design as any. Street cars are going more to small displacement turbo engines anyway. Hell, run them on pump gas
Why not two 1000cc screamers -- a 2L V8? 🙂
I’m not a massive Indycar fan. I typically prefer to watch F1 and endurance racing as I tend to appreciate the technical side just as much as the sporting side, which I think in itself validates the argument that Indycar should probably open up chassis development to multiple manufacturers. A performance arms race will certainly make things more interesting. They just have to make sure they keep the money thing under control.
With the outrageous cost of Motorsport these days I think the only option to not have a spec car is to implement BOP unless you are formula 1. I really hate to say it but BOP is probably the only way we will see different cars on the grid of IndyCar.
as long as they are very broad BOP , a V8 turbo = v8 N/A = v6 hybrid with specs to equalize etc etc . if we get into individual race performances and setup limits and micro management of the BOP for artificial racing , then no thanks.
@AlistairMaxwell77 I agree. I love the diversity in IMSA gtp cars
Imagine if they just put out an industry-standard RFP…and interested manufacturers came up with designs…and Indycar just picked the best one…or more than one…
Likely still end up back at Dallara, especially if there's an explicit or implied condition that the chassis has to be manufactured in the US.
The problem is, there is no interest in Indycar. There's interest in The Indianapolis 500, but no sane manufacturer wants to deal with Indycar management.
Don't let the series pick. Let the teams individually pick and pay.
A few points that other commenters haven't considered:
1. Multiple chassis manufacturers may increase costs, which is why Dallara is the only supplier.
2. V10s: This isn't F1. V10s will likely be more expensive.
3. Related to previous two points, Indycar doesn't make the money necessary to encourage teams to spend the way they'd need to to make the previous two points into reality.
The entire point of going to single chassis manufacturer was a lower costs. Instead, it raised them.
@@retromario96 but it didn't put the price out of touch like other series.
@@retromario96It didn't. They have been using tubs for years...the old series the cars were out of date after 3 years and you were buying all new cars. Plus the engine leases of that time were more.
@@marklittle8805 In most reasonable series (F2, F3, Super Formula etc) teams have no problems buying new cars every 3 or 4 years. That Indycar teams are so broke they can't even afford that is quite damning of the poor commercial return of Indycar racing. Something drastic has to be done to raise the profile of the races other than the Indy 500.
Adopting the GTP engine formula is a good way to get more manufacturers involved in IndyCar.I don't know if a GTP chassis could be adapted to make an open-wheel car.
i doubt you could make an open wheel car from a GTP chassis, but that kind of engine formula would be a good idea, i think.
Newey is automotive genius, think indy would learn a lot from his ideas. Yeah, the car might be from a computer game, but the latest version is real. Find it funny that he's kinda knocking f2 cars but there's more technology in those cars than indy cars, if you put the same engine that an indy cars have in an f2 car then the f2 would wipe the floor with it. Don't worry about having the same spec car at first as im sure updates will be added on during the seasons to come.
Kind of off topic, but I think electrification in motorsports is failing because they race in their own separate EV series rather than head-to-head against ICE cars.
F1 is a top series because the teams build their own cars. LeMans prototype is a top series because the teams build their own cars. NASCAR is no longer a top series because the teams don't build their own cars. Indycar is no longer a top series because the teams don't build their own cars.
Recommendation. Each Charter should send in their 2027 IndyCar concept/template to Penske and allow many designs to be molded together! Simple and everyone’s involved.
That's not how racecars work. Having different teams designing a car, you may as well just have them race those cars. If you start copy pasting components from one car, to another, you would likely end up with a worse performing car. Everything affects everything on a race car. Especially when talking about the witchcraft called aerodynamics.
Also…..going to be brutally honest here. Indycar has almost always, save for one event, been pretty second rate. And the tradition continues. In the modern era, it has and continues to be this really bad attempt at trying to be Formula 2 (not 1). It’s so sad. And as far as doing the engines….never happening. The manufacturers would never go for it, and you gotta have those or the sport won’t work.
Ok, so I realise that this is an unpopular opinion, but the aerokit era of the DW12 worked, because there was a difference between the two engine suppliers.
Just watched Conor Daly's interview of Simon Pagenaud yesterday. They brought up that chassis, and how much they liked it before the windscreen and later the hybrid system f'd up the balance of the chassis. Personally I think a new chassis that is balanced and gives us good close racing should be top of the "desired" list.
that may be. that, however, does not excuse the fact that the aerokit DW12s are genuinely the most hideous cars that IndyCar has ever run.
Interest was highest in the sport when each team had a different chassis. We watch Indy car because its the pinnacle of American open wheel racing. Having one engine and one chassis does not say pinnacle of motorsports to me, it says spec cars and also ran series. Let each owner choose from different cars and engines. Have a set of rules they must follow, but allow the creativity to run amok.
I don't care what it looks like, I only care how it can race.
Can it increase the top end on the straights by 60+mph, can it nail the corners at 20+ mph faster than currently, can it cut through wind turbulence like a hot knife through butter?!?!
60??!! They would Need new tech in the barriers for that
Maybe Penske Entertainment wants a F2 look alike car, so when they sell to Liberty it will be easy for F2 teams race in America
You've got an F2 team next year and if Prema get it right the rest of the grid could be in for a bit of a shock.
It would be unique if they tried something with fan cars. No other series in the world is doing it
i think indycar should go the gtp/lmh route and have body styles that reflect the manufacturers design philosophy, the caddy gtp has he headlights of the cts and a big NA v8 engine and the lambo gtp looks like a lambo, etc etc. right now the honda and chevy indycars look the same. it would be cool if the hondas took design cues from acura and the chevy took design cues from corvette or whatever. if the honda indycar had a screaming turbo v8 and the chevy had a growling v8 it would appeal to fans and manufacturers.
With Penske still there?
I feel like every time they get going in a good direction they somehow ruin all the progress with something stupid that nobody asked for.
Personally, I think the current car looks great. Just work on the some aero changes for better racing. Don't go making the same mistake NASCAR did and model your car after another series. Yeah, the intermediate races are great now, but the other races leave a lot to be desired due to the aero and gemometry of the car. It's just a flawed design and they won't get a 2.0 for another 5 years most likely, so we're pretty much stuck with this one. They won't even try more horsepower because they keep pretending like they're getting a new OEM and they have to cater to them. It's like, why can't you just be who or what you are? Stop acting like a needy person who craves validation and just do your own thing. Nope, can't do that.
I don't think anybody in Indycar can see past the logos on the formula e car. They just see the logos and say "Look at the sponsors! We should do that! No need for original ideas or pushing boundaries when obviously copying someone else and being years late to the party is going to be so lucrative!"
I wouldn't mind it if Indycar went toward F1, meaning no windscreen, but with a halo. The halo has proven itself to be a reliable component to F1 cars that stop the most dangerous parts of overturns. Also, I don't think Indycar has helped iself with the video game having been shelved.
The IndyCar aero screen IS a halo with a windscreen built around it. The primary function of the aero screen is to prevent heavier pieces of flying debris in a high-speed crash from entering the cockpit- protection from rollovers is a secondary function. For example, a conventional halo by itself would not have saved Justin Wilson at Pocono in 2015- that heavy piece of brake caliper assembly that hit his helmet would have gone right through the opening of a conventional halo, and it still would have gotten into the cockpit.
I think you made a great point with the sound David! I dont think many people understand the huge interest having that v8/v10 sound back in Motorsport would bring. That is one of the biggest complaints f1 fans have about the current f1 cars, and I think indycar can capitalize big time on that if they bring back the high pitch scream of the early 2000s
PS RedBull X1 looks like a 70s video game car. UGGLY. I do know your heart in the right place BUT your as all over the map as Indycar is ….Other that completely open chassis /aero design which is not as cost effective as Indycar rolls these days best would be a body work that there is a window that can be modified in. There is not an unlimited number of designs for cars that WORK To design some to NOT look like F2 is stupid if F2 ish is best aero etc then that is not a bad place to start your more worried about marketing than car design
It is totally nonsense that Indycar keeps sticking to a single chassis supplier, when even the feeder endurance series have at least 2 different chassis. And there are plenty of companies with skill and capabilities to do that (Dallaara, Tatuus, Ligier, Oreca, Lola, etc)
2007-ish Formula 1 cars were crazy different with all sorts of aero thingmajiggies that people would guess what they were supposed to do and then halfway through the race something would fall off and the car would go faster without the 'upgrade'. Some complained saying some cars looked silly but it was great fun.
A good option Could be open it for several chassis makers with a BOP system
A new IndyCar should sound meaner than a Formula 1 car, whether that means V8s, V10s. V12s, or a mixture, and give teams much more leeway to craft unique body designs, even if the chassis is spec.
If F1 isn’t going for those Indy won’t get them with manufacturer support.
WEC nailed the “different but the same” thing with the hypercar regs but I feel that’s a lot more difficult to implement on an open wheel car
@@nickz4993 The LMDH regulations work because they are mostly off the shelf parts. All the engines in the category come from existing engines. Open wheelers are built off being bespoke to an extent.
@@rexthewolf3149but there's LMH too,indy should lean towards that not LMDH
My god the best advice ever @18:55. Imagine if someone said yes ok let’s go bold. Let’s make smaller, lighter, more nimble single seaters with giant V8’s and just ripped them around as the loudest thing on the continent. That would be worth seeing every weekend.
Take the 1995 rule book, adjust the crash standards and cockpit dimensions to present, shrink the fuel tank from 40 gallons to 26.5, and then the 2.4 V6 hybrid engine with intercooling. More downforce, more drag, more power.
If IndyCar is committed to being spec for the rest of time, then they should look at the Chris Beatty Design (I believe he had a hand in the aero screen to some degree) Velocity concept car (you can look it up, it’s on his website) as the inspirational basis for the next chassis, even if the reality of bringing it to life would require huge technical compromise and changes.
It looks modern, innovative and catches the eye.
But IndyCar seems lost and confused as to what it’s purpose is, and - most importantly- who it is for.
The RACER article didn’t surprise me in the slightest, and I suspect I’m not the only one.
But where are you going to get the money??? To have multiple chassis and manufacturers. What Honda has been whining for several years now about not getting their returns of the money exposure. And Chevy has had those complaints too. Has far chassis manufacturers who else is there to get??? Yeah in the past there were four. But has one or two chassis shows there the one to have the others went bye bye Swift Eagle Penske.... Ferrari sniffed around but they didn't want to run more than their team with three or four cars look at endro they are just running wec and no real plan to run IMSA in the future???
"But where are you going to get the money?" By promoting the series properly so it's not just a one race series where everything apart from the big race is basically a non-event.
I wanted to reply earlier, but have a couple of thoughts here. First, about 15 years ago they had the idea of using a universal tub but each team could tweak the aero packages in house, leading to different looking race cars. This to me is a good cheaper alternative. Share the chassis, use different control surfaces. Active aero is also en vogue, so might not be a bad idea. It's also visually more pleasing and obvious than "push to pass" or the battery thing. Fans can see the wing change and the burst of speed in F1.
Next, the Formula E car did move the needle. It's one of the coolest looking open wheel cars ever (the 2nd Gen car you mention). It's the design that got me into Formula E. The issue with that series isn't the car, it's the network availability, the race schedule, and the fact that the cars sound like dentists drilling cavities.
Lastly, more important than the video game angle (which is critical, I agree), is toy availability. If you want the next generation of fans, we need Lego versions of Indycars, hotwheels (not just "1:64 scale diecast" collectibles), etc. Make the series accessible, modern, and visible, and Indycar wins. Because on the track it's the best product on earth (if you don't count the very narrow street courses).
I kinda wished they did something with the original Deltawing Indycar concept back then. Yes its old & looks funky but makes sense to me for ovals. Half the power, half the drag, half the fuel consumption but still with similar speeds. Was genuinely a forward-looking concept in my books.
I 100% agree that sound is where IndyCar needs to differentiate itself, more so than visually. Wide setup windows are also key.
V8 would be awesome! The OEM manufacturers would refuse to build that
Typical Indy car. This series will never be what it was in their hey day
Yes to Cormiers comments about the time when there were multiple chassis and engine combos. What we need. I'm old enough to remember when a large part of the mystique around the Indy 500 was wondering how many different designs were gonna show up there
Open the engine and hybrid system regulations (say they have to meet certain performance requirements but no specifications on how to get there)
If you go with a spec chassis, have OEMs or individual teams design the body work. Ideally have some kind of competition with chassis but that’s not realistic.
Or pay IMSA/WEC a finders fee or license the LMdH/LMH power train regulations and build a chassis from there. That gives you 10 potential engine manufacturers. And combined with body work designed by OEMs or the individual teams/groups of teams build body work
I don't get the hate for the V6
It doesn't scream like a V8. Look up Rick Mears's pole run at Indy from 1991 right here on YT- that's how a proper Indycar powerplant should sound. If Chevy & Honda could just add two more cylinders to the current engines, presto! They would sound awesome again.
@@aerofence38
>It doesn't scream like a V8
thats mostly a problem of NA vs Turbo'd, you could add RPM and a bunch of other problems to the mix. the JGTC NSX from the early 2000s (the NA models) absolutely scream like nothing else despite being v6s themselvs
@@hertzwave8001The RPMs on the current V6s are already there, both the Chevy turbo V8 of the early 90s and the current V6 run at 12,000rpm
@@hertzwave8001 The low boost Indy V8s screamed and revved high as they were almost NA-ish. It really wouldn't add much cost to have two extra cylinders.
@@TassieLorenzoNot only that, but reduce the size of the cylinders and reduce the boost a little, that way it won't make the engine an untamed monster. I'd be happy with 720-750 horsepower- those were the horsepower figures of the early 90s Ilmor-Chevy V8s. The Ford XB & 1995 Honda Turbo V8s raised the game to about 800-850hp, but once the power starts climbing towards that figure, knock back the boost a bit. Allow small horsepower gains, but if it starts getting ridiculous, then the rulesmakers can step in...
As much as I hate BOP, I’ve recognized that the motorsports world no longer allows for a raw spending race any more. I just want an Indycar with BOP aero kits and open engines with a torque meter limit (like hypercar/LMDH/LMGT3)
If we look at this realistically... What else can Indycar do? Ganassi is not Ferrari, Penske is not Mercedes. The money will never be there to not be a spec chassis. The one strength Indycar has is close racing, and the DW12 privides that. Slap a bit of lipstick on it and keep going. That's the only option.
Penske Is close to them tbh in revenue in racing
McLaren *is* McLaren though. An equivalent to Ferrari on the track and on the road. Surely McLaren F1 Team can afford to design the car for the series?
Likewise Andretti *is* Andretti Cadillac F1 Team. That's hundreds of millions of dollars of funding and already 200 employees in the F1 valley Silverstone area.
@@TassieLorenzo But where is the return on investment? It's Indycar.
@@papertiger795 There's your problem! Why does Indycar have such a vanishingly small commercial profile that it's not worth spending any money on?
@@TassieLorenzo it's a regional series that attracts underrated, but still not superstar talent. Indycar shouldn't have Formula 1 size dreams, F1 already exists. It would bankrupt the series and everyone involved if they try.
That being said, I do believe there is room for them to succeed beyond where they are at now. But some of the commentary in and on this video seem wholly unrealistic. I get it, we love Indycar, but it is what it is.