@@ResortDog It was the wreck, even if the car didn't break no way was he making up the spots to contend again. Same thing happend to Rossi except he didn't break, I think he just cracked the top 10, should have been podium. Listen to Powers interview at the end he'll tell you the same thing. IndyCar needs to re-think its pit rules.
Good point, though euros think that Indy cars are a lower class of open wheel because of the Specs. F1 is who ever spends the most is in the top 3. You will never see a F1 driver finish in the top three even if he is starting in the middle of the pack
Easily - it really wasn't the point of the video. They're looking at how Indy used the track differently, not at the race results. You'll find a results video somewhere else.
@@Perifroog NO SHIT! 3:37 is what he's talking about, F1 doesn't have that and it is wayyy better than F1 onboard cameras... If you guys actually watched the video or IndyCar you would realize he's talking about 360° Degree onboard cameras, you can watch a car dive bomb on the inside and they will point the camera to the car next to it when they are wheel to wheel racing, which is constantly happening in Indy btw.
This whole video was just about all the things they like better about f1 and that's coming from an f1 fan. It seems like Indy fans liked the race and getting to see Colton win was awesome also the guy in blue has never been to a real Indy race. On ovals they go way faster than f1 obviously a stock chassis is going to get crushed at a circuit you also can't forget how big of a difference a Williams f1 vs a Ferrari or Mercedes
He ran a perfect race, accidents aside. He had a perfect strategy, and drove the wheels off that car. I might be biased a bit, but I think will power qualifying on pole and dnf'ing is almost a meme at this point.
Wish you would have posted the finishing results. Like how many cars finished on the lead lap? Also many laps did the Indy Cars run compared to F1? Really kind of hard to compare a Indy Car to a F1 car. I am sure a F1 car has much more down force. And a Indy Car cost a lot less. I really don't care how fast they go. I would so much rather to see some close racing. And one thing you forgot was a rookie won the race! Which is most unlikely to happen in F1. I am hoping the FIA figure out what it takes to bring about some closer racing in the years to come "2021?". Here is to hoping!!
the sausage curbs at the austrian Red Bull ring i think are the best, they can be removed for bike racing and if f1 cars exceed them they ruin their lap and cause long term damage, like a Monaco barrier would.
Mason Kurien grass is dangerous. It’s too slippery. If somebody overshoots from the long straight, or if there is a Danny Ric and Verstappen style crash causing the cars to overshoot, grass wont stop the cars. Tarmac and gravel are the best for that. The sausage curb allows you to keep the tarmac while discouraging people to drive on it
They're comparable because they're both popular open wheel single seater racing series that both use turbocharged V6 engines. Either way I still like both.
That’s like saying we shouldn’t compare MotoGP and SBK. IndyCar and F1 are the two top open wheel racing series in the world, they always have been. We know that IndyCar is going to be slower because a) it’s essentially a spec series, and b) the budgets in IndyCar are a lot lower than F1, like waaaaaay lower. But a lot of F1 drivers end up racing in IndyCar (or CART back when it was a thing), and some IndyCar/CART drivers even make the leap to F1 (like Jacques Villeneuve and Juan Pablo Montoya), so I think making comparisons is fair.
I enjoy Indycar and F1 but always thought the speed comparison was silly. Just look at the cost of the cars and you'd guess what the gap would be. I just find Indycar more fun to watch and the drivers generally more likable. F1 will always remain the pinnacle of motorsports and an exercise in excess, which is fun in its own way.
While I love to marvel at the technological advancements and solutions clever engineers come up with I also don't want to watch a predictable parade. In short, I want to have my cake and eat it too.
@@Sp4mMe lol nah It would slow the race down to much. Having to red flag the race every other lap to send out the marshal's with mops and buckets to clean up the track .
It was kind of a joke in my book...I appreciate how it avoided excessive penalties that leaves a bad taste in peoples' mouths, but it sorta raises the question of why the white lines and curbs matter anywhere on the track if they don't matter at turn 19.
Marcus Ericsson quali times-- Indycar 2019: 01:48.425 vs F1 2018 01:35.536 13+ seconds slower. David Land did an awesome video to compare several COTA lap times of different racing series cars. Interesting numbers. F1 is the undisputed pinnacle of racecars but NOT the pinnacle of wheel-to-wheel racing. Indycar trumps it in that category for sure. I love both disciplines for completely different reasons.
Back in 2014, the Chevy Indycar tested at COTA and had F1 mid-field times. But that aero produced F1 single file/strung out racing. The new reduced downforce aero allows driver talent to come to the forefront, such as the hated Will Power. The biggest difference between the two series is not the engine, or the drivers, its the downforce levels.
mathias gudme agreed. But that shows the difference in the willing directions of the two series. Since 2014, f1 has gotten intentionally faster, and Indycar has gotten intentionally slower. One things for certain, I think the fans of both series miss the monster 1000 hp plus producing V8’s.
If you aren't on the edge in a racing car or even any professional sport then you simply aren't fast enough or good enough. Sounds to me that Indy car just suits them better
@@pierrepaniagua Actually no, it's been said many times by F1 drivers that F1 seem easier to handle because of the Power steering and other aids. Indy is much more physical because the lack of power steering, Ericsson mentioning that his arms would definitely be sore after the Indy race at COTA.
Wait...so are you guys trying to tell me an F1 car, that has $100million worth of development and factory backed engines...is...faster?...than a $5-10million Indycar??? MIND BLOWN
The fact is that this was an indycar classic, and I had more fun watching the youngest driver ever to win a race in series history, than in a long time with F1. I love both, they're just different, I watch them for different reasons, but Indycar deserves much more respect as a series.
This. It's apples and pears. They are similar, but very different. The Indycar is an older platform that doesn't get redesigned every year. Less power, less downforce, heavier, no power steering...they are just different animals that look alike. Both are top notch, just different...and I'll watch both every weekend (along with F2, F3, Formula Renault, GT, Sprint Cars, midgets, DTM, WEC, IMSA, etc.).
@@StinkyCheeseYodeler totally agree, I like the simplicity of Indycar vs. f1, but don't get me wrong I love the technology of f1 too. Indycar on the whole though is objectively a more competitive series, I mean it could be argued that Penske and Andretti are pretty dominant atm, but I never get the feeling that the same driver is going to start on pole and speed off into the distance. The best thing about Indycar is its unpredictability, which is why the championship fight has gone down to the last race for the last few seasons.
For me it seems that F1 and IndyCar have different priorities. F1's focus is very much on tactics and ruthless competitiveness (off the track as well as on) whereas the main focus of IndyCar seems to be entertainment and the overall spectacle. Not saying that F1 doesn't have entertainment, or that IndyCar doesn't have tactics, they both have them in abundance, but just that their main focus is slightly different. I grew up watching F1 but found that IndyCar was quite easy to get into, whereas I can understand why IndyCar fans might struggle a bit more to get into F1. There always seems to be something happening in IndyCar whereas in F1 a race may pivot on a single pitstop.
I agree, I think that's why they compliment each other and it makes it good to follow both. They are both a completely different take on premier motorsport.
I'm a huge fan of both series, but one thing refreshing was to see how much the driver's have to physically wrestle the Indy car around the track. For me, it puts much more on the driver when compared to F1, which is much more on the engineers.
F1 drivers have to deal with a lot higher G's going through curves since they have more downforce and therefore go faster. IndyCar drivers don't have power steering and require more arm movement and control than F1. The series require a bit different skills.
No, it's just more visible. Take a look at an F1 steering wheel to see what an F1 driver has to manage and adjust. Also, because of the huge downforce and lighter weight of an F1 car it means that they're much more sensitive and much more on a knife edge. The problem is that it doesn't show up very well on TV and only really becomes apparent when you listen to the drivers describe it.
It's fun to compare. You don't often get to look at two different evolutions of the same racecraft and compare them in the exact same circumstance. If you had a chance to compare DTM/Super GT and Aussie V8 Supercars on the same track in racing conditions I feel that the same sort of comparison could be warranted.
Why? DTM and VASC are different. You can see that right from the aero. They already don't compare. Who puts on good enough shows that draw fans is all that matters. The sooner people stop getting hung up on trying to compare the incomparable, and pay attention to the race in front of them, then we will all enjoy all motorsports for what they are. Keep trying to divide, that's when people get frustrated, throw up their hands, and go fishing.
I really enjoy this channel, but this video reeks of them trying to sell me their opinion. Indycar put on a damn good show, and the F1 crowd doesn't seem to want to admit it :/ I watch both series for different reasons. Indycar has been putting on a great show for years and F1.... hasn't so much.....
that free-for-all at turn 1 reminds me of the old Cleveland race--do they still run that?--with wide turns that allowed multiple lines through the corners and provided plenty of overtaking. Refreshing to see after the F1 races (although I love those as well).
TBH I wasn't really feeling the no track limits thing -- you may not like the design of the tracks, but the track is the track, you know? I like the wall analogy, and challenging the drivers more by keeping them on the course.
indy car engine = $275,000; F1 engine $20,000,000. its a curiosity to compare the two on the same track, but it is like comparing a go cart to a 911.... by the way though, Indy is about the drivers, F1 is about the cars....
John Monsalve couldn’t agree with you more! Also I’m pretty sure Indy is down on power about 200-300 hp currently (they’re looking to get that hp number to 1000 in the near future) and has lots less downforce, and they’re overall smaller cars with skinnier tires. So the comparison isn’t exactly fair lol. Indy doesn’t even have power steering!
@@z33tanner That would also translate: You don't need to know anything about cars to enjoy IndyCar, but if you do and if you like engineering, NOTHING is better than Formula 1.
This is ridiculous. 3 guys not-so-subtly trying to paint F1 as the superior motorsport when the IndyCar race last weekend clearly showed that the racing is superior and the cars are more exciting to watch. You’re off your rocker if you honestly believe that it’s harder to drive an F1 car than an IndyCar. Harder to find those last crucial tenths? Maybe. Harder to drive? Absolutely not.
I think a lot of that is fair. There is also a catagory of very good but financially unsupported drivers who can't get into f1 but can get into an even win other series where they don't need to bring money. My broad view is that f1 draws from the world, IC broadly is North America and ex-f1/f2/failures (many of whom do well there suggesting the class gap) F1 has a global talent pool and unsurprisingly the best there are probably better than any rival series. F1 doesn't get other series failures. Thats not a comment on which is more fun to watch of course.
@@kukuc96 No, you have it 180 backwards. Marcus Ericcson said in an interview at the race the cars are much harder to drive and be quick in without the aids of F1, and so has JPM in the past. He has said in F1 you pretty much jump back in and just steer, whereas Indycar is on the edge much more. You can make big mistakes in f1 and the cars just scrub and slow down whereas indy cars and their small stiff sidewalls are gone. The reason you see consant steering wheel adjustment (which mostly isn't pro-active adjustment) is because the manual steering doesn't dampen the bumps coming back up to the driver, whereas f1 power steering absorbs that (along with those tall sidewalls - should be interesting on the new tire coming).
Ya when they glossed over that the f1 race there was pretty good - it wasn't. 2 on track passes I think in the front running teams. The track limit deal is too bad because the right answer is to have grass or something slick outside 19 for awhile to be an actual deterrent by costing lap time. Or a wall, thats worked for decades!
The racing was 10x of anything I saw last year in F1. There was actual passing. We have two engine manufacturers that are both competitive unlike F1. Really, what wasn't to like? Sound of the cars? I dunno, sounded good to me.
But those cars are so ugly.. Australian Formula Vee is better then, because it is also evenful, more friendly atmosphere and cars looks much better and classier.
Got to love the purity and simplicity of Indycar. I consider track limits a commentators talking point but not something fans should be caring about. Rather have this madness than arbitrary 5 second penalties. The track ends where the barrier begins... And by the way, great story about Colton Herta winning. The American Verstappen ;-)
I tend to agree, but only in the sense that it's the track that should penalize drivers leaving the track, not the series. There should be gravel traps, grass, or kerbs that drivers hit if they leave the track. There shouldn't be 100m of paved runoff in every direction. Having the racing line 3 or 4 car widths off the track is absurd.
I have been an F1 fan since Jim Clark's breakout season in 1963. Been a fan ever since. Have NOT been an Indycar fan for the most part. I have been to both Austin and Indy for the USGP and there is something to be said about being at the one place on the planet at one moment in time where the most talent, bravery, money and technology all come together in a single event. Only F1 under Bernie could do that. "Back in the day" we used to watch F1 so we could see the "drivers work out their issues with one another" on the track, something very difficult to do on a circle track aside from planting your opponent into the wall. In F1 you had the kamikaze which was employed by both Senna and Prost at the same track in differing years. We had Piquet, Schumi, Irvine, and Hunt going to fisticuffs to better clarify "the rules." You had Graham Hill, and a host of others, who loved to spray rocks in the face of someone following too closely to prove a point. The fact is this, we watch to watch brave men drive undrivable machines around an impossible circuit while working out their personal issues with one another. Today, the F1 soap opera is totally "off the track" talking about engines, rules, signings, et al. The soap opera needs to be ON THE TRACK. Indycar has it right these days, if they wanna go out there, let 'em run and we'll watch 'em work it out. The sterility that has become F1 under the new regime will kill it and as long as commentators like you continue to rationalize this pablum they call entertainment, they will remain in their safe spaces and eventually we will all go elsewhere for excitement. Under these constrained, watered down, throat choking rules and culture that constitutes F1 today even Shakespeare surpasses it for thrills, interest, and mystery.
I think within it's field of drivers Indy truly sorts out the best of who was on the track. With F1 it's proven, at least the past 20 years it's whoever has the best car. There are a number of drivers that would win as consistently as Hamilton if they were fortunate enough to get with the right team at the right time. The only Indy driver that ever cried as much as Hamilton was Danica Patrick.
Honestly Indycar and F1 are two very different series. Indycar and F1 are both incredible motorsports and Indy car may not look it due to the aftermath of the dreaded "split", but it's slowly getting back on its feet. They're planning on increasing the engine displacement to a 2.4 liter Twin Turbo V6 capable of around 900 hp with push to pass and also are rumored to be trying to grab another engine manufacturer. Both F1 and Indy are two of the top series in the world imo. One is a manufacturers and engineers competition and the other a full on battle to see which driver is the best. Also, saying F1 drivers are better than Indycar drivers isn't really the case necessarily. If that were true than Ericsson should be having a field day with the rest of the drivers when really he hasn't, and when people bring up Alonso doing so well in the 500 before his engine blew up, Alonso is one of those generational talents where he could excel at any Motorsport he wanted to like a Mario Andretti. Both are great series at what they are trying to do.
1) relative speeds do not mater. They are both formula governed and not open classes so the rules of the class dictate the limits of what can be done. So comparing them on speed is pointless. 2) the track limit issue makes Indy look farcical. Why bother. Put gravel down. If that’s a motorcycle problem then route the cycles a different way or don’t race then there. The rules of “making a device to do two things means they do neither very well” holds for a track as well.
tell the FIA that and stop bitchin. if it’s paved use it. that’s always been the mentality of american open wheel racing. this isn’t a problem on the other courses they go to where if you go off track, you’re in the grass, sand or the wall *cough FIA, get rid of the parking lot tracks cough*
Europeans have a rule fetish for sure. Why do we need the same rules for every series? IndyCar isn't FIA, and most of their circuits have no runoff like FIA tracks do. F1 cars are like an SR-71, just go as fast as it can, cost no object. IndyCar is like an F-15, made for toughness and dog fighting.
Nexu Jin That’s understandable. Ovals are just something you get accustomed to, if you give them the chance. They can create some pretty exciting races (Gateway; Iowa; Texas).
I've never watched an Indy race but every time I get exposed to it through youtube videos or Fernando Alonso having another crack at it, I get the impression that Indy is the great spectacle that F1 used to be when F1 was a good spectacle and not a politicized parade of cars that never overtake each other and get penalized when they do.
You would be correct. Here is what I know as a spectator. I have been a die hard F1 fan for over 40 years. I have been to over 60 grand prix. This year I bailed on Montreal and went to the Indy race in Toronto. It was quite refreshing. I was able to get close to the cars on track and was able to get to view them from multiple corners with a general admission ticket. My grandstand seat did not cost a fortune and supporting races were spectacular. Now the racing. The cars made more noise and the racing was close. If I wanted value for my money. Indy car would get it. F1 needs to rethink.
Both should have a lot more cars on the grid. F1 needs to make it easier to field a team and Indycar needs another engine supplier to help add another 6-10 cars.
If it’s paved, use it. If it doesn’t make your car work better, then don’t. Why punish for everything, and what looked bad about it? I thought using the runoff area was exciting!
Tiny note about the speed difference. Should really compare race laps. F1 allows teams to turn up the engine and run unlimited DRS only in qualifying, so a pole time is always several seconds faster than a fastest lap. In Indycar, they aren't. So it would make sense to compare fastest lap times. Fastest race lap was 1:37.7 for F1 by Vettel last year and the Indycar pole was 1:46.0. So an Indycar is about 9% slower. Of course, I would also bet you a lot of Money that Lewis Hamilton will win the F1 championship, and I have no idea who will win the Indycar championship.
Why aren't you comparing fastest lap with fastest lap in the race. An IndyCar is lighter in qualifying too, so you're not making a like for like comparison.
Ehhhh? That's even making your comparison worse! Of course Pole lap is faster than the race lap, and that's normal for setting a perfect lap just to get the pole. And now you say we must compare F1's race lap to IndyCar's Pole lap? Totally absurd. Pole lap to Pole lap. That's what we get to see the Speed difference.
Wow, that is a snobbish review of an event that had actual overtaking instead of pit stop passes. Track limits rule in IndyCar allowed drivers to actually push. No nanny state FIA rules. IndyCar lets the driver with the biggest "attachments" take the chance.
121bham why do south american and european drivers come here and drive. They say they like to actually have to control the cars here,no power steering and less down force
Way too political in F1 and we all know 80%of the teams have no chance of winning a Championship We both know there are several F1 drivers who would do just fine in 1 of those Mercedes. ...but..........
This is not a debate where you are comparing apples with apples... One has all the tech aids and is built to go around corners...the other is built to withstand the forces of going around corners on a track at 240mph and its associated impacts - hence one will be quicker! One looks like a pile of junk and the other look like racing cars! One sounds like a vacuum cleaner and the other sounds like a racing car! One has a budget of upwards of £300million and the other £3million (per car). One has a "blessed" egotistical idiot and the other has a series of down-to-earth skilled drivers...plus the rubbish Max Chilton! But the biggest thing about this ridiculous comparison is that one offers "racing" and a "spectacle"...the other is a processional demonstration. Disclaimer: I am a massive F1 fan and watch most of the coverage here in the UK weekend in, weekend out but this video and comparisons are ridiculous. Comparing to F2 is disrespectful; Alexander Rossi, Juan Montoya, Marcus Ericsson and Sebastien Bourdais are ex-F1 drivers who will say driving an IndyCar is more fun than an F1 car plus all its politics. The acid test is when and if Fernando Alonso does more races!
@@dannyocean9673 never said that. I said diversity is not a strength. That is a lie. Having islam in your country is not a strength. The people who believe it's a strength are usually white middle class liberals who always live in the least diverse areas.....
I'd take wheel to wheel racing over speed any day. Having faster cars is just a stupid dick measuring contest at the end of the day and makes racing less exciting.
Marcus Ericsson said hands down the Indycar was much harder to drive physically. Alonso also commented similarly when he tested before the Indy 500, Marco Andretti told him the steering on the road course was even worse. Comparing lap times between the two series without going into the details of the cars is useless. A indycar weighs more than an F1 car, has 400-500 less H.P., half the downforce and the softest tire is still harder than the hard F1 tire. So context of why one is faster or slower matters.
Anish The current Indycar makes 600-650 hp. I'm not that sure what F2 makes or much about that series. I don't see a lot of coverage of F2 here in the states. F2 might have less hp and the same or less aero. I do know the current body kit for Indycar lost 1500lbs of downforce from the previous aero kits 2 yrs ago.
@अनिश् Indycar teams are allowed to push a ludicrous amount of development into Shock/Spring/Damper development which helps alot, and I believe that Indycar also has a bit less drag in their current package.
Let's see what a 1995 vintage Champ Car could do with an authentic Cosworth turbo. Gerald Forsythe to the white courtesy phone, please, Gerald Forsythe to the white courtesy phone, please...
You don't like F1 because one manufacture wins too many races but you like the series were one manufacturer wins every race. Have you considered seeking mental health treatment?
09Libertarian I’m following F1 since late 70s, where a fierce competition was between the teams every season until 2014 and the V6 era, where Mercedes was developing their hybrid technology since 2007. They get a pass by the FIA as manufacturer, and guess what? The others were not allowed to develop their V6 and The FIA created tokens, and every team was restricted using enough tokens for development. Where is the fairness here? At the same time Mercedes enjoyed their full DOMINANCE never seen to date!!! Every average driver can win WCC in Merc, not the other way around. At the same time, IndyCar teams are allowed to compete in complete fairness, so we have a wheel to wheel fights in every race! The reason why I said what I said. Capeech? No who needs a mental health check? BTW, I’m expert in insulting people and be a warrior of keyboards, but brings FACTS on the table, so bring me facts! Cheers
I've been watching every F1 race and quali since 2009, and every session since 2010, while only dabbling in Indycar over the years, watching it more and more regularly over the last few years (maybe watching 3-4 races per year). I'm really starting to think that Indycar is the most challenging single seater championship in the world, moreso than F1. On top of the physical challenge of lacking power steering, the drivers have to do so much to get the cars quickly and efficiently in and out of every single corner, the braking phases are longer, and they seem to struggle more for traction than F1 cars do, and honestly, that makes the cars a lot more interesting to watch, and it's easier to see that the drivers are REALLY having to work for it. Also, the pit stops being slower (and more variable in length) in Indycar, and having more stops than a typical F1 race, means the order jumbles and tumbles around a lot more in Indycar than an F1 race, and that really is independent of how the cars generate performance or what tracks they use...longer pitstops is always going to push drivers around the order a lot more. Lastly, homologated aerokits and all that makes the cars closer and almost surely much cheaper to develop. It makes me want to see F1 lose downforce, honestly, and find smart ways to reduce the gaps in performance between teams. Your recent podcast on a radical F1 rules revamp with a max. downforce target and limited package homologation during the season sounds like a good approach the more I think of it, honestly (though I'd like to see more than 1 update per year for F1...an initial car plus 3 updates would split the season into "quarters" for each team that would be entertaining to track, and keep car development part of the F1 story without being an unlimited resource drain like it is now). Of course, I still want to see F1 implement cost caps...
Well thought out commentary. I am a fan of both series as well as other motorsport. I was at COTA for F1 several times and for the IndyCar race this past weekend. I have also been to Texas motor speedway for IndyCar several years ago(and might go back again this year)....that is some crazy stuff.
Well said. My biggest qualm with Indy is the pit fiasco when a yellow comes out. They really need to be allowed to pit under yellow. It’s amazing to see Colton Herta win and race and he did a stellar job, but it’s hard to ignore that he was significantly helped due to the caution
How it compared? Easy. Instead of parades, we saw racing. Instead of the big budget team casually strolling to victory each weekend with their number one driver, we saw a nobody take a rookie win with a low budget new team. So yeah, nothing like F1. And as a former F1 fan, I thoroughly enjoyed the racing Indy provided. Oh yeah, and Indy has infinitely better sounding exhaust.
Basically a troll video, Indycar tries to differentiate the series and this video premise ignores that. The extra 300 kg side pods and purposely less down force than before makes any comparison moot.
These guys don't mention that there is a much wider inter team gap in F1 than IndyCar. This gap washes away driver talent in F1. I reckon that drivers matter more in the total performance equation in IndyCars than in F1 machines. Also a claim was made that F1 cars were on the razors edge relative to IndyCars, I have to say that I don't see much evidence of that claim. Either IndyCars are less stable or more likely they are closer in performance causing the drivers to push them harder than F1 pilots have to push their rides. CART in the big bad turbo days of the 80's and 90's were a perfect foil for the sanitized world of F1. I would love to see IndyCar gravitate in that direction.
The bitching about the Turn 19 track limits seems really stupid. COTA is a good track by F1 standards, but the standards for F1 aren't going to apply properly for most other series in the world because of how F1 machines are engineered. Indycar saw that and adapted accordingly, in the process opening up another overtaking zone and allowing the drivers to push much harder coming out of the 16-17-18 complex. Not to mention wrestling the cars under heavy breaking going into turn 19 with no driver aids whatsoever with reduced front and rear downforce would lead to innumerable drivers sliding wide in that turn anyway, as the cars in their current spec simply aren't built for that corner. Every lap you'd have guys getting pinged and punished for a situation they simply wouldn't have much control over. It would be like expecting a 1939-era F1 cars like the Auto Union Type-D to navigate the modern iteration of the Eau Rouge/Radillion complex with no issue during the entire event, and penalizing them the moment it's not perfect.
If they don't want you driving somewhere they shouldn't pave it. All american tracks except COTA has grass and gravel. I know Europeans are obsessed with safety but it takes away from driver skill when you can fuck up a corner and just casually get back on track.
As much as I like F1, I think they take themselves way too seriously. In typical European fashion. But Id imagine to the rest of the world, Indy car is probably seen as nothing more than open wheel nascar. But what Indy has that F1 doesnt, is pure racing.
What difference does it really make being 12 seconds or whatever, slower? Its harder to get the power down, there's less grip. It's more driver orientated in terms of skill. You can really tell these guys sitting down have never driven a racing car. An F1 car can take fast corners flat out with power steering and these cars are more driver influenced, so the guy on the right is wrong.
I personally asked the Max Chilton IndyCar garage why the technology is lacking, DRS, telemetry, aerodynamics. Interesting enough the answers I got were “it’s too expensive” or “not in the budget”. However, I also asked Paul Tracy and a few other team owners. Their answers were more about the purity and driver feel.
Why are F1 people so hung up on comparing the two types of cars. Are F1 people _that_ insecure about themselves? They are _different._ Very different. You wouldn't be making these comparisons with a Formula Vee, though it is a single seat, engine in the back, rear wheel drive, open cockpit, open wheel car, also. Right? For most race fans, all they want natural, organic, competition. Not the manipulated "pairity" of NASCAR, or the total lack of competition like F1.
True, seems to come with the territory though- the less downforce you have, the more exciting the racing is. BTCC is a great example of that, it's far slower than F1 or Indy, but there's far more close racing. Personally though, I love F1 because they're pushing the limits of what can be achieved more. More new ideas seem to come out of F1 than any other motorsport- many aren't applicable to road cars sure, but then I drive a V6 hybrid with paddle shift, adaptive suspension and a split rear diffuser amongst other things. There's something nice about seeing new tech on F1 cars and wondering if it'll be on my next car. I'm hoping for the big front wings next ☺
hmmmhmmmm F1 commentators doing Indycar am I missing something here, trying to apply F1 logic to Indycar saying bad TV or whatever have they check the TV rating???? Just because things are done differently from F1 does not mean it is "bad" does not mean Indycar is anything lesser than F1. Try to run an F1 in an oval against an Indy car see what happens, does it mean Indycar is superior to F1 or F1 is lesser than Indycar????
They all sound very defensive of Formula 1 and not understanding of IndyCar. They basically just extended the track. It wasn’t a “free for all” It was pre determined to have the runoff areas okay to go beyond. IndyCar is not under the microscopic rules of FIA, they do their own thing and it was the same for all drivers. It was a really good race.
But no one gives a reason why? Why is it necessary to run off 19? Is it because some drivers are skilled enough to do it well while others struggle? Sounding more and more like another American past time, making everything equal. No one can stand out, be simply better than the others, it's not fair.
Nope, all are skilled enough for it. It’s more because the Indy cars handle differently than F1 and found that extending into the runoff would make a better flow/better racing. I see people ranting with a “HOW DARE THEY?!” mentality rather than just ask (like you have👍🏻) about the reasoning. It’s just a different type of racing here. Some act as though we’re committing heresy to exceed “F1’s track limits” like the track is governed by the FIA/F1. It’s their first time at the circuit, so maybe next time they’ll paint some lines or whatever. Lol
So agree they got SO MANY facts and assumptions wrong about Indycar it is embarrassing! No way they have watch ANY Indycar! For AutoSport to air such crap is a little shocking
who are these three clowns?? they seem clueless!! how can you compare two series without bringing up the real difference and that is the budgets!! Mercedes, Red Bull, Ferrari spend upwards of 500 million a year and Penske, Ganassi, and Andretti spend 8-10 million per car. if all you want to do is kiss F1's feet, then why compare in the first place??
They are just different beasts. The politics and development in F1 is what makes it so dramatic and interesting for me. Indy is fun watching these guys trying to tame those beasts with less aids and no power steering.
This crew sounds so biased against Indy Car. The racing was CLEARLY much better top to bottom at COTA. Imagine if Grosjean won for Haas, who basically buys all their parts from Ferrari - you'll all be praising that the midfield has caught the "Big 3" in F1. Well just about anyone on the grid in Indy Car can, and has won. Colton Herta races for Harding Steinbrenner Racing, which is a customer of Andretti Autosport and he became the youngest Indy Car winner in history. Don't get me wrong, I love both sports... but jumping to "which is faster is better" argument just seems wrong. Of course F1 is (much) faster. But I don't think that's the point...
I agree. What they didn't point out is that Indy cars are faster in a straight line. IRL is a much more prescriptive car; F1 is more open and pretty much a much function of how much money do you have? A lot less wing and downforce in IRL - and smaller tires. Having said all that, I don't care. I love both forms of open wheel racing. They're just different, not one better than the other.
It has nothing to do with fairness. It's just a comparison of the 2 series as they are. Take it for what it is. Just comparing the speeds of different cars around a track isn't a reason to get upset. It doesn't mean one is better than the other they're just talking about the differences.
i've watched Indycar the last few seasons, where are all these overtakes everyone talks about? There really isn't that many, maybe because they are mostly street circuits, i can't bring myself to watch the oval racing.
@@cyberbird451 that's your loss. I'm from an F1/road course background too, but got introduced to oval racing quite early. I look forward to the ovals in the Indy schedule more than alot of the road courses. It gets butt clenchingly mad.
@@cyberbird451 Friend i watch both F1 and Indycar! If you compare the overtakes Indycar is 100s ahead a year that is just the truth! Like you I only watch Indycar on road course races and no oval races save the Indy 500
A full comparison would factor in costs. F1 cars alone range from $50 to $100m a copy. Indy Cars around $15m. With all that money F1 cars are about 15% faster ... on a very rough average that about $4m a second. Indy Cars then don't seem that slow considering the cost benefit ratio. Of course F2 is a real bargain at about $340K. Spec series? Yes, but with the stratification between the haves and have nots in the last remaining manufactures formula series the allure of bespoke teams, after 40 years of following the sport, is waning.
I actually liked the way indy car did it, but I'm an American. As far as the racing goes indy car provides a much better race. I love F1, but they have got to figure out this aero to allow overtaking.
It's amazing how "Track Limits" has always been one of the most controversial topics in Sim Racing, and here we are talking about two world leading Physical Racing series having the same problem, and possibly in an even worse condition than the Simulators. Over the last decade almost all of the advancement in Simulators has gone into the various Penalty Systems, and at this rate it looks we may very well go through a period where Sim Racing is outright more competitive than Physical Racing.
One thing they forget is that Indycars have significantly less horsepower (something around 25% less). It should be interesting when they get the next generation of engine.
F1 cars have much less HP than they used to. M Schumacher still holds lap records from 15 years ago. Even so, in that era the regulations were designed to slow the cars for “safety” reasons. For example, the narrower tyres that had the three grooves cut in to reduce grip levels. But, also they were slowed artificially because if the cars were allowed to reach their true potential it would reduce overtaking possibilities and hurt ratings. Currently, the engine and fuel limitations do that job so much so, 15 year old lap records still stand.
@@Squashed8Ball What does this have to do with the fact that Indycars have significantly less horsepower than current F1 cars? We're talking about current F1 cars and current Indycars at COTA.
@@Squashed8Ball It's pointless since they aren't racing anymore. The video, and what I said, is talking about current cars only. Bringing up the "old F1 is better" has nothing to do with the discussion. Also, F1 cars currently have about 1000 HP and the 2004 cars has 950 HP. We have equalled if not surpassed the old F1 cars.
F1 doesn’t count passing on first lap ! you could count all the passing in one season in F1 and that wouldn’t equal 4 -5 races in Indy because Indy is a spec series chassis and 2 engines Co. watch Monaco your on pole automatic win unless you blow up.
More than just Monaco. You may as well count qualifying as the race. There would be a lot less carnage in turn one. The only passing you see is the cars that didn't wreck in the first few corners, passing the ones who did wreck.
I thought the racing was great to be honest. The constant mid field battle with some cars pitting earlier vs cars pitting later made for great on track action as drivers fought for position while one was on hot tires and the other was on cold tires. It certainly was entertaining.
Motor racing in general has become too sanitised, it's become netball on wheels, can't do this can't do that, you touched me I'm dobbing, just let em race...with hand guns...
So you like watching Go-Karts go trundling around a circuit? I don't. Indy Pole time 1.46 hahahahahahaha ROLLING ON FLOOR LAUGHING MY HEAD OFF! Lewis Hamilton in his Mercedes 1.32 for last years Pole. Fastes lap time of the race was 1.34. Aye just go away and enjoy your snorefest racing league whilst I enjoy the raw speed and power of Formula 1.
Indycar has a lot of potential but I want to see it with more horsepower. Somewhere around 850-900BHP. That would instantly double the excitement and give it the X Factor it needs to be a rival to F1 once more. Back in the late 90s they were close to 1000BHP, so there is a precedent for this.
@@ngc-fo5te even if that's true, who cares whether it's better or not. What's more important is "Is Indycar the best that it could be?" - the answer to that is a resounding no.
I'm a fan of both series. But I'd much rather to watch indycar rather than formula one. F1 is just a boring race. One of 6 cars will win. Indycar, you have no idea who's gonna win.
Ed Sheeran knows much more about auto sport than I imagined.
Vegan Ed with better eyes😎
As does Phil Neville.
😂😂😂😂
Hahahaha there's always someone ripping on one of the lads
😆😅
How do they not even mention the youngest driver to ever win an Indycar Race? Congrats Colton Herta.
and Powers car lost him the race, not the wreck beforehand..
@@ResortDog It was the wreck, even if the car didn't break no way was he making up the spots to contend again. Same thing happend to Rossi except he didn't break, I think he just cracked the top 10, should have been podium. Listen to Powers interview at the end he'll tell you the same thing. IndyCar needs to re-think its pit rules.
Good point, though euros think that Indy cars are a lower class of open wheel because of the Specs. F1 is who ever spends the most is in the top 3. You will never see a F1 driver finish in the top three even if he is starting in the middle of the pack
Easily - it really wasn't the point of the video. They're looking at how Indy used the track differently, not at the race results. You'll find a results video somewhere else.
@@CattoRayTube The results of the race shows how the sport uses the track differently. Has a rookie won an f1 race at COTA? No
*F1* can learn a *_LOT_* from the *IndyCar* onboard camera... so much more exciting !!
F1 cars have had onboard cameras since the 90's... F1 just doesn't show onboard footage as often as Indy Car
F1 cars have had onboard camera since the 90’s...
@@Perifroog NO SHIT! 3:37 is what he's talking about, F1 doesn't have that and it is wayyy better than F1 onboard cameras... If you guys actually watched the video or IndyCar you would realize he's talking about 360° Degree onboard cameras, you can watch a car dive bomb on the inside and they will point the camera to the car next to it when they are wheel to wheel racing, which is constantly happening in Indy btw.
@@Perifroog no shit
F1 is much more exciting than Indy. Especially when Indy is on an oval track (boring AF).
Colton Herta
Colton Herta
Colton Herta
Absolutely ignored his incredible drive to his first IndyCar race win , 🙄🙄🙄
This whole video was just about all the things they like better about f1 and that's coming from an f1 fan. It seems like Indy fans liked the race and getting to see Colton win was awesome also the guy in blue has never been to a real Indy race. On ovals they go way faster than f1 obviously a stock chassis is going to get crushed at a circuit you also can't forget how big of a difference a Williams f1 vs a Ferrari or Mercedes
He got gifted the win but nonetheless impressive to pull a bit of a gap and maintain the lead after the safety car
He ran a perfect race, accidents aside. He had a perfect strategy, and drove the wheels off that car. I might be biased a bit, but I think will power qualifying on pole and dnf'ing is almost a meme at this point.
im a much bigger Indy fan and the no track limits looked awful on tv.
And Verstappen’s first race win was gifted to him. I still thought it was awesome to see
F1 isn't just about the driver as we all know the car makes 80% or more of the difference. F1 is about being the best one can under the rules.
I think if Indy runs in circuits of F1 I would enjoy Indy such as F1.
@kevin paul halliday The only downside to American racing is everything is about money. They have to get the sponsor ship in.
Wish you would have posted the finishing results. Like how many cars finished on the lead lap? Also many laps did the Indy Cars run compared to F1? Really kind of hard to compare a Indy Car to a F1 car. I am sure a F1 car has much more down force. And a Indy Car cost a lot less. I really don't care how fast they go. I would so much rather to see some close racing. And one thing you forgot was a rookie won the race! Which is most unlikely to happen in F1. I am hoping the FIA figure out what it takes to bring about some closer racing in the years to come "2021?". Here is to hoping!!
f1 has zero interest in moving to actual racing as the battle of multi million dollar engineering teams is working thus far for them.
Williams should consider switching to IndyCar.
your mothers name was William
As a pace car?
They'd probably do a much better job because of the spec chassis and aero. They wouldn't need as big of a budget as they do now in F1.
Their F1 car still wouldn't be competitive
F1 MIGHT consider switching to Indycar aero come 2021.
the sausage curbs at the austrian Red Bull ring i think are the best, they can be removed for bike racing and if f1 cars exceed them they ruin their lap and cause long term damage, like a Monaco barrier would.
absolutely, the sausage curb is the best solution.
Il Papa Vitielo what about grass?
Mason Kurien grass is dangerous. It’s too slippery. If somebody overshoots from the long straight, or if there is a Danny Ric and Verstappen style crash causing the cars to overshoot, grass wont stop the cars. Tarmac and gravel are the best for that. The sausage curb allows you to keep the tarmac while discouraging people to drive on it
Sausage curbs are also iffy because they have been known to launch cars into the air or the cars getting stuck on them and it becomes a shit show
Gravel traps?
F1 and Indycar should not be compared, but enjoyed seperately.
Jeroen as the two highest points of open wheel racing it really isn’t a comparison between the two but it still is interesting to see the differences
They're comparable because they're both popular open wheel single seater racing series that both use turbocharged V6 engines. Either way I still like both.
@@13anomalous16 ...Except one's hybrid, one is not
Indycar should be compared to F2 to see how much faster F2 is with indycar
That’s like saying we shouldn’t compare MotoGP and SBK. IndyCar and F1 are the two top open wheel racing series in the world, they always have been. We know that IndyCar is going to be slower because a) it’s essentially a spec series, and b) the budgets in IndyCar are a lot lower than F1, like waaaaaay lower. But a lot of F1 drivers end up racing in IndyCar (or CART back when it was a thing), and some IndyCar/CART drivers even make the leap to F1 (like Jacques Villeneuve and Juan Pablo Montoya), so I think making comparisons is fair.
I enjoy Indycar and F1 but always thought the speed comparison was silly. Just look at the cost of the cars and you'd guess what the gap would be. I just find Indycar more fun to watch and the drivers generally more likable. F1 will always remain the pinnacle of motorsports and an exercise in excess, which is fun in its own way.
Dominic Mako Well said
While I love to marvel at the technological advancements and solutions clever engineers come up with I also don't want to watch a predictable parade. In short, I want to have my cake and eat it too.
Yeah it's amazing how much more likeable the Indycar gang are.
That and speed has deliberately been taken out of the indycars for safety and "competitiveness"
@@hengineer same goes for f1. They nerfed the hell out of themselves, they could be at least 3-5 seconds faster than now
Solution to turn 19 is simply
A temporary tire wall about 5 feet away from the outside curb . But I do love the IndyCar "have at it boys" approach .
Completely agree!!!
Put a crowd of crazy rallye spectators there. Anyone who doesn't want to kill someone will have to take a proper line.
@@Sp4mMe lol nah
It would slow the race down to much. Having to red flag the race every other lap to send out the marshal's with mops and buckets to clean up the track .
Or some nails, it could ruins someone's race.
It was kind of a joke in my book...I appreciate how it avoided excessive penalties that leaves a bad taste in peoples' mouths, but it sorta raises the question of why the white lines and curbs matter anywhere on the track if they don't matter at turn 19.
Blaming Hinch for that caution is hilarious. I expected some European bias, but that’s laughable.
10 seconds slower .. then Williams can win.
In order to finish first, first you have to finish.
John Johansen *slow clap*
@@ItsMeeJon thank you, Sir!
14s in quali/race pace
with bigger tyres, drs and ers, yeah.
Marcus Ericsson quali times-- Indycar 2019: 01:48.425 vs F1 2018 01:35.536
13+ seconds slower. David Land did an awesome video to compare several COTA lap times of different racing series cars. Interesting numbers. F1 is the undisputed pinnacle of racecars but NOT the pinnacle of wheel-to-wheel racing. Indycar trumps it in that category for sure. I love both disciplines for completely different reasons.
Couldn't agree more! F1 technology is amazing but the racing is more driver oriented in indy. Hate how no one can follow in F1
Back in 2014, the Chevy Indycar tested at COTA and had F1 mid-field times. But that aero produced F1 single file/strung out racing. The new reduced downforce aero allows driver talent to come to the forefront, such as the hated Will Power. The biggest difference between the two series is not the engine, or the drivers, its the downforce levels.
Jeremy Thurman thats more to do with the horrific 2014 f1 cars
mathias gudme agreed. But that shows the difference in the willing directions of the two series. Since 2014, f1 has gotten intentionally faster, and Indycar has gotten intentionally slower. One things for certain, I think the fans of both series miss the monster 1000 hp plus producing V8’s.
Jeremy Thurman i Think both series has done the right thing
Both Ericsson and Rosenquist said the Indycars are much more physical to drive because you are on the edge all the time.
If you aren't on the edge in a racing car or even any professional sport then you simply aren't fast enough or good enough. Sounds to me that Indy car just suits them better
Find one cars are also raced on the edge. F1 drivers are the best on the planet
it is bassically no power steering.
@@pierrepaniagua Actually no, it's been said many times by F1 drivers that F1 seem easier to handle because of the Power steering and other aids. Indy is much more physical because the lack of power steering, Ericsson mentioning that his arms would definitely be sore after the Indy race at COTA.
@@fasterandnoiser And low downforce.
Wait...so are you guys trying to tell me an F1 car, that has $100million worth of development and factory backed engines...is...faster?...than a $5-10million Indycar??? MIND BLOWN
The fact is that this was an indycar classic, and I had more fun watching the youngest driver ever to win a race in series history, than in a long time with F1. I love both, they're just different, I watch them for different reasons, but Indycar deserves much more respect as a series.
This. It's apples and pears. They are similar, but very different. The Indycar is an older platform that doesn't get redesigned every year. Less power, less downforce, heavier, no power steering...they are just different animals that look alike. Both are top notch, just different...and I'll watch both every weekend (along with F2, F3, Formula Renault, GT, Sprint Cars, midgets, DTM, WEC, IMSA, etc.).
@@StinkyCheeseYodeler totally agree, I like the simplicity of Indycar vs. f1, but don't get me wrong I love the technology of f1 too. Indycar on the whole though is objectively a more competitive series, I mean it could be argued that Penske and Andretti are pretty dominant atm, but I never get the feeling that the same driver is going to start on pole and speed off into the distance. The best thing about Indycar is its unpredictability, which is why the championship fight has gone down to the last race for the last few seasons.
I think if F1 could learn something from Indycar, it’s that Indycar does a pretty good job on their small budget.
Hahahahaha
So do F2.
(Formul 1 cars are all prototypes.)
this is fucking retarded. indy is a spec series, f1 is a development series. wtf do you expect?
You’re all missing the point
@@kukuc96 There's little they can do on R&D as this is a spec series.
I was never a F1 fan but lately I’ve appreciate F1 more. Grew up watching NASCAR, IndyCar & NHRA. More racing is always better.
I've always watched F1 and now IndyCar is live on British TV i've started watching that too, love it.
For me it seems that F1 and IndyCar have different priorities. F1's focus is very much on tactics and ruthless competitiveness (off the track as well as on) whereas the main focus of IndyCar seems to be entertainment and the overall spectacle. Not saying that F1 doesn't have entertainment, or that IndyCar doesn't have tactics, they both have them in abundance, but just that their main focus is slightly different. I grew up watching F1 but found that IndyCar was quite easy to get into, whereas I can understand why IndyCar fans might struggle a bit more to get into F1. There always seems to be something happening in IndyCar whereas in F1 a race may pivot on a single pitstop.
I agree, I think that's why they compliment each other and it makes it good to follow both. They are both a completely different take on premier motorsport.
Couldn’t agree more. F1 keeps me yelling at the TV but Indycar is just a pleasure to watch
@mike a F1 has always been like that to a certain extent. The only way it'll improve is when the teams stop having a say in the regulations.
I'm a huge fan of both series, but one thing refreshing was to see how much the driver's have to physically wrestle the Indy car around the track. For me, it puts much more on the driver when compared to F1, which is much more on the engineers.
Nope!
Hahaha! You clearly don't know how Formula 1 works.
F1 drivers have to deal with a lot higher G's going through curves since they have more downforce and therefore go faster. IndyCar drivers don't have power steering and require more arm movement and control than F1. The series require a bit different skills.
No, it's just more visible. Take a look at an F1 steering wheel to see what an F1 driver has to manage and adjust. Also, because of the huge downforce and lighter weight of an F1 car it means that they're much more sensitive and much more on a knife edge. The problem is that it doesn't show up very well on TV and only really becomes apparent when you listen to the drivers describe it.
@@ReclusiveDuck Or when you watch a professional driver who isn't used to F1 embarrass themselves with either a spin or a pathetic lap time.
Why would you even compare the two? Cheers though
Because they can learn from each other. It need not be a case of judging one to be better or worse than the other.
For fun
They r both open wheelers
It's fun to compare. You don't often get to look at two different evolutions of the same racecraft and compare them in the exact same circumstance. If you had a chance to compare DTM/Super GT and Aussie V8 Supercars on the same track in racing conditions I feel that the same sort of comparison could be warranted.
Why? DTM and VASC are different. You can see that right from the aero. They already don't compare. Who puts on good enough shows that draw fans is all that matters. The sooner people stop getting hung up on trying to compare the incomparable, and pay attention to the race in front of them, then we will all enjoy all motorsports for what they are. Keep trying to divide, that's when people get frustrated, throw up their hands, and go fishing.
I really enjoy this channel, but this video reeks of them trying to sell me their opinion. Indycar put on a damn good show, and the F1 crowd doesn't seem to want to admit it :/ I watch both series for different reasons. Indycar has been putting on a great show for years and F1.... hasn't so much.....
I mean when one team dominates in any sport it gets kinda boring
@@DevinEMILE it's more than that, current F1 cars surrender wheel to wheel action and overtaking for speed
I liked the no track limits...fun for a spectator
yea it looks kinda mad which for me is good
I agree looks crazy and great for mistakes and overtakes...
that free-for-all at turn 1 reminds me of the old Cleveland race--do they still run that?--with wide turns that allowed multiple lines through the corners and provided plenty of overtaking. Refreshing to see after the F1 races (although I love those as well).
FiddlerSteve no,haven't for years
TBH I wasn't really feeling the no track limits thing -- you may not like the design of the tracks, but the track is the track, you know? I like the wall analogy, and challenging the drivers more by keeping them on the course.
indy car engine = $275,000; F1 engine $20,000,000. its a curiosity to compare the two on the same track, but it is like comparing a go cart to a 911.... by the way though, Indy is about the drivers, F1 is about the cars....
John Monsalve couldn’t agree with you more! Also I’m pretty sure Indy is down on power about 200-300 hp currently (they’re looking to get that hp number to 1000 in the near future) and has lots less downforce, and they’re overall smaller cars with skinnier tires. So the comparison isn’t exactly fair lol. Indy doesn’t even have power steering!
Battle of manufacturers vs a battle of drivers.
@@z33tanner That would also translate: You don't need to know anything about cars to enjoy IndyCar, but if you do and if you like engineering, NOTHING is better than Formula 1.
@@z33tanner F1 is both.
@connor gagnon that‘ the point! You sum up the differences between the two series better than a comparison like in the video
Off track 1x
Haha. That's exactly what I was thinking. I've been playing iRacing for too long.
Or a slow down
Frickin Porsche curves....
Looks like your car is toast. Press and hold the reset button.
This is ridiculous. 3 guys not-so-subtly trying to paint F1 as the superior motorsport when the IndyCar race last weekend clearly showed that the racing is superior and the cars are more exciting to watch. You’re off your rocker if you honestly believe that it’s harder to drive an F1 car than an IndyCar. Harder to find those last crucial tenths? Maybe. Harder to drive? Absolutely not.
That Ic has always had f1 rejects or those looking for a final paycheck at the end of their career suggests its easier for the top drivers.
I think a lot of that is fair. There is also a catagory of very good but financially unsupported drivers who can't get into f1 but can get into an even win other series where they don't need to bring money.
My broad view is that f1 draws from the world, IC broadly is North America and ex-f1/f2/failures (many of whom do well there suggesting the class gap) F1 has a global talent pool and unsurprisingly the best there are probably better than any rival series. F1 doesn't get other series failures.
Thats not a comment on which is more fun to watch of course.
@@kukuc96 No, you have it 180 backwards. Marcus Ericcson said in an interview at the race the cars are much harder to drive and be quick in without the aids of F1, and so has JPM in the past. He has said in F1 you pretty much jump back in and just steer, whereas Indycar is on the edge much more. You can make big mistakes in f1 and the cars just scrub and slow down whereas indy cars and their small stiff sidewalls are gone. The reason you see consant steering wheel adjustment (which mostly isn't pro-active adjustment) is because the manual steering doesn't dampen the bumps coming back up to the driver, whereas f1 power steering absorbs that (along with those tall sidewalls - should be interesting on the new tire coming).
Ya when they glossed over that the f1 race there was pretty good - it wasn't. 2 on track passes I think in the front running teams. The track limit deal is too bad because the right answer is to have grass or something slick outside 19 for awhile to be an actual deterrent by costing lap time. Or a wall, thats worked for decades!
You have driven both types of car?
The racing was 10x of anything I saw last year in F1. There was actual passing. We have two engine manufacturers that are both competitive unlike F1. Really, what wasn't to like? Sound of the cars? I dunno, sounded good to me.
But those cars are so ugly.. Australian Formula Vee is better then, because it is also evenful, more friendly atmosphere and cars looks much better and classier.
Wow. A whole 2 engine choices. F1 has more
@@ItsMeeJon it wasn't the count, it was the fact they are near even so you aren't just watching Mercedes win every week. F1 is dead boring.
@@ItsMeeJon Next year BMW is joining Indycar.
speed of cars, drivers, track limits being even more stupid than f1, the cars themselves.
90's CART was the best, too bad they got kicked out of Indy. F1 is always more glamorous and exotic, but 90's CART was the best racing.
Fuck yea 👍
crusherbmx agreed
Little Al and the Chevy V8s I remember.
Got to love the purity and simplicity of Indycar. I consider track limits a commentators talking point but not something fans should be caring about. Rather have this madness than arbitrary 5 second penalties. The track ends where the barrier begins... And by the way, great story about Colton Herta winning. The American Verstappen ;-)
I tend to agree, but only in the sense that it's the track that should penalize drivers leaving the track, not the series. There should be gravel traps, grass, or kerbs that drivers hit if they leave the track. There shouldn't be 100m of paved runoff in every direction. Having the racing line 3 or 4 car widths off the track is absurd.
@@TMJ32 Actually COTA Is the only track on the Indy car circuit with a run off.
I have been an F1 fan since Jim Clark's breakout season in 1963. Been a fan ever since. Have NOT been an Indycar fan for the most part. I have been to both Austin and Indy for the USGP and there is something to be said about being at the one place on the planet at one moment in time where the most talent, bravery, money and technology all come together in a single event. Only F1 under Bernie could do that. "Back in the day" we used to watch F1 so we could see the "drivers work out their issues with one another" on the track, something very difficult to do on a circle track aside from planting your opponent into the wall. In F1 you had the kamikaze which was employed by both Senna and Prost at the same track in differing years. We had Piquet, Schumi, Irvine, and Hunt going to fisticuffs to better clarify "the rules." You had Graham Hill, and a host of others, who loved to spray rocks in the face of someone following too closely to prove a point. The fact is this, we watch to watch brave men drive undrivable machines around an impossible circuit while working out their personal issues with one another. Today, the F1 soap opera is totally "off the track" talking about engines, rules, signings, et al. The soap opera needs to be ON THE TRACK. Indycar has it right these days, if they wanna go out there, let 'em run and we'll watch 'em work it out. The sterility that has become F1 under the new regime will kill it and as long as commentators like you continue to rationalize this pablum they call entertainment, they will remain in their safe spaces and eventually we will all go elsewhere for excitement. Under these constrained, watered down, throat choking rules and culture that constitutes F1 today even Shakespeare surpasses it for thrills, interest, and mystery.
I think within it's field of drivers Indy truly sorts out the best of who was on the track. With F1 it's proven, at least the past 20 years it's whoever has the best car. There are a number of drivers that would win as consistently as Hamilton if they were fortunate enough to get with the right team at the right time. The only Indy driver that ever cried as much as Hamilton was Danica Patrick.
@@maya_coqsalonga Well said...
Honestly Indycar and F1 are two very different series. Indycar and F1 are both incredible motorsports and Indy car may not look it due to the aftermath of the dreaded "split", but it's slowly getting back on its feet. They're planning on increasing the engine displacement to a 2.4 liter Twin Turbo V6 capable of around 900 hp with push to pass and also are rumored to be trying to grab another engine manufacturer. Both F1 and Indy are two of the top series in the world imo. One is a manufacturers and engineers competition and the other a full on battle to see which driver is the best. Also, saying F1 drivers are better than Indycar drivers isn't really the case necessarily. If that were true than Ericsson should be having a field day with the rest of the drivers when really he hasn't, and when people bring up Alonso doing so well in the 500 before his engine blew up, Alonso is one of those generational talents where he could excel at any Motorsport he wanted to like a Mario Andretti. Both are great series at what they are trying to do.
Excellent points!!! I could not agree more.
1) relative speeds do not mater. They are both formula governed and not open classes so the rules of the class dictate the limits of what can be done. So comparing them on speed is pointless.
2) the track limit issue makes Indy look farcical. Why bother. Put gravel down. If that’s a motorcycle problem then route the cycles a different way or don’t race then there. The rules of “making a device to do two things means they do neither very well” holds for a track as well.
tell the FIA that and stop bitchin. if it’s paved use it. that’s always been the mentality of american open wheel racing. this isn’t a problem on the other courses they go to where if you go off track, you’re in the grass, sand or the wall *cough FIA, get rid of the parking lot tracks cough*
Europeans have a rule fetish for sure. Why do we need the same rules for every series? IndyCar isn't FIA, and most of their circuits have no runoff like FIA tracks do.
F1 cars are like an SR-71, just go as fast as it can, cost no object. IndyCar is like an F-15, made for toughness and dog fighting.
FIA have been around for too long, they have lost their purpose
Not arguing your point man but more like F1 is a Raptor and Indy like a Hornet
Look at the list of fatalities at Indy then in F1. Much as I grumble f1's rules work - Indy's are shameful.
Since my comparison period was not in the 70s thats neither here nor there.
Tbh their attitude to safety is has been a long way behind f1 not just in rules but in car safety.
I'd be for more coverage of Indycar if you guys happen to find time.
Much better drivers in indycar! no power steering just raw talent unlike F1
krk1291
Yup lower downforce too and no tire warmers.
IndyCar does look interesting to me, just not the oval race tracks. That's utterly boring for me as spectator.
Nexu Jin That’s understandable. Ovals are just something you get accustomed to, if you give them the chance. They can create some pretty exciting races (Gateway; Iowa; Texas).
I've never watched an Indy race but every time I get exposed to it through youtube videos or Fernando Alonso having another crack at it, I get the impression that Indy is the great spectacle that F1 used to be when F1 was a good spectacle and not a politicized parade of cars that never overtake each other and get penalized when they do.
You would be correct. Here is what I know as a spectator. I have been a die hard F1 fan for over 40 years. I have been to over 60 grand prix. This year I bailed on Montreal and went to the Indy race in Toronto. It was quite refreshing. I was able to get close to the cars on track and was able to get to view them from multiple corners with a general admission ticket. My grandstand seat did not cost a fortune and supporting races were spectacular. Now the racing. The cars made more noise and the racing was close. If I wanted value for my money. Indy car would get it. F1 needs to rethink.
on board cameras are just so much better compared to f1 ones.
The number of cars in the race makes it all much more interesting. F1 has far too few cars on the grid.
F1 has 20, there were 24 indy cars at Austin. 4 cars is where you draw the line?
Both should have a lot more cars on the grid. F1 needs to make it easier to field a team and Indycar needs another engine supplier to help add another 6-10 cars.
Indy is a spec series so ofc ur gonna get more teams cuz its cheap. All that cars at Indy is pretty incredible though
@@dougiedavis4159 There can be anywhere between 22 to 33 cars being lined up on the grid
If it’s paved, use it. If it doesn’t make your car work better, then don’t. Why punish for everything, and what looked bad about it? I thought using the runoff area was exciting!
Tiny note about the speed difference. Should really compare race laps. F1 allows teams to turn up the engine and run unlimited DRS only in qualifying, so a pole time is always several seconds faster than a fastest lap. In Indycar, they aren't. So it would make sense to compare fastest lap times. Fastest race lap was 1:37.7 for F1 by Vettel last year and the Indycar pole was 1:46.0. So an Indycar is about 9% slower. Of course, I would also bet you a lot of Money that Lewis Hamilton will win the F1 championship, and I have no idea who will win the Indycar championship.
Why aren't you comparing fastest lap with fastest lap in the race.
An IndyCar is lighter in qualifying too, so you're not making a like for like comparison.
Ehhhh? That's even making your comparison worse! Of course Pole lap is faster than the race lap, and that's normal for setting a perfect lap just to get the pole. And now you say we must compare F1's race lap to IndyCar's Pole lap? Totally absurd. Pole lap to Pole lap. That's what we get to see the Speed difference.
and no
unlimited DRS has been removed more than 5 years ago
have you been under a rock?
bot
@@AlistairMaxwell77Indycar doesn't even have an advantage in fuel, F1 cars are fuelled light for quali as well. 5 laps max
Wow, that is a snobbish review of an event that had actual overtaking instead of pit stop passes.
Track limits rule in IndyCar allowed drivers to actually push. No nanny state FIA rules. IndyCar lets the driver with the biggest "attachments" take the chance.
I'm coming for you Ricky Bobby...
121bham why do south american and european drivers come here and drive. They say they like to actually have to control the cars here,no power steering and less down force
Way too political in F1 and we all know 80%of the teams have no chance of winning a Championship We both know there are several F1 drivers who would do just fine in 1 of those Mercedes. ...but..........
This is not a debate where you are comparing apples with apples...
One has all the tech aids and is built to go around corners...the other is built to withstand the forces of going around corners on a track at 240mph and its associated impacts - hence one will be quicker!
One looks like a pile of junk and the other look like racing cars!
One sounds like a vacuum cleaner and the other sounds like a racing car!
One has a budget of upwards of £300million and the other £3million (per car).
One has a "blessed" egotistical idiot and the other has a series of down-to-earth skilled drivers...plus the rubbish Max Chilton!
But the biggest thing about this ridiculous comparison is that one offers "racing" and a "spectacle"...the other is a processional demonstration.
Disclaimer: I am a massive F1 fan and watch most of the coverage here in the UK weekend in, weekend out but this video and comparisons are ridiculous. Comparing to F2 is disrespectful; Alexander Rossi, Juan Montoya, Marcus Ericsson and Sebastien Bourdais are ex-F1 drivers who will say driving an IndyCar is more fun than an F1 car plus all its politics. The acid test is when and if Fernando Alonso does more races!
@@RastaWayne-di4sj - The blessed "egotistical idiot is that idiot Lewis Hamilton!!!
Put in a removable wall |barrier for f1 and indy races at turn 19. Solved.
If Indy can deal with super tight tracks like Detroit, they can deal with a barrier on turn 19.
Just stop with the comparisons. Formula one is Formula 1 Indy car is IndyCar, we need diversity diversity is our strength.
@@lukemallory7832 probably because its not true. But after every atrosicy, its what our political and media class keep repeating.
@justsay no so let’s just all ward each other off and stay isolated? Lmao
@@lukemallory7832 literally evolution. Like not even a wrong use of literally it diversity is incredibly important in evolution which is a good thing
@@dannyocean9673 never said that. I said diversity is not a strength. That is a lie. Having islam in your country is not a strength.
The people who believe it's a strength are usually white middle class liberals who always live in the least diverse areas.....
@justsay no you really edited your reply to this? I preferred the first one... less bullshit
I'd take wheel to wheel racing over speed any day. Having faster cars is just a stupid dick measuring contest at the end of the day and makes racing less exciting.
If they had no track limits why didn,t someone just straight line the first section, easy
Happy to give up 14-15% of speed for a far better show. F1 is pretty tough to watch these days unless you like Mercedes.
T Bone then watch indycar
@@FullOilBarrel Get bent out of shape much? Must live a charmed life to have someones comment get you upset
@@FullOilBarrel, uh, your a sharp one, that was the point.
Marcus Ericsson said hands down the Indycar was much harder to drive physically. Alonso also commented similarly when he tested before the Indy 500, Marco Andretti told him the steering on the road course was even worse.
Comparing lap times between the two series without going into the details of the cars is useless. A indycar weighs more than an F1 car, has 400-500 less H.P., half the downforce and the softest tire is still harder than the hard F1 tire. So context of why one is faster or slower matters.
Anish The current Indycar makes 600-650 hp. I'm not that sure what F2 makes or much about that series. I don't see a lot of coverage of F2 here in the states. F2 might have less hp and the same or less aero. I do know the current body kit for Indycar lost 1500lbs of downforce from the previous aero kits 2 yrs ago.
@अनिश् Indycar teams are allowed to push a ludicrous amount of development into Shock/Spring/Damper development which helps alot, and I believe that Indycar also has a bit less drag in their current package.
Let's see what a 1995 vintage Champ Car could do with an authentic Cosworth turbo. Gerald Forsythe to the white courtesy phone, please, Gerald Forsythe to the white courtesy phone, please...
Yeah, or better a 2005 F1 V10; fastest race cars ever.
@@davidtatelo, the weight and horsepower formulae were different.
Hey IndyCar! Didn't think you guys would take a look at this.
IndyCar is definitely much better than FORMULA MERCCEDES!
You don't like F1 because one manufacture wins too many races but you like the series were one manufacturer wins every race. Have you considered seeking mental health treatment?
09Libertarian I’m following F1 since late 70s, where a fierce competition was between the teams every season until 2014 and the V6 era, where Mercedes was developing their hybrid technology since 2007. They get a pass by the FIA as manufacturer, and guess what? The others were not allowed to develop their V6 and The FIA created tokens, and every team was restricted using enough tokens for development. Where is the fairness here? At the same time Mercedes enjoyed their full DOMINANCE never seen to date!!! Every average driver can win WCC in Merc, not the other way around. At the same time, IndyCar teams are allowed to compete in complete fairness, so we have a wheel to wheel fights in every race! The reason why I said what I said. Capeech? No who needs a mental health check? BTW, I’m expert in insulting people and be a warrior of keyboards, but brings FACTS on the table, so bring me facts! Cheers
@@Sumotori. Wow dude, you haven't noticed Ferrari in F1? Bye bye, take your ignorant babel elsewhere. Idiot
I've been watching every F1 race and quali since 2009, and every session since 2010, while only dabbling in Indycar over the years, watching it more and more regularly over the last few years (maybe watching 3-4 races per year). I'm really starting to think that Indycar is the most challenging single seater championship in the world, moreso than F1. On top of the physical challenge of lacking power steering, the drivers have to do so much to get the cars quickly and efficiently in and out of every single corner, the braking phases are longer, and they seem to struggle more for traction than F1 cars do, and honestly, that makes the cars a lot more interesting to watch, and it's easier to see that the drivers are REALLY having to work for it. Also, the pit stops being slower (and more variable in length) in Indycar, and having more stops than a typical F1 race, means the order jumbles and tumbles around a lot more in Indycar than an F1 race, and that really is independent of how the cars generate performance or what tracks they use...longer pitstops is always going to push drivers around the order a lot more. Lastly, homologated aerokits and all that makes the cars closer and almost surely much cheaper to develop.
It makes me want to see F1 lose downforce, honestly, and find smart ways to reduce the gaps in performance between teams. Your recent podcast on a radical F1 rules revamp with a max. downforce target and limited package homologation during the season sounds like a good approach the more I think of it, honestly (though I'd like to see more than 1 update per year for F1...an initial car plus 3 updates would split the season into "quarters" for each team that would be entertaining to track, and keep car development part of the F1 story without being an unlimited resource drain like it is now). Of course, I still want to see F1 implement cost caps...
Matt Clark well said,I have to agree
Well thought out commentary. I am a fan of both series as well as other motorsport. I was at COTA for F1 several times and for the IndyCar race this past weekend. I have also been to Texas motor speedway for IndyCar several years ago(and might go back again this year)....that is some crazy stuff.
Well said. My biggest qualm with Indy is the pit fiasco when a yellow comes out. They really need to be allowed to pit under yellow. It’s amazing to see Colton Herta win and race and he did a stellar job, but it’s hard to ignore that he was significantly helped due to the caution
How it compared? Easy. Instead of parades, we saw racing. Instead of the big budget team casually strolling to victory each weekend with their number one driver, we saw a nobody take a rookie win with a low budget new team. So yeah, nothing like F1. And as a former F1 fan, I thoroughly enjoyed the racing Indy provided. Oh yeah, and Indy has infinitely better sounding exhaust.
F1 is faster. Indy car is more exciting.
This has been the case since the Hybrid era began.
Always been faster. The truth is the hybrid era fucked up racing there.
Indycar was always more exciting. But also they might have been faster on several occasions, most probably in 1989, 1995 and 1998.
this comparison is so useless
Basically a troll video, Indycar tries to differentiate the series and this video premise ignores that. The extra 300 kg side pods and purposely less down force than before makes any comparison moot.
Biased much?
These guys don't mention that there is a much wider inter team gap in F1 than IndyCar. This gap washes away driver talent in F1. I reckon that drivers matter more in the total performance equation in IndyCars than in F1 machines. Also a claim was made that F1 cars were on the razors edge relative to IndyCars, I have to say that I don't see much evidence of that claim. Either IndyCars are less stable or more likely they are closer in performance causing the drivers to push them harder than F1 pilots have to push their rides. CART in the big bad turbo days of the 80's and 90's were a perfect foil for the sanitized world of F1. I would love to see IndyCar gravitate in that direction.
I was looking at the highlights from Austin and Marcus Ericsson still getting his ass handed to him like formula 1
The bitching about the Turn 19 track limits seems really stupid. COTA is a good track by F1 standards, but the standards for F1 aren't going to apply properly for most other series in the world because of how F1 machines are engineered. Indycar saw that and adapted accordingly, in the process opening up another overtaking zone and allowing the drivers to push much harder coming out of the 16-17-18 complex. Not to mention wrestling the cars under heavy breaking going into turn 19 with no driver aids whatsoever with reduced front and rear downforce would lead to innumerable drivers sliding wide in that turn anyway, as the cars in their current spec simply aren't built for that corner. Every lap you'd have guys getting pinged and punished for a situation they simply wouldn't have much control over. It would be like expecting a 1939-era F1 cars like the Auto Union Type-D to navigate the modern iteration of the Eau Rouge/Radillion complex with no issue during the entire event, and penalizing them the moment it's not perfect.
Sausage curbs and gravel traps work a treat to ensure track limits are adhered to.
If they don't want you driving somewhere they shouldn't pave it. All american tracks except COTA has grass and gravel. I know Europeans are obsessed with safety but it takes away from driver skill when you can fuck up a corner and just casually get back on track.
Spikes.
Max Verstappen would never finish a race if there were no run offs!
@@kukuc96 I agree with you, let's do away with motorcycles, they're ruining race tracks.
@@FD36 Boo, MotoGP is awesome.
As much as I like F1, I think they take themselves way too seriously. In typical European fashion. But Id imagine to the rest of the world, Indy car is probably seen as nothing more than open wheel nascar. But what Indy has that F1 doesnt, is pure racing.
I find Indycars so much more exciting than F1...
IndyCar 10x Better racing
Rai defending against Lewis last year got me more pumped.
What difference does it really make being 12 seconds or whatever, slower? Its harder to get the power down, there's less grip. It's more driver orientated in terms of skill. You can really tell these guys sitting down have never driven a racing car. An F1 car can take fast corners flat out with power steering and these cars are more driver influenced, so the guy on the right is wrong.
I personally asked the Max Chilton IndyCar garage why the technology is lacking, DRS, telemetry, aerodynamics. Interesting enough the answers I got were “it’s too expensive” or “not in the budget”. However, I also asked Paul Tracy and a few other team owners. Their answers were more about the purity and driver feel.
I’ve always wanted F1 cars to go around the proper Indianapolis Motor Speedway.
They cannot race in banked ovals as the "roll cage" blocks the drivers view.
I don't think they can now as they can't recharge. Plus a lot of them are afraid of the walls.
@@StinkyCheeseYodeler They are afraid of walls (SAFER Barriers) hence the miles of run off at T19
StinkyCheeseYodeler you mean like monaco
At about 245-250 mph.
Why are F1 people so hung up on comparing the two types of cars. Are F1 people _that_ insecure about themselves? They are _different._ Very different. You wouldn't be making these comparisons with a Formula Vee, though it is a single seat, engine in the back, rear wheel drive, open cockpit, open wheel car, also. Right? For most race fans, all they want natural, organic, competition. Not the manipulated "pairity" of NASCAR, or the total lack of competition like F1.
F1 is clearly technically superior in every way but the racing is often much better at Indy and hence more entertaining.
True, seems to come with the territory though- the less downforce you have, the more exciting the racing is. BTCC is a great example of that, it's far slower than F1 or Indy, but there's far more close racing.
Personally though, I love F1 because they're pushing the limits of what can be achieved more. More new ideas seem to come out of F1 than any other motorsport- many aren't applicable to road cars sure, but then I drive a V6 hybrid with paddle shift, adaptive suspension and a split rear diffuser amongst other things. There's something nice about seeing new tech on F1 cars and wondering if it'll be on my next car. I'm hoping for the big front wings next ☺
hmmmhmmmm F1 commentators doing Indycar am I missing something here, trying to apply F1 logic to Indycar saying bad TV or whatever have they check the TV rating???? Just because things are done differently from F1 does not mean it is "bad" does not mean Indycar is anything lesser than F1. Try to run an F1 in an oval against an Indy car see what happens, does it mean Indycar is superior to F1 or F1 is lesser than Indycar????
They all sound very defensive of Formula 1 and not understanding of IndyCar. They basically just extended the track. It wasn’t a “free for all” It was pre determined to have the runoff areas okay to go beyond. IndyCar is not under the microscopic rules of FIA, they do their own thing and it was the same for all drivers. It was a really good race.
Agree 100%
But no one gives a reason why? Why is it necessary to run off 19? Is it because some drivers are skilled enough to do it well while others struggle?
Sounding more and more like another American past time, making everything equal. No one can stand out, be simply better than the others, it's not fair.
Nope, all are skilled enough for it. It’s more because the Indy cars handle differently than F1 and found that extending into the runoff would make a better flow/better racing. I see people ranting with a “HOW DARE THEY?!” mentality rather than just ask (like you have👍🏻) about the reasoning. It’s just a different type of racing here. Some act as though we’re committing heresy to exceed “F1’s track limits” like the track is governed by the FIA/F1. It’s their first time at the circuit, so maybe next time they’ll paint some lines or whatever. Lol
@@mathewgruenholz Turn 19 separates the men from the boys, but that's not fair is it?
So agree they got SO MANY facts and assumptions wrong about Indycar it is embarrassing! No way they have watch ANY Indycar! For AutoSport to air such crap is a little shocking
who are these three clowns?? they seem clueless!! how can you compare two series without bringing up the real difference and that is the budgets!! Mercedes, Red Bull, Ferrari spend upwards of 500 million a year and Penske, Ganassi, and Andretti spend 8-10 million per car. if all you want to do is kiss F1's feet, then why compare in the first place??
IndyCar every time.F1 is sanitised to the absurd.
They are just different beasts. The politics and development in F1 is what makes it so dramatic and interesting for me. Indy is fun watching these guys trying to tame those beasts with less aids and no power steering.
@xxMLxx, the formula don't compare, so the basis to even compare performance isn't equal.
This crew sounds so biased against Indy Car. The racing was CLEARLY much better top to bottom at COTA. Imagine if Grosjean won for Haas, who basically buys all their parts from Ferrari - you'll all be praising that the midfield has caught the "Big 3" in F1. Well just about anyone on the grid in Indy Car can, and has won. Colton Herta races for Harding Steinbrenner Racing, which is a customer of Andretti Autosport and he became the youngest Indy Car winner in history. Don't get me wrong, I love both sports... but jumping to "which is faster is better" argument just seems wrong. Of course F1 is (much) faster. But I don't think that's the point...
I'm an F1 fan so as much as I love to bash Indy. Don't think these two can be compared fairly
I agree. What they didn't point out is that Indy cars are faster in a straight line. IRL is a much more prescriptive car; F1 is more open and pretty much a much function of how much money do you have? A lot less wing and downforce in IRL - and smaller tires. Having said all that, I don't care. I love both forms of open wheel racing. They're just different, not one better than the other.
It has nothing to do with fairness. It's just a comparison of the 2 series as they are. Take it for what it is. Just comparing the speeds of different cars around a track isn't a reason to get upset. It doesn't mean one is better than the other they're just talking about the differences.
Nico Hulkenberg may drive Indycar in 2020 or 2021
Indy had more overtakes
i've watched Indycar the last few seasons, where are all these overtakes everyone talks about? There really isn't that many, maybe because they are mostly street circuits, i can't bring myself to watch the oval racing.
@@cyberbird451 that's your loss. I'm from an F1/road course background too, but got introduced to oval racing quite early. I look forward to the ovals in the Indy schedule more than alot of the road courses. It gets butt clenchingly mad.
BUt not many high speed duels like in F1. Indy car looks slow that their overtaking is like overtaking in GT race.
@@cyberbird451 Friend i watch both F1 and Indycar! If you compare the overtakes Indycar is 100s ahead a year that is just the truth! Like you I only watch Indycar on road course races and no oval races save the Indy 500
@@cyberbird451 I only watched the Highlights for this race, and there it looked like people were overtaking each other quite a lot
All I see are a bunch of reasons why IndyCar is more fun to watch.
I'm honestly a fan of the relaxed track limit rule. I don't really think it's the biggest issue in the world.
A full comparison would factor in costs. F1 cars alone range from $50 to $100m a copy. Indy Cars around $15m. With all that money F1 cars are about 15% faster ... on a very rough average that about $4m a second. Indy Cars then don't seem that slow considering the cost benefit ratio. Of course F2 is a real bargain at about $340K. Spec series? Yes, but with the stratification between the haves and have nots in the last remaining manufactures formula series the allure of bespoke teams, after 40 years of following the sport, is waning.
I love IndyCar exactly for its RAW and PURE racing... our "snowflake" European approach drives me nuts...
all of you crying about PURE racing are just like homers dad yelling at a cloud, its pathetic
What? 😂😂 How are you bringing snowflake into motorsports?
Peter, this is motor racing at its finest - both F1 and IRL. Please leave the name calling to Nascar.
I actually liked the way indy car did it, but I'm an American. As far as the racing goes indy car provides a much better race. I love F1, but they have got to figure out this aero to allow overtaking.
no track limits looked awesome on tv
This race just proved that I should start watching IndyCar again. F1 somehow got more boring with the aero change.
if the track limit was a brick wall they would respect it
It's amazing how "Track Limits" has always been one of the most controversial topics in Sim Racing, and here we are talking about two world leading Physical Racing series having the same problem, and possibly in an even worse condition than the Simulators.
Over the last decade almost all of the advancement in Simulators has gone into the various Penalty Systems, and at this rate it looks we may very well go through a period where Sim Racing is outright more competitive than Physical Racing.
One thing they forget is that Indycars have significantly less horsepower (something around 25% less). It should be interesting when they get the next generation of engine.
Most important thing people should remember is that Indycar achieves what they do with fraction of the money.
F1 cars have much less HP than they used to. M Schumacher still holds lap records from 15 years ago. Even so, in that era the regulations were designed to slow the cars for “safety” reasons. For example, the narrower tyres that had the three grooves cut in to reduce grip levels. But, also they were slowed artificially because if the cars were allowed to reach their true potential it would reduce overtaking possibilities and hurt ratings. Currently, the engine and fuel limitations do that job so much so, 15 year old lap records still stand.
@@Squashed8Ball What does this have to do with the fact that Indycars have significantly less horsepower than current F1 cars? We're talking about current F1 cars and current Indycars at COTA.
YourItalianJob It has everything to do with it especially as you brought up the HP difference.
@@Squashed8Ball It's pointless since they aren't racing anymore. The video, and what I said, is talking about current cars only. Bringing up the "old F1 is better" has nothing to do with the discussion. Also, F1 cars currently have about 1000 HP and the 2004 cars has 950 HP. We have equalled if not surpassed the old F1 cars.
F1 doesn’t count passing on first lap ! you could count all the passing in one season in F1 and that wouldn’t equal 4 -5 races in Indy because Indy is a spec series chassis and 2 engines Co. watch Monaco your on pole automatic win unless you blow up.
More than just Monaco. You may as well count qualifying as the race. There would be a lot less carnage in turn one. The only passing you see is the cars that didn't wreck in the first few corners, passing the ones who did wreck.
Spoken like true, European, F1-centrists.
Sunday Indycar won, respect F1. A lot of overtakes and real battling. In F1 the car is too much important respect the driver.
So Indy car = F1.75
F1 is an engineers sport, Indy is a driver's sport. I like both, but Indy is so much better to watch.
I thought the racing was great to be honest. The constant mid field battle with some cars pitting earlier vs cars pitting later made for great on track action as drivers fought for position while one was on hot tires and the other was on cold tires. It certainly was entertaining.
I like Indycar better. F1 is over on lap 5.
F1 is suprerior in speed but Indy is suprerior in endurance enough said
Motor racing in general has become too sanitised, it's become netball on wheels, can't do this can't do that, you touched me I'm dobbing, just let em race...with hand guns...
as a spectator, i enjoy indycars much more than formula one.
So you like watching Go-Karts go trundling around a circuit? I don't.
Indy Pole time 1.46 hahahahahahaha ROLLING ON FLOOR LAUGHING MY HEAD OFF!
Lewis Hamilton in his Mercedes 1.32 for last years Pole. Fastes lap time of the race was 1.34.
Aye just go away and enjoy your snorefest racing league whilst I enjoy the raw speed and power of Formula 1.
@@hoggy2much999 yeah, where there's hardly any passing. it's all about pit stops and qualifying in formula 1, not really about racing.
Indycar race was 77.8 % much more exciting than f1
Indycar has a lot of potential but I want to see it with more horsepower. Somewhere around 850-900BHP. That would instantly double the excitement and give it the X Factor it needs to be a rival to F1 once more. Back in the late 90s they were close to 1000BHP, so there is a precedent for this.
It's already better than F1. F1 is a disaster at the current time.
@@ngc-fo5te even if that's true, who cares whether it's better or not. What's more important is "Is Indycar the best that it could be?" - the answer to that is a resounding no.
IndyCar is a Spec Series. There's no comparison between the 2.
Thats not a spec series
Semi-Spec, not full spec. You have two different engine manufacturers, and most of the teams run their own Shock/Damper programs.
I'm a fan of both series. But I'd much rather to watch indycar rather than formula one. F1 is just a boring race. One of 6 cars will win. Indycar, you have no idea who's gonna win.