Thread: Turbos or NAs?
View Single Post
Old 10 Mar 2008, 17:58 (Ref:2148534)   #58
Bob Riebe
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location:
Minnesota
Posts: 2,351
Bob Riebe User has been fined for unsportsmanlike behaviour!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teretonga
The truth is that CART grew to be the force that it was because from the 70's through till the late 80's all it had was the Cosworth DFV turbo that anyone could buy off the shelf...
That level playing filed contributed to it's growth and success. It wasn't until the Chevy deal that Penske did with Illmor that things started to change and we got a proliferation of manufacturers.
None of that really did the series any good because that was when the costs went through the roof for the teams.

What amazes me is that people remain blind to the lessons of history and repeat the same mistakes over and over again.

The most successful engine spec Indy ever had since the 60's was the 2.65 litre turbo specification. You can get an engine with that specification now at a very reasonable price so why would you go through the whole exercise over again..... and continue to be at the mercy of a major manufacturer whose involvement will only ramp up your costs?
You seem to love to ingnore anything except the Ford/Cosworth.
The Ford/Cosworth did not come about till the late seventies.

GEE how did racing survive all those years before Parnelli Jones tried one.

In 1977 There were 25 Offy based engines, 4 Ford/Cosworths, 3 Foyt/DOHC Fords and 1 blown AMC.

In 1980 there were 20 F/C at Indy

There was a serious attempt to use push-rod engines in the early eighties, led by Dan Gurney, but CART simply did its best to kill them, and finally simply eliminated Gurney, both cars and engines.

From the eighties to the nineties there was also Alfa Romeo, Buick, Chevy p-r V-6s, Honda, Judd, Porsche and various chassis. USAC' over-reaction to the p-r Ilmore/Merecedes was the start of the doldrums into same crap, same pile.

You have forgotten history.
Bob Riebe is offline  
Quote