2006 CCWS Silly Season

[drewdawg727]

Hmmmm i think i missed something here...
What's going on in 2007 with chassis'? And why would the grid therefore expand?
I feel like i just learned something entirely new

[Omega99]

It's going to be cheaper, and therefore easier to find funding for a car.

If you look at the explosion of interest in Toyota Atlantics for next year with the release of a cheaper package, you can see the potential for growth that may exist for champ car in '07. Nothing's definite, but it's absolutely the right move.

[GBoehm]

http://www2.presstelegram.com/sports/ci_3104341


This article also mentions the defection of team to Champ Car...... But something like that will probably come after the final race of the season for the other series.

[macdaddy]

The article mentions speculation of one of two things.
- A defecting team. (Ganassi?)
- A series sponsor. (RedBull? McDonalds?)

Hand me them shades.

[drewdawg727]

Originally Posted by Omega99

It's going to be cheaper, and therefore easier to find funding for a car.

If you look at the explosion of interest in Toyota Atlantics for next year with the release of a cheaper package, you can see the potential for growth that may exist for champ car in '07. Nothing's definite, but it's absolutely the right move.

I still don't follow...
Why is it going to be cheaper? It seemed like something like this would be all over the news, but i haven't heard anything...

I mean ever since Champcar was reduced to one engine and one chassis, i don't see how there could be a significant change like that.

[macdaddy]

The cars will about 35% cheaper to buy, and the parts about 50%.

[Omega99]

Originally Posted by drewdawg727

I still don't follow...
Why is it going to be cheaper? It seemed like something like this would be all over the news, but i haven't heard anything...

I mean ever since Champcar was reduced to one engine and one chassis, i don't see how there could be a significant change like that.

Well, I don't have definite answers there, but I do have some probable examples.

The main thing is that because it's a spec series, the car doesn't have to be "the best", because there's only one choice, so it's automatically the best. As a result, there's a much lower research and development cost because Panoz will not be trying to out fox Lola or some other competitor who are also trying to build a chasis. Remember that when Lola built it's last chasis, it did so with the intent of beating the pants off Reynard. And the additional R&D cost had to be slowly recouped by charging a higher cost for the chasis than they would have if they had been the only manufacturer.

Another advantage of the spec chasis is that until the chasis is complete, there is essentially no spec. What I mean by that is, the design isn't more than a concept at this point, so a lot can change, which means that Panoz can use all of the knowledge they have about building racecars that they've gained through years of building other cars, and use those design elements on the car without worrying about meeting the requirements of what the rule book says. Right now, there is no rule book, and the old one had pretty specific guidelines for the size and shape of each piece of the car. Cahmpcar will pretty much let Panoz do whatever they want so long as it fits their EXTREMELY non specific specs: overall dimensions, ballpark weight range, downforce is less dependent on wings. Believe me, from an Engineering standpoint, those are unbelievably loose specifications.

So, Panoz builds a chasis that works. That's pretty much all they have to do. They can also use cheaper materials because they don't need to save weight on every possible element of the car. Also, materials are better and cheaper than they used to be, and Panoz won't be spending any money to develop new ones, like they would in Formula 1. Formula 1 teams would (and do) spend millions to develop new materials to save even as little as 5kg.

Designing a car for a spec series is much different than designing one for a competitive series. There are different design priorities. In a competitve series you want a fast, light car that handles great, with as much downforce as you can get without causing too much drag, etc. In a spec series, things like reliability, durability, and the quality of racing that the car produces are the priorities, and those elements are much cheaper to build.

Another thing that champcar can do is say "We'll pay you X-amount per chasis" and Panoz therefore has to build a car that is that cheap, and that's pretty much what they've done by going with the bidding system, because they chose the manufacturer that offered them the cheapest price and could still produce a quality car. Panoz also knows that they are the exclusive provider. If there are 18 cars on the grid, they sold all 18 of them, plus backups, so they already know how they're going to be able to recoup their costs.

I hope that helps clear things up. I'm sure it's not the complete reason, but it probably touches on a lot it.

[mountainstar]

Very good post Omega, I think you made a lot of good points.

I'm sure for some having 2 manufacturers is important, but I don't think the average fan will care. I know devoted, long time champcar fans that cannot tell the difference between a Lola and Reynard chassis. Even Nascars now have the same exact bodywork and most people could care less.

I used to be a big F1 fan, but have gradually lost interest to the point of indifference. I never thought I would say that either. But as teams have now exploded to the point of having over 1000 employees and $400 million budgets just to field 2 cars for 17 races, I find it totally absurd. Some of these teams are running two wind tunnels 24 hours a day and doing 60,000 kms of testing a year. Exploring technology is all well and good but that is total overkill. That's why I like the new champcar formula. It looks like they are building a car built for RACING and that is what I want to see. The fact that Ferrari has a wind tunnel running right now trying to find a millisecond in time on the race track doesn't do anything for me.

[Amar7605]

I'm with mountainstar. F1 (and NASCAR to a certain extent) is so tech-driven that the things that make racing exciting i.e driver skill are gone.

There's nothing wrong with a spec series. It shows the skill of the team and driver.

[BootsOntheSide]

Excellent post Omega, and completely correct in terms of the attraction of a spec series - especially when you're contracting car cosntructors with no automotive links. ChampCar has to be different from NASCAR and F1 to make any inroads into their huge markets, and providing close parity and a variety of winners without making thigns artificial is the best way they can do this.

[rustyfan]

Originally Posted by Amar7605

... (and NASCAR to a certain extent) is so tech-driven that the things that make racing exciting i.e driver skill are gone.

Oh I don't know about that - seeing Carl Edwards do a 180mph-powerslide coming out of turn two on very old & worn tires with a couple of laps to go during the spring-race at Atlanta this year, and still managing to catch Jimmie Johnson to win by a nose, is still one of my favorite top motorsport-moments this year


On a side-note, I agree with Omega99 as well, although...

Originally Posted by Omega99

So, Panoz builds a chasis that works. That's pretty much all they have to do.

...it's impossible to know how well it will work until we actually get to see a race with 20 cars racing each other. They can do thousands miles of testing and it still won't equal a single mile of a true race situation.

With that said the specs do seem promising.

[Amar7605]

Originally Posted by rustyfan

Oh I don't know about that - seeing Carl Edwards do a 180mph-powerslide coming out of turn two on very old & worn tires with a couple of laps to go during the spring-race at Atlanta this year, and still managing to catch Jimmie Johnson to win by a nose, is still one of my favorite top motorsport-moments this year

That's why I said to a certain extent

But even NASCAR crew chiefs and drivers admit that the racing is more technology-driven than before.

[drewdawg727]

I know we're off the subject of Walker Racing but...didn't Darren Manning place some good results when he was with the Walker Team? I know he's certainly not Australian, but he's driven for the team before and he IS without a ride...

[Amar7605]

Darren Manning would be an excellent pickup. Loads of talent and a hell of a personality.

Question is: does he have money to back him up?

[drewdawg727]

He should have money, even if he was cut midseason

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by drewdawg727

He should have money, even if he was cut midseason

He doesn't and him and his manager have always been scratching around to make it from season to season.

I used to be a big fan of him and had some posters from his Formula 3 seasons on my wall. No more.

[Russfeld]

Why not?

[StickShift]

In a Robin Miller article about a month back, Manning was touted as a potential replacement for Da Matta and Vasser at PKV.

Also mentioned as possibilities were Carpentier and Dalziel.

[Mystery]

Carpentier seems to have a pretty good thing going in the IRL though. Dalziel? Why not, but I think Manning would be a better bet.

[drewdawg727]

Carpentier has one more year in his contract at Cheever Racing

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by drewdawg727

Carpentier has one more year in his contract at Cheever Racing

Carpentier was quoted very recently as saying he didn't know what he was doing next year as he has received no offers.

[macdaddy]

I haven't read any quotes from Carpentier, but Robin Miller wrote this just a day or two ago...

And all this uncertainty has left Patrick Carpentier, Alex Barron, Tomas Enge, Meira and Scheckter scratching their heads about where they'll be driving.

Carpentier, IMO, tried burning a couple of bridges. Granted he felt shafted by his former team owner, but he started tooting the other series' horn as loudly as he could as soon as he could. "We'll be racing in Canada this, we'll be racing in Canada that, blah blah blah."

[drewdawg727]

Sorry for switching topics again..but about the size of the grid in the future :Personally, i don't think there should be TOO many cars...
I mean look at NASCAR...there are over 40 cars in one race, and it's a crashfest. Every single time i turn the channel to a NASCAR race, there's 5 or 6 cars sprawled out on the grass somewhere because of a crash.
Anything above 25 cars in a race is just downright dangerous, and it's not even racing.

[Kicking-back]

The highest CART ever started on a road course was 32 at Mid Ohio 1994, IIRC

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by drewdawg727

Anything above 25 cars in a race is just downright dangerous, and it's not even racing.

What? I agree that you can have too many cars, but it really depends on what track we are talking about here. Somewhere like Road America could easily handle 35 cars safely. Given the recent trend towards Street Circuits your numbers are probably accurate for many of them. Then again, there are those with the opinion that Street Racing isn't proper racing either (at many of the events).