Sitting Up and Listening

The winds of change are blowing, all across American motorsport. IndyCar has got a new CEO, introduced earlier today. Sports car racing is scrambling to reposition itself within the entire scene as a whole, just in order to stay alive. NASCAR, as documented here and in many other places, is trying to reconnect with its hardcore fanbase, after a couple years of dwindling attendance and television ratings. IndyCar is grappling with its next generation car, apparently picking between two fundamentally different designs, one of which will be introduced in 2012.

These last two items sound basically unrelated, but in reality, they’re pretty closely linked. NASCAR has angered a large part of its classic fanbase by making all of their cars nearly identical with its Car of Tomorrow. Meanwhile, many existing and past IndyCar fans have become frustrated with the spec car racing that the current formula has resulted in. Other writers have tackled the issue of whether or not IndyCar should be looking at using more than one chassis going forward from 2012, in order to create technical intrigue. Curt Cavin, on Trackside a couple of weeks ago and in a couple of his Q&A columns, has said that the two potential new cars, the Delta Wing and the evolutionary Dallara, will be cheaper than the current cars, but also that their business models are based on the assumption that they will be supplying the whole field, creating another spec car situation unless multiple engine manufacturers come on board.

I have been vocal, both here and in my comments on other blogs, that it is most important that the cost for the next car to come down so that more teams can afford to come compete in the IndyCar series. This is important because if the costs creep up and the teams go away because they can't afford to run anymore, you’ll no longer have a series. Given a few weeks of reflection, now I also feel that it is very important that the IRL investigate using more than one chassis manufacturer. It appears that even the most staid and change averse sanctioning bodies are capable of sweeping change, if the fanbase and environment dictate them. In this linked piece, Peter M. De Lorenzo (a fantastic automotive and motorsports writer, who tells the truth, even if it’s uncomfortable) talks at length about changes that are likely upcoming in NASCAR over the next 2-3 years. Stock-based, manufacturer identifiable bodies. Direct fuel injection. Bio fuel. Sequential shift gearboxes. An extra road course race, likely during the “Chase”. For a series that uses 3400 pound, carburetor-engined cars as they have since the 1940s, this is nothing short of earth shattering.

Some of those changes are a nod to shaking things up and increasing competition. Some of them are a nod to the manufacturers, who are clearly not happy that the cars on the track bear very little resemblance to what they sell to consumers. Some of them are a nod to the fans, who are clamoring for the “old days” of when they could tell the brands apart, and could pull for the make of car that they’d driven to the track. In any case, all of these things are a nod to the idea that it’s not 1958 anymore. This is a great thing. I wish that NASCAR would also address their spotty attitude on safety, but I’ll take what I can get at this point.

OK, back to my point: what does this have to do with IndyCar? What all of this tells me is that sometimes you HAVE to listen to the fans. Sometimes you HAVE to embrace some things that are kind of scary in order to evolve for the future. Sometimes when the playbook is all used up and not working anymore, you HAVE to try something new to get things jump started again.

This is why IndyCar needs to attempt to have multiple manufacturers again, both engines and chassis. If Delta Wing and Dallara have staked their business cases on selling 50 chassis per year, then ask them to re-do their spreadsheets for a scenario where they’re selling 25 per year, or roughly half the field (that’s for primary and back-up cars). Do whatever it takes to get multiple engine manufacturers back to the table. Tell them that you want to use an F1-style common engine control unit to control engine revs and turbo boost and outlaw traction control, but that you want their input on how they’d like to display their proprietary engineering in the IndyCar series. Biodiesel? Cellulosic ethanol? Hydrogen? For the sake of getting cars on the track in two years, you’ll need to limit the ideas to internal combustion engines, but no idea is too crazy. There is plenty of good engine simulation software out there that you can use to come up with equivalency formulas among engine types and configurations. It’s not the ‘70s or ‘80s anymore, when the FIA made wild guesses as how to best balance turbos versus normally aspirated engines in F1. It’s possible, you just have to give it a try and then work through the data. Once you’ve got the basic engines specs sorted out, then you can work through a similar program of balancing the performance of the Delta Wing and the Dallara. Turbo boost levels, engine revs, ballast weight, keep everything on the table for now.

There is plenty of time to get new, varied cars on the track in time for the 2012 IndyCar season. The IndyCar brass needs to sit up and listen to the fans and manufacturers, then get started right now. After all, if NASCAR - the sanctioning body that seemingly hasn’t changed the way they race or do anything else since the ‘50s - can make sweeping changes to its formula in order to stay relevant with fans and manufacturers, there’s no reason that the folks in Indianapolis shouldn’t be able to do the same.