Gandretti -

No downforce would have lap speed slightly higher than what NASCAR can do at Indy. Is that what you want? Sideways at Indy!? I don't think so.

I want good racing. But no downforce doesn't have to mean slow. Increase mechanical grip with better, wider, grippier tires and increase engine size so you increase power with out the increase costs of turning a smaller displaced engine more rpm.

You think a zero downforce 1500lb, 1500hp, wide tire, wide track car will be a little quicker than a cup car? How about a lot faster! It will require great driving skill by the driver as they can easily break traction and they will have to steer the car with the throttle.

Sideways at indy? Sure, just give them a tire that has feel. With out downforce you won't need a sidewall that is as stiff as a hockey puck so with a sidewall with flex it will give a driver much more feel and allow them to get aggressive with it.

Any new chassis is going to have tobe good on three different types of circuits(road courses,street circuits and yawn ovals) downforce is as important as how it is acheived. High speeds are part of racing(duh) I saw Gugelmann turn 242 at Fontana the car was so hooked up it literally looked like it was on rails. Sideways and sawing at the wheel dosen't equate to fast smooth does

westsideclay - 23 May 2008 11:23 AM

Any new chassis is going to have tobe good on three different types of circuits(road courses,street circuits and yawn ovals) downforce is as important as how it is acheived. High speeds are part of racing(duh) I saw Gugelmann turn 242 at Fontana the car was so hooked up it literally looked like it was on rails. Sideways and sawing at the wheel dosen't equate to fast smooth does

His car looked like it was on rails because it was glued to the track with downforce. Remove the downforce and the car will slide and the driver needs to balance the car with the thottle like a dirt car. Sideways & sawing with todays cars isn't possible, let aone fast because you'll loe downforce and the current tire opperates at a low slip angle with a tightrope characteristic.

Yes and it was done with the "speedway" set up on a car that generated most of it's downforce from the wings. Newer chassis,the Panoz DP01 were designe dto generate their downforce with the underside of the car and would be faster and more stable. Wing size would not be the determining factor on the amount of downforce generated

westsideclay - 23 May 2008 01:51 PM

Yes and it was done with the "speedway" set up on a car that generated most of it's downforce from the wings. Newer chassis,the Panoz DP01 were designe dto generate their downforce with the underside of the car and would be faster and more stable. Wing size would not be the determining factor on the amount of downforce generated

Actually, it wasn't. That generation of car got most of its downforce from the underbody tunnels, not the wings, in the superspeedway package. In fact, the underbody tunnels as originally designed on that car were so effective, they actually put baffles at the back to limit the downforce.

With the current IRL spec, they are running negative wing angles at Indy and they are running 227mph laps. If they did that at Fontana or Michigan, with less scrub in the corners, I'd say 235mph was not impossible. They're right back where they were.

The answer has to be a combination of aero that limits top speeds on superspeedways but still allows close racing at roadies. The DP01 started down the path, having more downforce from the underbody, but they should have reduced the wing size/effectiveness more. This puts a premium on mechanical grip especially at slower speeds of under 100mph which is a good thing. I think we've seen the problems from trying to implement flat underbodies for cars that travel 200+ mph in sportscars and the IRL. Reducing overall downforce has to be an objective, and it ought to be married with engines that produce more torque and thus can break tire adhesion pretty much at will. This'll work on roadies and smaller ovals, but it remains to be seen how well it would work at the superspeedways since you've got to restrict power output somehow as well as create a lot more drag.

F1 went the route of trying to limit HP and torque on engines by making them smaller and limiting revs. The teams just made up the difference with better aero and now the cars are faster than ever, and more importantly, they are faster in the corners which is potentially more dangerous. They also made the cars narrower. I think that approach is a dead-end, and was 180 degrees the wrong direction. They are going to limit aero bits soon but they'll be rocket ships in a straight line then.