Q: I read that Ferrari has reached a deal to supply engines and gearboxes to the Cadillac-GM F1 team. The timeline is to have its works engine ready by the end of the decade. I know there is development, testing, etc. involved, but four years seems like an awfully long time. Why does it take so long?
Steve, Chicago
CM: It’s not just about the development and testing of the engine itself, but also the creation of the facility and infrastructure to do all that work. For example, Cadillac is building a power unit facility in Charlotte that I am led to believe is into the nine-figure range, and that isn’t the work of a moment. Once you have the facility built, you then need to kit it out with extremely specialist machinery, which can take time to be delivered, plus you then need to commission and test it all to know it is providing the information required.
Hiring experienced personnel can take many months and even years because of gardening leave times to protect IP, too, and they might want to see proof of the infrastructure before committing. From this point right now you could see all of the above taking at least two years before you’re even ready to properly start work on the full development and testing of an engine, which would be late 2026.
Given established set-ups have been working on the ’26 engines since the summer of 2022, if GM wants to give itself the same development time before first racing one (and don’t forget it would then be playing catch-up with developed and raced power units) you’re looking at 2030.
I don’t think it will be waiting that long as I believe GM will have a full facility up and running efficiently far sooner than the end of 2026 – perhaps within 12 months, as it has already started – and will try and learn as much as it can from rivals. But as we saw with Honda in 2015, it can be really difficult to join mid-cycle, and that’s why you’d give yourself as much time as possible.
Q: Hey Kelly, has NASCAR ever thought about racing at Sebring? Watching older NASCAR cars at the HSR event, the track looks like a riot. I imagine that with 43 cars and a full crowd it would be fun show. Especially now they own the track for IMSA. IMSA/NASCAR could do new Super Sebring. Have the Cup race on Friday or Sunday.
Cole Trickle
KELLY CRANDALL: I’ve never heard any rumblings about NASCAR taking one of its national series to Sebring. But if the last few years have taught us anything, never say never when it comes to the schedule. Sebring being a road course would bring into discussion how many of those NASCAR wants on the schedule, where it would fit, and what it would replace.
THE FINAL WORD
From Robin Miller’s Mailbag, 16 December, 2014
Q: There seems to be an age-old belief in the Mailbag that putting USAC-raised Americans in IndyCars will somehow magically save IndyCar since fans have been ‘following their careers right to the top. The consensus in the Mailbag also seems to be that all these guys that have recently hit the ceiling on the F1 ladder won’t move the needle and nobody cares about them. Nobody, of course, wants the traditional ride-buyer either who has excelled in no series, but brings a personal sponsor.
I have been a hard-core IndyCar fan since 1994 through all the crap of the last 20 years. Let’s be realistic. If Americans RHR, Newgarden, Rahal, and Andretti haven’t made people (those who aren’t already fans) care about IndyCar, then why do we think Daly or Rossi will? Because they win? RHR wins – he won Indy. Let’s say there are as many people following some of the young USAC drivers as there are IndyCar fans today. Zero (relative to NASCAR and F1’s popularity) times zero is still zero. Nobody who is not already a fan is going to tune in for the first time just to see how some guy who dominated GP2 or USAC does in IndyCar. The Mailbags are filled with letters from fans trying to figure out how to make non-fans care. They don’t care about the same stuff as us.
Personally, I just want funded cars and shootouts for the best available (paid) driver regardless of nationality or background. Obviously that ain’t happening anytime soon, nor do I think for a second that’s going to make all the middle-aged ladies at work who discuss Johnson, Gordon, and Keselowski’s performance every Monday morning start debating the performance of Power, RHR, Rossi, or Vergne. Those are the fans that made NASCAR a monster, not us. None of the solutions in Mailbag make these people IndyCar fans. Obviously, I don’t have the answers. But we keep fooling ourselves and wasting our time in heated debates about solutions which solve nothing.
Paul Clopton
ROBIN MILLER: Sadly, you make an excellent argument. The USAC connection and watching heroes matriculate to Indy via Terre Haute and Winchester is never coming back. If Dave Darland got a ride at Indy, most of Howard County and all the HARF members would buy a ticket this May, but that represents a couple thousand people. And even a popular, young American winner like Bryan Clauson has little or no affect on attendance or TV ratings. Nor will Rossi or Daly. Hell, 75 percent of the public couldn’t tell you Ryan Hunter-Reay won last year’s Indianapolis 500.
Having said that, Sage Karam, Daly or Rossi will generate more American media coverage than Sam Bird or Jean-Eric Vergne. If they turn out to be Zanardi or Montoya, sure, that kind of winner captures the public’s attention, but IndyCar needs little victories to try and get back on the map. Had Karam run Pocono last summer, there would have been 5,000 more paying customers – all from Nazareth.
But let’s be honest. NASCAR built its heroes through continuity, television saturation, promotion and marketing while IndyCar lost its identity after The Split. Good example? I followed Scott Dixon down the hallway last week at the PRI Show and not one person stopped him to say hello, take a photo or shake his hand. But Rusty Wallace couldn’t walk 10 feet without being stopped.