Q: When an IndyCar Series driver does testing for a manufacturer of tires, engines or chassis, or at the request of the series, is that driver compensated by the entity that desires the testing?
Mike Fox, Kalamazoo, MI
MP: Often, yes, but there’s no specific answer as each driver’s contract with their team is different. In some cases, it’s an all-inclusive deal where the driver goes to driver wherever the team tells them to drive, and with others, it’s an added fee. Select few drivers also have direct business relationships with the manufacturers — some for personal services like appearances and speaking engagements and promotions — and those could also include professional services like added track and simulator testing to help the brand develop engines or aero or whatever else they come up with.
At the far end of such things, the little TKM/Genoa Racing IRL team I helped to run was essentially saved by Firestone’s Joe Barbieri in 1987/1998 when we were dead broke and Joe, who we’d known from Genoa’s many years in Indy Lights, added us as an official test team. We’d get back from wherever Firestone wanted us to test and I’d head straight to the office to create and fax (yes, faxing…this was long ago) an invoice to Joe. Most of those invoices were very generous on their part; a $50,000 bill wasn’t uncommon, and for our small and lean outfit, the profits kept us afloat, ensured everybody got paid, and I’m sure our driver, Greg Ray, also got paid for his time once our invoice was handled.
Q: I started researching hotels for the IMSA weekend at Watkins Glen. There doesn’t appear to be many good choices for quality and location close to the track.
Which town do all the top teams stay in? They should know all the best places.
David, Coventry, CT
MP: Corning and Painted Post are the two local-to-Watkins towns I stay in, as do most teams, with Corning as the first option.
Q: After reading Robin’s Mailbag for the better part of a decade, I am over IndyCar doom and gloom. It is fantastic racing that has increased ratings over the last few years. I don’t know what people expect. Roger Penske is currently 86 years old. He seems to be savvy to how media has changed in the last few decades. I love Peacock’s streaming of every event. If you have purchased a television in the last decade, it probably has internet connectivity. I am 40 years old and have bridged the gap of OTA, cable, satellite, and now exclusively stream all of my traditional TV offerings. It is simple and easier to find than scrolling through pages of DirecTV offerings. Streaming is the future. I go to four or five IndyCar races per year and watch nearly every session through Peacock or Hulu.
If IndyCar needs anything, it is more social media presence that brings the greatest form of auto racing in North America to the forefront. Finding interest among the young people who gravitate to F1 and NASCAR is the key. This is not an issue of finding more ovals. Build it, and they will come is the new decree for television. I am tired of hearing people complaining about television packages. I must reiterate, if 86-year-old Roger Penske sees the wisdom in new streaming media, then everyone will probably follow.
Christopher Logan, Marion, IN
MP: Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Christopher.
Q: Use a spec engine (since it seems like that’s where we’re truly headed) at all rounds except for the Indy 500. It can be used for the 500, but isn’t mandatory. It’s spec. It’s affordable.
For the 500, IndyCar should completely open up the engine rulebook and allow manufacturers to run whatever they want as long as it fits under the skin of the new IndyCar chassis. If Tesla can develop a battery that will charge in 15 seconds without exploding and wants to try and run an EV for the 500, go for it! if someone else wants to try and cram a V8 hybrid under the cowling and have that screaming into Turn 1, even better. Let engine manufacturers bring whatever they want for the 500. If the engine suppliers aren’t interested, then we get what we’re headed towards anyway: a spec series. But if a few take a chance, it’d be huge!
If they find value in being able to develop engines for the 500 then the headlines write themselves: “McLaren Mercedes wins the 500 with a version of the four-cylinder hybrid found in the AMG C63 S E Performance.” I know it’ll never happen, but seems like it costs nothing while also giving us a chance to attract some manufacturers interested in the ROI that winning the biggest race in the world might give them.
As a bonus, they get to develop (or redeploy from other series) engines that are most relevant to their interests, and potentially allocate development costs among programs. Maybe some F1 teams even become interested as a way to shelter some F1 engine development costs in their “Indy 500 engine department.”
I know this will never happen and I’m sure there are myriad reasons why it’s a terrible idea, but it’d just be nice if IndyCar was relevant again.
Stewart
MP: The word “relevant” is immensely powerful, isn’t it?
Q: One of the arguments for not being able to utilize different engines in the Dallara chassis was that it was designed to accept the current Chevy and Honda engines. Back in the day when we had a more open engine formula, we had four-cylinder Offenhausers, stock block V8s, stock block turbo V6s and Cosworth V8s in Eagle chassis. That’s a pretty wide variety of engines fitting in one type of chassis. Apparently Dan Gurney knew how to design a flexible-use chassis; why can’t Dallara?
If we did get a third OEM, would their design have to be compromised just so it would fit? Is there any flexibility with Dallara? I would hope that the next chassis design would encourage more diverse engines to be used.
I thought Honda was being very honest in sharing what needs to be addressed to keep it in IndyCar and keeping the series progressing. The truth has to hurt sometimes. Chevy’s response was very disappointing. It lacked courage and honesty about how dire the situation is. It was a response from the Good Old Boys Club. Its view was everything is fine, and avoided a concise plan of action to keep IndyCar relevant in the future.
Dave Wells
MP: Dallara can design whatever it’s asked to; citing Gurney and a design from 40 years ago isn’t applicable since it was a different formula. If IndyCar wanted Dallara to make a new chassis that could accept engines of all different sizes and shapes, it would do so. IndyCar would also need to change its engine formula to allow those different sizes and shapes.
I’d look at the third OEM situation in a different manner: It isn’t about whether it could fit in a DW12, it’s whether it matches the same 2.2-liter twin-turbo V6 formula Chevy and Honda conform to with their motors. We are in a specific engine formula that debuted in 2012, so that’s what a third would need to bring to compete. That could change tomorrow if IndyCar made the call or if Chevy/Honda agreed to let a new brand run with something that isn’t 2.2L, which would be a first, as far as I can recall, with such an allowance.