The RACER Mailbag, January 3

Welcome to the RACER Mailbag. Questions for any of RACER’s writers can be sent to mailbag@racer.com. We can’t guarantee that every letter will be published, but we’ll answer as many as we can. Published questions may be edited for length and …

Q: After the recent delay with the hybrid engine and the potential Honda departure from IndyCar, it’s another gloomy time for IndyCar.  Although the series would certainly benefit from more manufacturers and a new chassis, I’m not convinced that either would be a game-changer. If we suddenly had four manufacturers and two or three chassis makers, although all the fans of the Mailbag would be ecstatic (myself included), I’m not convinced that would change the overall health of the series. The fans who get hyped about car designs, engine sounds, etc. already follow the series, and I’m not sure that any new fan would suddenly turn onto IndyCar because of those things.

When I talk to new F1 fans (because of “Drive To Survive”), they are fans of the drivers and the teams. Most don’t have more than a superficial knowledge of the engineering of F1 but they are excited by the people and the competition. The next generation is more interested in gaming and personality than car horsepower and chassis configuration.  Like it or not, that’s where I think IndyCar needs to focus its efforts to get new fans. The return to iRacing is good, but IndyCar needs to spend more effort making the drivers of the series well-known as personalities “100 Days To Indy” was good, but needs to be on a streaming service so that fans can see it.

Also, the constant emphasis of the Indy 500 to the exclusion of all other races is why no one cares about the other races enough.

Only when more fans are excited by the IndyCar drivers and the series that they race in will more people show up to race, which will improve the fans in the stands numbers, and the TV numbers as well. I think it is only then that we will see manufacturers and money come into the series and a hopeful return to the glory days.

Arvind Mahadevan, Peoria, AZ

MP: All great points, Arvind, and the only thing I’d add on the call/question about going to a new car is one of giving the series something fresh and hopefully exciting — something that’s visually stunning — to draw attention to itself. It’s not that the DW12 looks bad, but with the aeroscreen, it does look a touch weird compared to an F1 car, so thinking strictly in that superficial way, it can’t hurt to try something new to attract more eyeballs and interest. Because what we have now, and have had for many years, isn’t working. Totally agree that the drivers and human rivalries are what’s stoking the Drive To Survive generation’s interest in racing, but they can get that in any other sport.

Our sport features cars, and fast ones at that, so let’s not completely dismiss the importance of the machines in this wave of popularity, and even if the average DTS fan knows little about the technical side of racing, they do know what pleases their eyes. Maybe meeting those eyes with a new IndyCar that looks like it’s from 20 years in the future would draw them towards our racing and our drivers and our drama. And maybe it wouldn’t. But doing nothing, which we know isn’t working, doesn’t seem like the answer to me. Solving a problem by doing nothing isn’t how you solve a problem.

Q: Your disclosure that IndyCar’s Marketing VP SJ Luedtke was not replaced speaks volumes. This would appear to be a very important position in the structure of IndyCar management. That her responsibilities were absorbed among others tells me her duties were not appreciated as anything other than following directives, as opposed to generating viable marketing strategies.

Mark Miles stated no candidates of interest were found. Does this mean no candidates were willing to work within the current corporate framework (be a yes person), no candidates were willing to work for the salary offered, no candidates were willing to work with the current marketing budget? If you can’t find someone credible to work in that marketing position, it tells me you have a serious problem with your product and how you run your company.

John, Seville, OH

MP: I’ll admit that doing a deep dive into why nobody was hired to replace SJ holds no interest for me.

Idea No. 7: Put a bigger spotlight on the drivers and their personalities by taking away the cars. Studio Colombo/Motorsport Images

Q: Big Possum apologizes for speaking in the third person in his last question for Mailbag but he failed English class in high school on two occasions so is unfamiliar with third person. So here goes one hopefully not in third person.

Two things with the command to start engines – actually four.

Go back to “Gentlemen, start your engines.” if we keep on this path it could become “Persons, start your engines” or “Lifeforms, start your engines.”

What would be the command if, God forbid, IndyCar goes electric? “Engage your rotors?” “Turn on your voltage?” “Watts on?” I am becoming ill just thinking about the future.

These are the most famous words in all of sports, not just motorsports. What is better? “Play ball?”Or blowing a whistle to start a foot ballgame?

No one ever said it better than Tony Hulman — no commercial pitch, not screaming like at a wrestling match — said with the gravitas it deserves.

Big Possum, Michigan by way of Texas

MP: Since “Sanford and Son” was (and still is) one of my favorite shows, I’ll refer to myself as “Big Dummy” going forward, Big Possum.

Even if IndyCar goes full-electric, we’re talking about electric engines, so the “start your engines” command would apply.

I’m not sure what’s wrong with “Drivers, start your engines.” It must be “Gentlemen, start your engines,” no matter what, in order to be good or authentic? Come on, man. I mean, person.

Q: With regard to the infinite number of questions regarding a new chassis and allowing multiple chassis, I have had a thought over the past few years: Why does the series not allow more options in terms of interchangeable parts? While teams have options for different smaller parts (wickers, wing extensions, etc), IndyCar could offer secondary wings and pods for teams to consider at certain courses. That would diversify the look of the cars while also adding a layer of strategy. Just a thought. Thanks!

Tim, Fishers, IN

MP: I like the idea, but as we’ve seen, when multiple aero options are allowed in a spec series, it doesn’t take long for one option to emerge as the better choice, and then everybody uses that option.

Q: When it was just Honda supplying IndyCar, Ilmor made all the engines. They make the Chevy engines now. If Honda leaves, Penske-owned Ilmor isn’t going to leave IndyCar without engines.

This means Honda’s proposal to have one manufacturer with companies tweaking the software to badge it makes sense.

My question is, does it really matter? The engines manufacturers have always just badged engines. Ilmor made the Mercedes Beast, too.

Jason, Green Bay, WI

MP: Citing two examples doesn’t equate to “always,” but your point is taken. It only matters if the series and its manufacturers care. This is yet another question for IndyCar to ask and answer as it attempts to chart a plan for the future.