Q: I just wanted to get an idea out to you I have been thinking about. I know this is usually a subject where you, and Miller before you, deferred to the status quo when asked about IndyCar shopping for an additional tire manufacturer.
Firestone has developed safe, reliable tires for the series to shine on. And with the financial climate being what it’s been in racing for the past decade, you guys were right to say adding another tire manufacturer wouldn’t have been in anyone’s best interest. The racing, though, still has provided a better tire to the public from lessons learned on the racetrack either way.
Every now and again, we get bits and pieces of the new stuff Firestone currently has in development on the track, and I enjoy the hell out of watching development of consumer products like this, and I’m sure many others do as well. As such, I do believe that with the current bright atmosphere swirling around the series with an influx of new teams, sponsors, and money that maybe it is time for the series to get another tire competitor.
I can only see upsides as I’m not a team owner, but the team owners should remember that changes continually have to be made in everything in life to make and keep people interested. And Firestone should chew on the fact that the fans would most definitely enjoy the competition, and then hopefully would get more transparency on the tire development side on the track between suppliers and the consumer with the benefits of this kind of competition rolling over to their passenger cars. Kinda like what racing was doing before money ruined everything, remember?
Has your opinion changed at all?
Bob Fay, Seymour, CT
MP: I’d absolutely love to see tire competition again, Bob. I just can’t think of a proven tire manufacturer with top-tier racing experience that isn’t already engaged in the sport in a big or bigger series. And that’s the criteria here. Goodyear is tied to NASCAR, which gets far more coverage and offers a much greater return on investment than IndyCar.
Michelin is tied to IMSA, the FIA WEC, and the 24 Hours of Le Mans, and gets everything it needs from them in coverage and ROI. And Pirelli is tied to F1 and has all of their needs met by the world’s most popular form of racing. So with Firestone/Bridgestone, Goodyear, Michelin, and Pirelli off the board, we’re left with brands that are awesome in their own right, but do we see Yokohama, Kuhmo, Continental, or whomever going all-in with a huge budget to try and beat Firestone at their own game?
That’s where we hit a stopping point. Only workaround I can think of is if one of those major brands wants to use one of its other tire properties to take on Firestone, like Michelin’s BFGoodrich, Goodyear’s Cooper, or similar.
Q: I am a veteran of 47 consecutive Indy 500s. My seats are just north of the Pagoda, three quarters of the way up in the stands in the Tower Terrace. So I always have a pretty good view of the start when they come down for the green. For me, seeing who would jump into the lead from the front row and lead into Turn 1 was always an exciting moment. However in the last five years or so, I have noticed that the front row will come down three abreast as called for out of Turn 4, but as soon as the green is thrown, the pole car accelerates with the second-position car falling in directly behind it. And this year, the third-position car just fell in behind the second. Though I may doubt IndyCar would possibly confess to this, is the start being done this way for safety reasons to possibly avoid any kind of accident? I could possibly see this as the reason, but it sure has taken the excitement out of seeing who will lead the race going into Turn 1.
Rick Owens, Fort Wayne, IN
MP: I bet you’ve seen some incredible things across those 47, Rick. The cars no longer have giant power to do a three-wide drag race starting in a low gear, so that’s made aerodynamics and the benefit of tucking in behind the leader and using that draft to try and go by into Turn 1 or Turn 3 the new routine. This is just a function of what’s best for success, not a double-secret thing they’ve been told to do by the series.
Q: I was watching Super GT, which I consider the best top-level road racing series even if IndyCar is my favorite, and seeing how easily those GT500 cars go side by side made me wonder about Class 1 aero and why nobody else is trying to use it. Then seeing that G56 Camaro made me think… is that car too distant from C1? Why isn’t NASCAR investing in something like that for the road courses?
Give it an even bigger spoiler to create more drag and it looks like it’d make some amazing races at NASCAR tracks, especially COTA. Sure, dirty air becomes a thing, but if the cars have too much grip and gets easier to drive, drivers would be closer for more time rather than only for the first five laps after a yellow flag.
Does NASCAR have any plan for that car? Would be possible for you to inquire about this with anyone involved in the Cup Series?
On the IndyCar side… as it feels like F1 will reject a new team, isn’t time for IndyCar to take some bets and grow on the points F1 is failing? A chassis that has more grip than a Super Formula car and more drag as well (so we can have good racing without DRS and maybe even without relying so much on push to pass) and that can use these GTP/LMH powerplants would go well if they managed to convince Porsche and Ferrari to join. (I guess Alpine would follow, given their U.S. plans).
Looking at F1 now and all the complaints about Red Bull domination, it doesn’t seem like people are that worried about teams building their own chassis. Of course, those of us watching F1 for long enough are used to it. But there seems to be a window for IndyCar in all this. Probably easier said than done.
William Mazeo
MP: Unless it’s a new chassis that looks like something from outer space, or from 100 years into the future, that makes everybody who sees it gasp and rave about how it’s the most amazing thing they’ve ever seen, IndyCar will gain very little in the sports entertainment market by going to a new chassis.
And I say that as someone who’s been begging for a new car for the last five or six years.
As for adopting GTP/Hypercar engines, Acura’s motor was meant for IndyCar and has been purposed for IMSA, but the rest are eighter big, or heavy, or big and heavy, and that’s how an IndyCar becomes a glorified turtle with all of that weight and tall mass ruining every aspect of its performance.
Also, if BMW, Lamborghini, Porsche, Ferrari, and others wanted to participate in IndyCar, they’ve had an open invitation since 2012 to take on Chevy and Honda. IMSA going hybrid a year before IndyCar made choices easier for some of the aforementioned, so like that futuristic chassis I mentioned, IndyCar would also help itself if it found the thing manufacturers want but can’t get in F1, NASCAR, and sports cars, and see if a new engine formula based around whatever that technology might be would bring a few of them into our world.
KELLY CRANDALL: I’m not too familiar with Super GT and Class 1 aero, so I reached out to an experienced individual in both sports cars and NASCAR. The summation that I got was:
“Class 1-based cars are significantly distant from NASCAR Cup cars, and it’s not quite possible to just copy and paste aero components from GT500 cars to a Cup car. It also wouldn’t be possible to directly use a Class 1 type chassis as the basis for a NASCAR cup car without significant changes to allow it to be able to crash on a superspeedway.”
What I can tell you about Garage 56 is that there is a belief that elements of that car will eventually make their way to the Cup Series garage.