Q: Reading last week’s Mailbag, Marshall mentioned that Logan Sargeant is rumored to bring $30 million to the Williams table. Having at the same time a discussion on the Autosport forums about the same, I quoted you and (of course) linked to the Mailbag. This was dismissed as rumors. So I did what anyone else would do and Googled it: One result was this.
But it seems the article was changed and now says nothing like that.
That could be for several reasons, but I’m just wondering why Marshall put that figure out? It’s very hard to find any other sources for the question of Logan being a pay driver or not. What gives?
Jean-Claude
MP: Let me ask Marshall. He says he’s heard the figure mentioned many times by friends who work in F1. He also suggests spending less time in forums. Anybody who thinks Logan was hired by Williams is silly.
CHRIS MEDLAND: I’m not quite sure where MP will have heard that figure from, but it’s very possible that within IndyCar circles that story has gone around off the back of his family ties, as his uncle is billionaire Harry Sargeant III. But Williams insists it picked Sargeant up based on his talent and potential — he was looked at by Mercedes, too, at one stage — and wanted to try and develop him into a top level F1 driver while simultaneously hoping that would prove attractive to sponsors in the U.S. market.
So both aspects can be true at the same time, in that he isn’t bringing direct money to the team but there were commercial considerations as well as sporting ones to giving Sargeant a race seat and keeping him in it for 2024.
I actually think F1 has moved away from the concept of traditional pay drivers now, and it is no longer as simple as buying a seat with enough money regardless of performance. The talent level has to be higher to be in the frame, and the perfect candidate also either has personal sponsors or represents a market that the team would like to be more prominent in.
(As an aside, I’m not sure if that’s the correct link you were intending to share about Logan being set clear targets by Williams last year, but I have the original copy and the article is completely unchanged from when it was published).
Q: I hope FOX can do a better job with IndyCar than it has with NHRA. They run a ticker across the bottom of the screen with useless information, and the ticker compresses the image, so everything looks weird.
I am praying that they do the only sensible thing and hire an IndyCar guy as the lead commentator. You had mentioned Adam Alexander as a possibility. Adam is fine for NASCAR, but not IndyCar. If they haven’t chosen a lead yet, put in a good word for me.
Also — this one is for Kelly, too — I’ve been meaning to address something since the season started. What happened to Saturday night races? It is outright stupid for at least one of the Iowa races to not be on Saturday night. I think there is only one Saturday night NASCAR race this year (Bristol, thank God).
None of this makes sense. Night racing looks awesome. There is no way that I would ever attend a race during the day in the summer, baking in the sun. Also, a Saturday night race leaves Sunday as a fallback in case of rain. Not everyone can take Monday off with one day’s notice if there is rain.
Keith Younce
MP: OK.
KELLY CRANDALL: The television networks moved away from Saturday night races because they said the windows and ratings were better. And late day Sunday accomplishes that. The weather isn’t always going to cooperate but we’ve seen races (like Las Vegas one year) scheduled late in the day because of how hot it is there. But overall, it’s about the network feeling when the best ratings are, and they feel more people are home on Sunday.
Q: If I was Michael Andretti, I’d make an offer to Gene Haas to buy both his NASCAR and Haas F1 teams, and brand them as both Cadillac. Apply for NASCAR to allow them to use CT4 or CT5 V Blackwings bodies. Toyota doesn’t sell coupe versions of the Camry and the Camaro is already out of production, so why not?
I believe the cross-sponsorship between the two series would be beneficial to all involved. Mahindra (for example) is a global company, and to be a sponsor on both teams would be an option to look at.
Dave, Orlando, FL
KC: I don’t see Andretti coming into NASCAR and starting from scratch. It seems like all their eggs are in the Formula 1 basket as far as doing that and the money being spent to make it happen. It would seem more logical, and I believe they’ve said it before, that if they came into stock car racing, it would probably be buying into an existing team.
Q: Just watched the NASCAR race at Sonoma and found it very entertaining once the spate of yellow flags was over. I’m curious to know why NASCAR insists on throwing a full-course yellow flag for minor off-course excursions that aren’t impeding traffic? Almost all the sanctioning bodies racing at road courses simply use a local yellow and the racing continues. Certainly, if the track is blocked or otherwise dangerous, a full-course yellow makes sense. NASCAR yellow flags require a lengthy time to gather everyone up, make a decision about when to open the pits, implement the pace car, etc., ad nauseam. The rhythm of the race gets thrown off kilter and the event drags on.
Mark Young, Arroyo Grande, CA
KC: There is no denying that NASCAR can be very inconsistent with its yellow flags. In fact, we saw that at Iowa Speedway when tires were going down and what got called for a caution and what didn’t. On road courses, NASCAR doesn’t believe in local yellows because they’ve stated in the past it comes down to the process of dispatching equipment and personnel and have them on the racetrack while cars are still running at full speed somewhere else.
Q: I have a question about the virtual energy tank at Le Mans. When the No. 50 winning car crossed the line at Le Mans it had 2% left in the virtual tank and took a full victory lap, albeit at a reduced speed. I would have thought the virtual tank would have reached 0% on the victory lap, but the car had enough gasoline to make it back to the pits. Is it OK that the virtual energy tank reaches 0% but as long as there is enough petrol in the tank for post-race scrutineering the car is still legal?
Tony
STEPHEN KILBEY: This is a very good question, and thankfully there is a relatively simple answer.
The formula is designed around managing the amount of energy that each car is permitted to use in the race itself. The regulations for the FIA WEC Hypercar category specifically state that “for the last stint, the energy calculation will stop on the finish line at the checkered flag.”
That means that, as long as the No. 50 crossed the line with more than 0.0% of its permitted energy, the team would not be penalized. A slowing-down lap does not count towards that total.
Ultimately, the car’s energy percentage that you see in on-screen graphics is not necessarily representative of the actual amount of fuel on board.
Virtual energy tanks are topped up via a sensor on the fuel nozzle, on a sliding scale depending on the amount of time it is connected to the car for refueling. They can have more than that on board, but can’t use it all.
The time it takes to refill a virtual tank fully is precisely calculated to ensure that a car will receive more fuel than it needs for a stint, thus enabling it to complete formation and cooldown laps.
Virtual energy management, measured in megajoules via live monitored driveshaft torque sensors, has been a regular topic of discussion in the WEC paddock for the last two years since it was first introduced.
It exists as a concept to manage stint lengths in Hypercar (and now LMGT3). The rule-makers feel it is necessary due to the wide variety of car types competing in the same class. The key is that a car’s “virtual energy tank” and “fuel tank” should be effectively be treated separately.
In the case of Hypercar, because LMH and LMDh cars are significantly different and therefore challenging to balance, the “virtual energy tank” helps ensure that — in the spirit of BoP — one platform (or specific car) doesn’t hold an inherent advantage on fuel consumption.
This does not remove a team’s ability to stretch the envelope on stint length via “lift and coast” techniques, though. The difference is you are saving “virtual energy” first and foremost, rather than fuel — as the ruleset allows for cars that burn fuel at significantly different rates.
THE FINAL WORD
From Robin Miller’s Mailbag, June 17, 2015
Q: Of course I love your body of work and your always honest opinions. You have been in our sport for some time, so who are your top five all-time drivers for Roger Penske? If you list Will Power I will be saddened.
Mark McKinley, Floyds Knobs, IN
ROBIN MILLER: Mark Donohue, Rick Mears, all three Unsers (that counts as one vote), Tom Sneva and Emmo. I’m basing this on results because Mario and Gary B. were cursed.