Q: With the IMSA season coming to an end in a couple of weeks, have you heard any updates from MSR on its future IMSA plans? It would be a shame to have one of the original teams missing from the paddock next year.
Frank, Mooresville, NC
MP: By the time you’re reading this, the team’s plans for 2024 have been announced. When I spoke with Shank about it last week, he was bullish on MSR’s ability to return in 2025. He and Jim Meyer worked through a bunch of options with manufacturers, but nothing came together to keep the program going next year.
Q: RE: Fire breathing monsters. Several years ago I wrote and suggested that IndyCar take advantage of the unrelenting march of lunacy in F1, i.e., the environmental diminishment of the spectacle that was F1 in the V10 era. Nobody likes the current iteration of cars as much as they did the V10s.
I told IndyCar (they never replied) to adopt a 3.0 liter engine policy, leave it to the manufacturers to determine the configuration, have the cars rev to 18,000 rpms like the old F1 V10s, and voila!, soon IndyCar would replace F1 as the preeminent form of racing on the planet – at least for the spectators. I cannot see a flaw in this idea.
Racing fans to not want to hear engines that sound like Evinrude outboard motors (in the water!). They want fire-breathing, pulsing, hair standing on the back of your neck, beasts being gored like the V10s of yore sound. You did not just hear the vicious sound, you wore it.
Jerold Krouse, Natchez, MS
MP: It is indeed a great idea, and I’d kill for it to happen. The only flaws in the idea are as follows: It would cost IndyCar teams more than their current annual budgets to lease those engines and, unfortunately, Chevy and Honda aren’t interested in high-revving V10s as their preferred road-relevant technology, so there would be no support from the current manufacturers, or the F1 manufacturers who left V10s behind 15 years ago for V8s, and then tiny V6 turbos.
Q: So, the Milwaukee Mile is now back on the IndyCar schedule. I might upset a lot of people by saying this, but I never really understood the hype around this track. It probably has to do with the fact that I’m European, not American, and am among the younger fans, therefore I didn’t grow up with it. I don’t hate it, but don’t like it, either.
First, there’s the track layout. With two quarter-mile long straights and two quarter-mile long corners, you’re going to spend at least as much time cornering as going straight, so a following car will spend as much, if not more, time in the leading car’s dirty air than in its slipstream. One might argue that the same could be said for most ovals, except we’re not talking about a banked superspeedway but a flat, one-mile short oval. Doesn’t sound very exciting to me.
Speaking of the banking, this one confuses me. On one hand, I’ve heard it is pretty much non-existent; but on the other hand, both Wikipedia and this old video from the IndyCar YouTube Channel say it is nine degrees… do you know who’s right?
Then, there’s the racing it produced. You might want to refresh my memory, but among the last races IndyCar had over there, only the 2011 one comes to my mind as a good show. I can’t remember the other ones, as good as they might have been. And after having a look at a couple of videos from the 2012 to 2015 races, this looks to be a track where following another car is quite tricky, because of the dirty air generated by the short oval aero kit. I do recall seeing drivers passing around the outside, but because of the nearly flat corners, I’m guessing it must be rather difficult. And with the two short straights, drafting might also not be very easy. Combine those three points together and I get the feeling that Milwaukee looks to be a place where attempting an overtaking maneuver is rather complicated.
Lastly, there’s the fact that this is a short oval, which is the type of track that I’m having a hard time enjoying. Iowa is usually fun; however, Gateway is a mixed bag; and Phoenix looked to be a place where passing was really difficult unless you had fresher tires.
I get that people like Milwaukee because of its history; however, I would have preferred to see IndyCar prioritizing other venues. If I had to pick an exciting oval in the Midwest, I’d have chosen Michigan or Chicagoland. And for a short oval with a moderate or flat banking, I’d have gone for Puebla or Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez’s oval layout, to capitalize on Pato’s popularity in Mexico. Why didn’t IndyCar think about these before Milwaukee?
Xavier
MP: With you having spent so much time describing all the ways you’re unimpressed by Milwaukee, I’ll skip the part of trying to convince you otherwise. Yes, the corners do have banking, but that measurement is taken from the top of the corners which, in all but the rarest scenarios, aren’t used, so the flattest parts of the corners are where most of the running is done.
Who’s to say IndyCar didn’t think about other tracks before Milwaukee? One thing we know for sure is those tracks didn’t pursue IndyCar to return in the same way Milwaukee did. Why isn’t IndyCar racing in Mexico? Because no track has tried to do a deal with IndyCar. Why isn’t IndyCar racing at Watkins Glen? Because nobody at Watkins Glen is trying to bring IndyCar to Watkins Glen.
I’ll keep using the phrase ‘It takes two to tango,’ and maybe that will start to register with folks who continually ask by IndyCar doesn’t race at Track X.
Q: Before IndyCar announced its race at Thermal Club, I read that they would have to spend millions on safety upgrades to the track. I have never seen mention that Thermal Club made these improvements. Has it done so?
Second, the 2024 schedule is a slap in the face to IndyCar teams after having the best year in racing in over 20 years. To manufacture 17 races out of 13 venues is sad, and a no oval events prior to Indy is not good either. I keep watching all these NASCAR Truck and ARCA races in front of empty stands at Chicago, Kansas and Michigan – why does IndyCar not try and piggyback with one of those series?
AE, Danville, IN
MP: The track made investments in the facility prior to Spring Training in February that allowed it to be given FIA Grade 2 certification, which is the base level IndyCar requires.
The lack of that oval prior to Indy is going to hurt the rookies for sure, and make the Indy 500 more of a jeopardy-fest than it should be. The kids coming up from junior open-wheel racing, or from F2, really need that weekend at Texas to learn the art of high-danger and high-speed oval racing before the 500, because they just don’t get enough training before they reach IndyCar like they once did.
Q: I am wondering, on an extraordinarily hot and sunny day on a superspeedway like IMS, could having a lighter livery make any meaningful difference over a darker livery? Also, what about if there was a set of white alternate tires?
Norm Bob, New Bloomfield, PA
MP: Maybe if we’re talking about 110F and a ton of time running behind the pace car where heat soak is a concern, but we’ve seen dark blue NTT liveries win a ton of races and a championship in recent years, and dark liveries on other cars, plus darker colors on Red Bulls reach a bunch of victory lanes, so other than an extreme situation we might see once every couple of years, it’s a non-issue. These things make a ton of heat on their own. The writing on the sidewalls is white, so adding a white band wouldn’t do much I can think of to alter tire temperatures in a meaningful way.
Q: For the record, I am a huge admirer of Michael Andretti. In many ways his achievements as a team owner surpass his excellent career as a driver. His desire to expand into other series, and commitment to the ladder series and American talent, is admirable. The factory expansion and huge investment to grow further is even more impressive.
However, his most important racing program historically and today is IndyCar. Let’s be frank, AA has been a shambles for longer than I can remember. It hasn’t competed at the top on a consistent basis for many years. The success it has had in other series has largely been through buying into an existing organization. I hope for many reasons Andretti does make it into F1, however I am concerned that a team largely based in spec racing might struggle badly. Given the struggles Michael will now encounter with FOM, I wonder if he ever reflects on his comment made years ago about Joe Blows turning up in IndyCar and his desire for a franchise system?
Finally, as we approach another season in 2024 with the same car, broadly similar engine package and a questionable TV schedule, do you ever hear Penske Entertainment or team owners or any other stakeholders discuss doing things a bit differently? Trying something new? Something has to give eventually. IndyCar risks becoming a club event for rich owners.
John
MP: Yes, I do hear important folks in the paddock express significant desires for changes, but most fear the repercussions of speaking out in public because the series’ owners attack and combat such things on a daily basis. I wish it weren’t this way, but it is, and it didn’t exist to this degree prior to Penske’s purchase of the series in 2020.