7 replies to this topic

[demonhorse]

http://www.champcarw...cle.asp?ID=9727

CART: CHAMP CAR WORLD SERIES ANNOUNCES NEW CHASSIS AND ENGINE PACKAGE

I think this looks like a good car that may stir my own interest in US racing again. However the addition of fins and 'shark like' rear section to the sidepod and the raised nose does also revive my theory that a 'champ car' is simply a slight modification of an F1 car of 4-5 years previous.

Thoughts Champcar fans?

Edited by demonhorse, 14 October 2005 - 06:42 PM.

[pumpdoc]

         I like it, it looks fast just sitting there...............Makes an IRL car look like the piece of crap that it is..........

[AutoRacer5]

Looks pretty cool.

[demonhorse]

pumpdoc, on Oct 15 2005, 01:01 AM, said:

      I like it, it looks fast just sitting there...............Makes an IRL car look like the piece of crap that it is..........

...and pretty much always has been. Though I hear that now, two or three times a year, they have to turn RIGHT in IRL races...   (and have had to redesign their braking systems accordingly ) Have I heard correctly?

Edited by demonhorse, 15 October 2005 - 11:04 AM.

[Senna]

Interesting…

[pumpdoc]

demonhorse, on Oct 15 2005, 04:03 AM, said:

...and pretty much always has been. Though I hear that now, two or three times a year, they have to turn RIGHT in IRL races...   (and have had to redesign their braking systems accordingly ) Have I heard correctly?

You have heard right.......................But they are still crap cars that are losing Chevy after this year and Toyota at the end of next year as engine suppliers........................leaving just Honda............

[kup]

as CART as F-1 i`d like to be:
Less Aerodynamic wings - take away all small wingies (for overtaking) !
More grooves and 2-dry 1-mixed 2-wet tyre types not more !
and 1 tyre complect for 2 gp (as engines in 2005)
F-1 must be a test zone for road cars, slix has best grip, but wears too quick !

[funkejay]

Click on this link for a short video explaining the differences between the "old" Lola and the "new" Panoz constructed CART chassis.

http://boss.streamos...cws_chassis.wvx

Although I don't think the new chassis is as nice to look at as the old Lola, it definitely has one advantage, it's made in America. I don't subscribe to the view that being miA will guarantee that it is any better than any other chassis, but as a series that is based largely in America, with predominantly American teams competing, I can understand their decision to move to an Amercian designed and built chassis.

However, if CART is committed to regaining its market share in US racing, the one thing they would be well advised to do is examine why so many of the non-US races are so much more successful than the US based events (with the notable exception of Long Beach). I went to the innaugral race in Edmonton Canada this year, which is a little backwater city in Northern Alberta, based on a temporary circuit on one the city's two airports, and there was a total attendance over the three day event of over 200,000 people. It set a Canadian record for attendance at a CART event, and surpased the attendance at every modern CART event in the US (once again, with the notable exception of Long Beach).

The point though is that every CART event that has been held in Canada generates similar numbers, from Toronto, to Vancouver, to Montreal, and now Edmonton.

Then you need only look at the attendance at races in Mexico to be completely blown away. Routinely they get crowds over 300,000, with a record attendance at Mexico City in 2003 with a three day total of 402,413 people present to watch the Champ Cars (with 221,011 on Sunday alone - also a record for single day attendance). Those are similar to Formula 1 numbers......

But back to the chassis - one other thing they have definitely done right is to reduce the size of the wings and eliminate winglets and vanes on the upper and side surfaces of the car. Almost all of the downforce is now being generated by the underbody, tunnel and diffuser, so as to clean up the air coming off the back of the car. This will make close quarter racing virtually guaranteed.

Max Mosely has also suggested a very innovative approach to aero regulations for F1, similar to what CART has adopted, by reducing wing sizes and eliminating all other body mounted aero devices to eliminate the problems with dirty air, and relying instead almost entirely on underbody devices to generate downforce. Where Mosely has been innovative is by not mandating a limit to the dimensions of any such tunnels, diffusers etc. but rather suggesting that there be a maximum amount of allowable downforce generated by each chassis, that can then be tested by the scrutineers before and after a race. Of course this poses its own problems with the construction and trasnportation of what would likely be a portable wind tunnel capable of accurately measuring that downforce, but such practical concerns aside, it is a novel idea.

Edited by funkejay, 15 October 2005 - 04:56 PM.