Wow, that ICONIC committee sure did make quick work of determining the new engine formula for the IndyCar Series.
Make no mistake, today's announcement is a big nod in Honda's direction.
Honda was the only manufacturer that preferred a 6-cylinder motor for the new 2012 spec.
The stipulation that other manufacturers are allowed to compete with smaller engines is meaningless. Honda's monopoly is secure for the foreseeable future.
That Mr. Honda himself, Gentleman Gil de Ferran, was selected to speak for ICONIC only enhances the impression that the fix was in.
This does not bode well for Delta Wing, the only chassis proposal that did not assume that the engine choice would be the Honda V6.
So, when do we get the Dallara announcement?
Roggespierre
Did you really expect the IIRS to leave Honda out of the deal?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteGood question. I'll admit that it was probably wishful thinking.
I hoped that IndyCar would work harder to slash costs. It isn't as if Honda has been promoting the hell out of the series lately. Perhaps IndyCar negotiated an attractive lease price? If it did not, then somebody should be fired.
I also thought that someone at IndyCar might mention that Motegi and Hideki Mutoh aren't doing much to enhance the marketability of the series, that the strings attached to Honda's "sponsorship" come at a cost. That was probably hoping for too much.
However, I did think that insiders who are disenchanted with Honda might hold some sway.
I guess not.
Roggespierre
Um, I think you're being waaaaaaayyy too cynical and pessimistic about this decision (as I think you are a lot of the time, but I'll focus on this one time). All engines are going to be 2.4 liters, not just the V6s. You said in your post that "smaller engines" will be allowed to compete. 4-cylinders can also be 2.4 liters as well, so the fact that they have less cylinders doesn't mean that they're smaller displacement. Different engines of different configurations can have different characteristics, even at the same displacement (a 4-cylinder will generally be torquier, while a V6 should have better top-end power), so there's not necessarily anything here that rules out somebody running a 2.4 liter 4-cylinder.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I could see IndyCar allowing 4-cylinder engines and/or engines that come in under 2.4 liters extra boost pressure, a larger air restrictor or extra fuel flow. They kind of left that door open in the announcement, if you read closely. From what Randy has said over and over at this point, they know that more than one engine manufacturer is key, due to the extra interest level by the fans and the extra marketing dollars that the manufacturers can provide. If, say, Audi/VW/Porsche wants to come in and try a 2.0 liter 4-cylinder to go against what I assume will be Honda's 2.4 liter V6, I am certain that they'll take a look at likely performance benchmarks for the two engines, give both a fighting chance against each other, and them if one is an utterly dominant package, make incremental allowances to the one who is behind (I'd say do that no more than twice a season, so that there is incentive not to sandbag to get a better restrictor size or whatever at the next race).
Anyway, I don't really understand why you'd assume the worst off of a pretty simple press release. To my mind, this relatively open spec for small displacemnt turbo engines has been the way to go all along for the 2012 car, and to me it sounds like they're picking the route that will spark the most interest from manufacturers and fans alike. It's an encouraging sign in my book.
Maybe you are being told one thing RP and they are saying something else behind closed doors? My guess is this still is going to be a spoiled rich kid's game and with that a steady decline of Indy Car will continue.Even in this society only a select few can afford the numbers presented here. Manufacturers can not afford this game currently, as profits are marginal at best and value received for this product does not make it a bargain. GM,Ford,etc...simply can't afford to throw money into a hole. Latest attendance & television figures reinforce that. If Honda can...then we continue down the same road......until it ends.
ReplyDeleteJesus Christ, oldwrench, if you're that pessimistic that nothing can save IndyCar, what are you still doing here? What kind of magic, $10,000, 1000 HP engine do you want?
ReplyDeleteMy point is this: all car manufacturers who make any kind of turbocharged engine in the 2.0-2.4 liter range will take a look at IndyCar, even if it's a perfunctory one. If they see what Izod apparently sees in the series, where they can "buy low, sell high", then they'll come play. If any of them think they can spend $5 million to develop and build an engine that'll win them the Indy 500, which even in its diminished state, nearly every American recognizes as a household name even if they don't watch it, then they'll do it. That is a bargain, in marketing terms. A drop in the bucket, in corporate spending terms. Tell a corporate bean counter that they could buy a 3-hour infomercial on Memorial Day Sunday afternoon (which is what it'll be, if they run up front all day and win in 2012) for $5 million plus the cost of some decals, and they'll do freaking backflips before they sign the check for the first dyno run. I'm being a little dramatic here, and that $5 million is ridiculously optimistic, but my point is that if a manufacturer can make the sums add up (and I think at least a couple will, from what I've heard), then they'll be here.
Speedgeek,
ReplyDeleteYou might be right. Perhaps I am too cynical about this issue.
I'm the first to admit that I don't know squat about the technical aspects of the sport. Frankly, they don't interest me. I am enticed by the action on the track and the economics of getting the product to market.
It is the latter that I choose to analyze here. In that regard, I am not cynical. I'm dealing with the facts as they are. The product IS overpriced by at least 400%. American auto racing is an established industry that has established benchmarks. The economic problem is not difficult to figure out.
Regarding Randy Bernard's quotes on multiple manufacturers, I must admit that I am curious as to exactly what he means. If he's talking about factory-backed efforts, then I think he's wrong. IndyCar does not necessarily need multiple auto manufacturers in order to succeed.
If he means that IndyCar needs multiple engine manufacturers, privateers included, then I would agree with him in total. Some of the best competition of the CART days came when Cosworth slugged it out with Ilmor. That both engines were not badged by auto manufacturers did not matter.
Of course, in those days the IMS did not require engine builders to be event and series sponsors. That has since changed - a big mistake, in my estimation. As Oldwrench has written, it's time to get manufacturers out of the underwriting business and throw them back in the supply chain where they belong.
I hope that you're right about the engines. I, too, would like to see multiple manufacturers because I would like to see suppliers have to compete for the racing teams' business. That is how cost is decreased and performance is increased, at least in theory.
Best Regards,
Roggespierre
That is a bit over stated! No they won't. Most companies today are staying with "traditional" advertising and marketing. The real move in current marketing is to social media....not car racing. Ford's recent introduction of the new "Fiesta" has had a major push on both its website and social media. They know where to sell the product and this ain't it!! Secondly, very few have turbo units presently. Until that changes don't expect anyone to be going to Indy Car just dying to get in. That isn't happening. Product lines have been trimmed to cut cost, simplify production and utilize one platform over several models. Companies that accepted goverment money are limited in how marketing dollars are spent and those that didn't are spending money in the most productive media. Long story short, I may to you be pesimisstic, but I feel I am more realistic. Markets determine where money is spent. Indy Car is NOT a good market currently.
ReplyDeleteOldwrench,
ReplyDeleteIndyCar is a horrible market currently, yes.
That is true for two reasons.
1. It is a declining advertising platform.
2. It is competing with new, more precisely quantified platforms.
The second factor should not be underestimated. Even Honda barely uses IndyCar as an advertising platform anymore. Honda is there to make cash money, which is most certainly does.
That's why Honda is going into 2-liter racing: to make money. That's the only reason to be there because there literally is no audience.
Honda clearly sees racing as a bottom-line profit center. That is why I am so skeptical of its motives when it comes to IndyCar. This series does not generate enough economic value. It can scarcely afford to allow a supplier to extract precious liquidity.
Best Regards,
Roggespierre
RP: no question!!! So who is going to spend 5 million to develop an engine? If they did it would equate to $ 151,515.15 US dollars per unit alone (based on 33 cars) or $ 75,757 for two engines per one car team. That dosen't include material or labor, just development! Honda has a good deal and I don't see it changing. 90 grand a unit for a fixed cost item and exclusive marketing. Not bad in this market!
ReplyDeleteHey, I hope I'm right too. I spent a good long time being down in the dumps about the sport that it feels good to be optimistic about the little upward momentum that we've seemed to have had lately (or maybe it's just decreased downward momentum, depending on how you look at it). I just think that the engine spec that IndyCar chose was by far the best option, at least statistically speaking. Currently, manufacturers making turbo engines in the 2.0-2.4 liter range are GM, Ford, Chrysler/FIAT, Hyundai, Mitsubishi, Subaru, VW/Audi, Citroen/Peugeot, Honda and Mazda (plus maybe one or two others that I forgot), and at least BMW is planning on introducing one soon. That's 11 manufacturers right now, and I wouldn't be surprised if more follow suit. It's just a very appealing displacement/power/economy package, if you ask me (in fact, I'm holding out hope that Ford comes out with a 2.0 liter EcoBoost Fusion in a couple of years, and if they do, I'll be among the first to buy one). If IndyCar can entice two of those 11 manufacturers, I'd be happy. Plus, this formula is going to fairly well match the ACO specs for Le Mans prototype engines, so it'd be possible for a manufacturer to defray costs by using the engine in both places. I do also hope that they leave the engines open to non-badged engines, but like Oldwrench says, it seems like you may also have to buy ad time to come play. We'll see what happens there.
ReplyDeletehttp://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/indycar-2012-engine-has-manufacturers-listening/
ReplyDelete“I think our guys are impressed with Randy’s leadership and where he wants to take things and Ford still sees value in the Indianapolis 500,” said Ford spokesman Kevin Kennedy.
Provided they are interested in participating, Mazda is one of few marques who could answer the call for 2012 with an existing product. Their 2.0L MZR-R sportscar engine, now in its fourth year of service, already uses alternative fuels with BP’s Biofuel Isobutanol, and generates 550hp with a large air restrictor. Without the restrictor, reaching the stated ceiling of 700 hp would not be an issue.
The MZR-R hasn’t been without its problems; built in 2007, it came in tiny and overly light. With the massive downforce figures seen in the ALMS LMP2 category, it suffered from flexing issues which led to a string of failures.
With a new, more robust block and cam cover mounting system, it has solved its reliability issues so far in 2010. While the 2010 version of an MZR-R lease agreement is still being debated, it could be similar to what MAZDASPEED offered in 2008 and 2009: A three-year lease for one engine, including all electronics and ancillaries, for $60,000 the first year, $50,000 the second and $40,000 the third. With two to three engine rebuilds added in at $35K a piece, you still walk out the door around the $150K range each year. Compare that to the $1.5M/year teams spend now, and annual budgets are relieved of a rather large burden.
Speedgeek; thats why we are here! We talk about this openly with no malice. Like you I value opinion. Even if I don't always agree I still want to hear it. It gives us all something to think about and hopefully we can find a point to present to Indy Car. So keep burning the brain cells and keep the opinions coming!!
ReplyDeleteSpeedGeek,
ReplyDeleteThank you for explaining that to me. I suspect that you dumbed it down so that I could understand it. I appreciate that very much.
I am on the brink of changing my mind, or at least of keeping an open mind.
Many thanks.
Roggespierre
John,
ReplyDeleteThanks for providing the quote. SpeedGeek brought me to the brink. You pushed me over the edge.
I also appreciate the cost ramifications that you have provided.
Oldwrench, too.
I'll take this to the top in the morning.
Best Regards,
Roggespierre
Now...take away the lease option and make it an outright purchase and guess what???? You got an engine that you OWN! You get to tweak it, rub it, fondle it and massage it into a power unit of your own design. If you win...pat yourself on the back. If it blows up...you get to go back and start over again. I think they call this R.A.C.I.N.G !!! Makes for interesting competition and a outstanding spectator sport !!! You remember spectators....they call them FANS!!! And with that, Fans bring advertising. I think they are called sponsors!!! And with that you get television and more FANS!! Isn't this how it worked in the 80's with a thing called CART???
ReplyDeleteRog--even though you seem negative to me, I can still sense your passion and your hope for the series. that's why I like reading you, even though I disagree a lot. I don't know who Speedgeek is--but he always makes sense to me.
ReplyDeleteAnd--sorry--but I'm so over people who just like to bitch no matter what.
Here's what you didn't read today:
ReplyDeletehttp://bleacherreport.com/articles/400545-indycar-mistake-of-iconic-proportions
Andy
Andy,
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of your points, but differ as to one conclusion. My take on all this with the ICONIC committee is that they're following in the footsteps of the FIA or ACO and what we'll see with a new chassis proposal will be some sort of homologation process using the current car as a performance benchmark. So teams will be able to run the current car if they so choose with no performance disadvantage to newer chassis. Just like the motor program, they're trying to increase variety while equalizing competition. That approach works to one degree or another with various sports car racing series and it might work for IndyCar.
I'm still not certain we've heard the last of the DeltaWing group though. Based on an interview last week, Penske seems to have changed his tune a little:
http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=370196&FS=INDYCAR
Q: For Roger and also if Chip wants to follow. Since Chip's already been playing chess like two years ahead with the Delta wing car and espousing innovation very strongly for this race in the series, what's your position on the return of true innovation to Indy and the Series, are you for it? And do you think it's critical to the revitalization of Indy car racing.
PENSKE: I think that change is always good. It's going to shake up the field. One thing we want to do is look at cost. I've followed the Delta Wing project from the beginning; I'm a supporter. I want to see a car built, and we've got to get the funding to build that car, get it on the racetrack, let people see it. There's an interest on four-cylinder versus six-cylinder engines. They want to have potentially a formula where you could have one or the other, which I think is good. There's a lot of interest internationally on four-cylinder engines which will be run in Formula One and DTM and rallying and maybe we have to have a derivative of that over there.
I think this is all good. Under the current process we're taking our time, everybody can be heard, we're just not making a bunch of rules in the back room because at the end of the day the car owners are the ones who have to pay for it. If we're going to make a change, let's make one that shows the fans we have something different and we have something economically and commercially that's beneficial for the teams. So to me I'm all in favor of it.
……………………………………………………………….
"I've followed the Delta Wing project from the beginning; I'm a supporter. I want to see a car built..."
Bottom line: "… at the end of the day the car owners are the ones who have to pay for it."
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteYour remarks and your presence are appreciated.
I also gather that SpeedGeek is a reasonable fellow - at least, I assume SpeedGeek is a guy.
Sorry to seem negative - I guess that I am, at times. Please have no doubt that I really do want IndyCar to succeed.
Best Regards,
Roggespierre
I just hope by the mid 20 teens, Honda can find a Japanese driver out there that is worth a damn. Everybody they have trotted out for Indy Car action has sucked donkeys.
ReplyDeleteI mean, how hard can it be to find one young man or women in the entire country of Japan that is actually a competent race driver. Come on Honda! Don't let the American race fan down like that. We want to see the "best" from Japan duke it out against the "best" from Brazil and the "best" from Venezuela and the "best" from England against 2 or 3 owner's kids from America. That is what all 400,000 or so still watching on Versus want! Give it to us, Honda!
And please, continue your overpriced engine leasing to keep the number of entries down at Indy. I'd hate for some of your full-time ride buyer teams to actually have to work and qualify for the Indy 500 again. Unless you count full-timer Milka Donuts not making it this year, as proof of "solid competition".
We need more Honda and more Dallara and more marble-rific Firestone tires (because one lane racing is what we all love to watch) to keep Indy Style Racing churning along towards well..whatever they are churning along for.
John,
ReplyDeleteThe deviation from that logic is announcing a spec for 2012 that does not include the existing Honda V8.
Yes, it is true that a new engine platform could then be installed in the current chassis. That's what I had proposed for 2010, then 2011 as time elapsed.
But to do so in 2012, as the majority of the field is filled with new chassis, will be financially imprudent. At that point, you would be wiser to buy the spec package. And there will be no market for your old one.
Before the IRL was born, that sort of mandate did not exist. Teams ran old cars as long as was necessary, or kept them as T cars. The option to sell them to a start-up was on the table as well.
Not now. No changes until 2012 at the earliest, and then you go all in...or you go home.
Andy
John, concerning your figures on the AER Mazda MZR-R:
ReplyDeleteBowlby and Delta selected this package, presumably since the engine management system had already been developed. The light weight was most likely the critical factor.
Lafontaine of Delta wrote that this engine was $150K per unit. No where have I seen a mention that there was a lease program applicable...and it seems that Delta would be anxious to point one out, in support of their "half the cost" claim.
Dyson Racing declined to comment to my question as to whether they had been contacted by Bowlby. Their four cylinder installation was the examplar I showed to several GM Ecotec builders: the narrower chassis and lighter weight of the Dallara as compared to the ALMS Lola would have imposed less load on the block architecture, which has already proven to be quite stout.
By the way, nice to see that Randy showed up. Too bad it wasn't the one invited by the Jackass Minion.
Andy
Jackass Minion.