Yahoo Autos The RACER Mailbag, January 3
Welcome to the RACER Mailbag. Questions for any of RACER’s writers can be sent to mailbag@racer.com. We can’t guarantee that every letter will be published, but we’ll answer as many as we can. Published questions may be edited for length and clarity. Questions received after 3pm ET each Monday will appear the following week.
Q: So, it’s all doom and gloom for IndyCar right now. What I’m wondering is, how much Ganassi, Andretti, Zak Brown, Bobby Rahal and the other team owners and various stakeholders are doing? No way can they let the series and their investment just drive itself into a big black hole. Any rumors, thoughts or known dialogue to share?
Oliver Wells
MARSHALL PRUETT: No, it isn’t all doom and gloom. The series will have a great season with a bunch of cars driven by mostly amazing pilots at every round, just as it did in 2023. The series also has some serious questions to answer about where it’s headed and what kind of racing series it wants to be. Both things can exist at the same time without living in an extreme state of things only being all good or all bad.
Nothing to share that would be of value. I’ll listen to a team owner eviscerate the series in private, and then read some version of “everything is awesome” in a quote from the same person the next day. Once upon a time, IndyCar team owners spoke freely. We are no longer living in those times.
Q: I’m sorry to hear about Gil de Ferran. He truly was a class act in every way.
After reading your article on him, I noticed his positive mention of Formula E, and I share his sentiment that it might be a solution to IndyCar’s challenges. I can envision a trial balloon scenario where Formula E utilizes the Indy road course. While manufacturers can be a double-edged sword in racing, it’s worth noting that they tend to gravitate toward EVs, recognizing it as the future. As an ex-racer myself, I understand that it’s not just about the noise but also appreciating the skill of drivers maneuvering cars at high speeds and close quarters.
What are your thoughts on how a Formula E car would perform in this context, or is this idea just too far-fetched?
Bruce
MP: I’m picturing IndyCar/Indy 500 traditionalists punching their screens right now, Bruce. It’s always about the noise in racing. Always. IndyCar is going hybrid, rather than all-electric, because it currently fits the auto industry market; F1’s been hybrid for a decade and IMSA’s now in year two of hybridization with its GTP cars, so it’s a relevant adjustment for the series.
Formula E has gone from being a complete joke of a racing series to something that, on the topic of quality in competition, has become remarkably good. But it’s just not something that has established itself as a hugely popular form of racing. Minus the huge ticket giveaways, there’s just not much there to point to as a product that has gained a sizable following.
It’s a giant opportunity for manufacturers to promote their hybrid/EV products, and in a few too many cases, to dive in for a few years, bathe themselves in eco-glory, reap the marketing rewards, and jet. I’d hope IndyCar would stay on its current hybrid path and skip the all-electric virtue signaling.
Q: I was recently watching the fabulous movie “Grand Prix” (1966) and noticed that they had the drivers in the movie wear something akin to dog tags on their wrist. While I know it’s a movie, it did make curious if drivers have anything like that nowadays? Is it even needed?
Matthew Houk, Columbus, OH
MP: With the introduction of computers and databases into the sport, we have a fairly standard practice among pro racing series where all of a driver’s vital info is readily available to emergency crews and onsite medical teams on a phone or tablet.
That said, it’s still common for a driver’s helmet to have their DOB and blood type listed on the back.
Since we have another Mailbag full of ideas about how IndyCar can increase its visibility, let’s see if the series can learn anything from great motorsport promotional campaigns from years past, starting with the Yardley hospitality unit at the British GP in 1971. In fairness, IndyCar already has a pretty good handle on this sort of thing. But why did that woman in the white sweater bring a bucket to a grand prix? Motorsport Images
Q: First, what a rough December for IndyCar in general. I remember watching Gil de Ferran set that closed course track record. Just the sound of that Honda engine that day was amazing. He was a gentleman on and off the track. He will be missed.
Second, I have picked up the World of Outlaws game on the PS5 and noticed that iRacing was a developer. I love the game and have become more interested in dirt racing now. I heard IndyCar was working with iRacing again. Could IndyCar take a page out of the World of Outlaws game? The resources are there from iRacing already and this could open the game up to multiple platforms as well instead of just PC.
Not the awesome Alumax driver Stefan Johansson
MP: All things are possible. When the collapse with IndyCar’s former gaming partner was happening, iRacing stood out above all others as the top choice to select, which I believe most wrote at the time, given the strong previous relationship that existed between the two companies. Considering how much of a dumpster fire was on display with the former gaming partner, I’d expect IndyCar to task its next partner to come up with something that kicks all kinds of ass. Forget iRacing; it’s IndyCar that has something big to prove with its next vendor choice and the final product it delivers.
Q: Marshall, if possible please give us some inside info regarding the IndyCar paddock’s interest in changing the status quo. I’m sure Roger Penske and company aren’t depriving them all of what they collectively want. If Honda can’t even find a business case as is, I can’t imagine these teams finding themselves so flush with cash that they are clamoring for an entirely new chassis and formula so they can destroy them in downtown Nashville and Detroit for no purse money.
The current cars race well, and the engines are bulletproof. Regarding Indy, it sure seems like there is a speed limit of 235 since they’ve been actively trying to prevent going 236 again for the last 27 years. The wheel flying over the stands last year certainly doesn’t make me think they are wondering how to make these things faster. Why spend a gazillion dollars to have slightly differently-looking cars and a different engine formula that, wait for it, go 235 at Indy?
TV ratings seem stabilized at underwhelming. Pay drivers who seem, at best, somewhat over their heads. Sponsors seem to be a random mix of B2B-focused companies I’ve never heard of until they joined, a Midwest supermarket chain, and personal friends of A.J. Foyt. The fan base was decimated 30 years ago, while also seemingly stabilized — I have a hard time seeing it growing any more with the millennial/ Gen Z crowd who are needed to make this thing grow. The split? 900 horsepower 2.65l V8s? Reynard vs. Lola? The only people over 40 who know are in in the comments section below, and people under 40 don’t know what the hell we’re talking about.
Indy, Long Beach, a revolving cast of Midwest ovals, a few nice road courses, downtown festivals, and maybe switch the bodywork around every couple years for as long as this all lasts. For better or worse, I think that’s where we are. The great old days are on YouTube. As Robin once responded to me when I lamented that they never should have removed dirt cars from the championship, “Just go buy some Dick Wallen and enjoy yourself.”
Ryan, NJ
MP: On the why-bother-with-a-new-car subject, you’re right. The DW12s are perfectly fine as-is and the engines are, as you say, bulletproof. There are a number of teams with a lot of sponsors of investors who are bringing stability and growth, so altogether, and from inside the IndyCar bubble, all is good.
And all of this is part of the big questions Penske Entertainment needs to ask itself and answer in the coming years. Does it want to take a knee and concede defeat — admit that IndyCar’s best days are in the past — by sticking with the same-old-same-old, or is it willing to fight and be brave and try to improve its place in the sports entertainment world?
Inside the IndyCar bubble, we’re kicking ass and taking names, as my father loved to say. And when you step out of that bubble, you quickly realize IndyCar is all but invisible to the outside world. So that’s what the series owner needs to contemplate: Stick with the same cars and the same formula and keep winning inside the bubble, or try to burst that bubble and become more like what it once was?
There are some passionate team owners who’ve told me for years — pre-dating Penske’s purchase of the series — that they want new cars, and to modernize all kinds of things. Off the top of my head, I’d put the yes/no answers close to 50/50, but since Penske wants to stick with the current cars and formula, the thoughts of the paddock don’t matter in the same way they did prior to the purchase.
Q: When an IndyCar Series driver does testing for a manufacturer of tires, engines or chassis, or at the request of the series, is that driver compensated by the entity that desires the testing?
Mike Fox, Kalamazoo, MI
MP: Often, yes, but there’s no specific answer as each driver’s contract with their team is different. In some cases, it’s an all-inclusive deal where the driver goes to driver wherever the team tells them to drive, and with others, it’s an added fee. Select few drivers also have direct business relationships with the manufacturers — some for personal services like appearances and speaking engagements and promotions — and those could also include professional services like added track and simulator testing to help the brand develop engines or aero or whatever else they come up with.
At the far end of such things, the little TKM/Genoa Racing IRL team I helped to run was essentially saved by Firestone’s Joe Barbieri in 1987/1998 when we were dead broke and Joe, who we’d known from Genoa’s many years in Indy Lights, added us as an official test team. We’d get back from wherever Firestone wanted us to test and I’d head straight to the office to create and fax (yes, faxing…this was long ago) an invoice to Joe. Most of those invoices were very generous on their part; a $50,000 bill wasn’t uncommon, and for our small and lean outfit, the profits kept us afloat, ensured everybody got paid, and I’m sure our driver, Greg Ray, also got paid for his time once our invoice was handled.
Q: I started researching hotels for the IMSA weekend at Watkins Glen. There doesn’t appear to be many good choices for quality and location close to the track.
Which town do all the top teams stay in? They should know all the best places.
David, Coventry, CT
MP: Corning and Painted Post are the two local-to-Watkins towns I stay in, as do most teams, with Corning as the first option.
Q: After reading Robin’s Mailbag for the better part of a decade, I am over IndyCar doom and gloom. It is fantastic racing that has increased ratings over the last few years. I don’t know what people expect. Roger Penske is currently 86 years old. He seems to be savvy to how media has changed in the last few decades. I love Peacock’s streaming of every event. If you have purchased a television in the last decade, it probably has internet connectivity. I am 40 years old and have bridged the gap of OTA, cable, satellite, and now exclusively stream all of my traditional TV offerings. It is simple and easier to find than scrolling through pages of DirecTV offerings. Streaming is the future. I go to four or five IndyCar races per year and watch nearly every session through Peacock or Hulu.
If IndyCar needs anything, it is more social media presence that brings the greatest form of auto racing in North America to the forefront. Finding interest among the young people who gravitate to F1 and NASCAR is the key. This is not an issue of finding more ovals. Build it, and they will come is the new decree for television. I am tired of hearing people complaining about television packages. I must reiterate, if 86-year-old Roger Penske sees the wisdom in new streaming media, then everyone will probably follow.
Christopher Logan, Marion, IN
MP: Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Christopher.
Idea No. 2: Give drivers a beer as soon as they retire from a race. It’s a bunch of Tik-Tok-friendly moments just waiting to happen. Motorsport Images
Q: Use a spec engine (since it seems like that’s where we’re truly headed) at all rounds except for the Indy 500. It can be used for the 500, but isn’t mandatory. It’s spec. It’s affordable.
For the 500, IndyCar should completely open up the engine rulebook and allow manufacturers to run whatever they want as long as it fits under the skin of the new IndyCar chassis. If Tesla can develop a battery that will charge in 15 seconds without exploding and wants to try and run an EV for the 500, go for it! if someone else wants to try and cram a V8 hybrid under the cowling and have that screaming into Turn 1, even better. Let engine manufacturers bring whatever they want for the 500. If the engine suppliers aren’t interested, then we get what we’re headed towards anyway: a spec series. But if a few take a chance, it’d be huge!
If they find value in being able to develop engines for the 500 then the headlines write themselves: “McLaren Mercedes wins the 500 with a version of the four-cylinder hybrid found in the AMG C63 S E Performance.” I know it’ll never happen, but seems like it costs nothing while also giving us a chance to attract some manufacturers interested in the ROI that winning the biggest race in the world might give them.
As a bonus, they get to develop (or redeploy from other series) engines that are most relevant to their interests, and potentially allocate development costs among programs. Maybe some F1 teams even become interested as a way to shelter some F1 engine development costs in their “Indy 500 engine department.”
I know this will never happen and I’m sure there are myriad reasons why it’s a terrible idea, but it’d just be nice if IndyCar was relevant again.
Stewart
MP: The word “relevant” is immensely powerful, isn’t it?
Q: One of the arguments for not being able to utilize different engines in the Dallara chassis was that it was designed to accept the current Chevy and Honda engines. Back in the day when we had a more open engine formula, we had four-cylinder Offenhausers, stock block V8s, stock block turbo V6s and Cosworth V8s in Eagle chassis. That’s a pretty wide variety of engines fitting in one type of chassis. Apparently Dan Gurney knew how to design a flexible-use chassis; why can’t Dallara?
If we did get a third OEM, would their design have to be compromised just so it would fit? Is there any flexibility with Dallara? I would hope that the next chassis design would encourage more diverse engines to be used.
I thought Honda was being very honest in sharing what needs to be addressed to keep it in IndyCar and keeping the series progressing. The truth has to hurt sometimes. Chevy’s response was very disappointing. It lacked courage and honesty about how dire the situation is. It was a response from the Good Old Boys Club. Its view was everything is fine, and avoided a concise plan of action to keep IndyCar relevant in the future.
Dave Wells
MP: Dallara can design whatever it’s asked to; citing Gurney and a design from 40 years ago isn’t applicable since it was a different formula. If IndyCar wanted Dallara to make a new chassis that could accept engines of all different sizes and shapes, it would do so. IndyCar would also need to change its engine formula to allow those different sizes and shapes.
I’d look at the third OEM situation in a different manner: It isn’t about whether it could fit in a DW12, it’s whether it matches the same 2.2-liter twin-turbo V6 formula Chevy and Honda conform to with their motors. We are in a specific engine formula that debuted in 2012, so that’s what a third would need to bring to compete. That could change tomorrow if IndyCar made the call or if Chevy/Honda agreed to let a new brand run with something that isn’t 2.2L, which would be a first, as far as I can recall, with such an allowance.
Q: If you attended any of the F1 races at Indianapolis in the early 2000s, what’s the first thing you remember? I bet it’s the unholy howl of the engines screeching down the front stretch. Even 20 years later, we remember sounds.
IndyCar needs a spec engine that sounds good. F1 cars have no character these days, so this could be a positive differentiating factor from F1. Perhaps an update of the Cosworth XFE? Hell, even a Judd V10 sounds better than the current engine. Just anything that would make a casual fan or someone walking by the track hear it and think, “what the hell is that?”
Ben, Buffalo Grove, IL
MP: No Indy F1 visits for me; my last F1 race was Canada in 1999, I think, where I was engineering between IndyCar weekends in the Atlantic Championship. Agreed on sounds; ours is one of the few sports where the sounds created by the tool we use to compete with can make lasting memories — good, bad, or indifferent. If IndyCar abandoned its manufacturer-led engine formula, there’s all kinds of motors that could be considered that sing and make people smile.
Q: Do you know anything about the IndyCar Live app subscription for 2024? I don’t live in U.S. and in my country there’s no TV coverage. I was left to find illegal streams to watch the races.
2023 was the first year in ages that I could watch IndyCar via the Live feature (for my country, races were also broadcast — same feed from Peacock, and all activities stay in the platform for replay). And I paid 30 dollars for the full season! I would love to not have a TV deal but keep the streaming.
The lack of an early bid offer to renew subscription and all this talk about the series wanting more money from broadcast deals seems to suggest that this wonderful deal might not be back to 2024.
Please let IndyCar officials know that there are also die-hard fans outside U.S. in countries that are small enough to not bother with the TV package discussion, and that are young enough to prefer streaming than TV. Actually, we don’t even have a TV.
Lucas Fromit
MP: IndyCar was kind enough to provide the following info in response to your question:
We appreciate the positive feedback. IndyCar has been very happy with the growing number of subscribers to IndyCar Live and its positive reception across the world. We are looking at ways to make the offerings even better for next year and will begin offering 2024 subscription packages shortly after the new year.
Q: It is not easy, finding the next U.S. talent. Thirteen years ago, Josef Newgarden jumped back into the U.S. scene after a miserable season in the GP3 Series. He would later win the Indy Lights, now called the Indy NXT series, in 2011 before becoming a contender with Penske. Two titles later, he won finally an Indy 500.
As of looking for a successor, it is a hard task. There is Nolan Siegel, Jacob Abel and Louis Foster returning, with Myles Rowe making his Indy NXT debut in 2024. As far as dark horses go, there is Bryce Aron, who was picked up by Andretti Global. Bryce’s Euro Formula Open season was way too easy due to small number of entries. Kaylen Frederick, on the other hand, was not the same after his poor three seasons in the FIA F3 series after winning the 2020 GB3 Championship. During the Chris Griffiths memorial post-season test, both Bryce and Kaylen performed well. But Kaylen is yet to have something for 2024.
Is there a possibility that Bryce or Kaylen could become the Next Newgarden?
JLS, Chicago, IL
MP: Possible? Yes. Likely? No, not until either one shows us they are capable. Both strike me as drivers who will need at least two seasons in NXT to give a proper account of their talent and potential. But before them, we have Rowe and Siegel, as you mentioned, who are further along on the USF Championships/Indy NXT ladder, so that’s where my eyes are focused, and behind them, Michael d’Orlando, Nikita Johnson, Simon Sikes, Yuven Sundaramoorthy, Jace Denmark, Bijoy Garg, Jack William Miller, Reece Gold, Jagger Jones, and those you mentioned are all capable of becoming our next American stars.
Idea No. 3: Embrace nautical vibes. Might work better at Long Beach than, say, Iowa. Motorsport Images
Q: Is there anything to the rumors that if Andretti Cadillac makes it onto the F1 grid, GM/Chevy would re-evaluate its participation in IndyCar?
Debbie Li
MP: We asked GM shortly after the original announcement was made and were told that joining F1 would not come at the expense of competing in IndyCar. That was about a year ago, I believe. Based on the flurry of non-answer answers I got from GM while asking about its thoughts and future plans related to IndyCar about a month ago, I can understand why this rumor is alive and healthy.
Q: How flipping hard is it to copy F1’s success? It’s not the cars, they aren’t interesting. They are so big now that they look slow in person and sound like crap. Plain and simple, F1 is popular simply because of “Drive To Survive.” I’ve been at COTA for F1 when nobody was there, and when it’s been wall to wall with people. DTS saved them from having to sell the track.
“100 Days To Indy” was somewhat an answer, but not really. Who thought it was a good idea to stop at Indy? Just stupid. All of the juicy stuff that happens in the season happens after Indy! Does F1 stop after Monaco? No! Rename the show and make it go all year. Unless the only race we want people to watch is Indy? Also, let’s get it on one of the big streamers; Netflix or Prime. People are just overwhelmed with having so many streaming services, so just make it easy on the consumer.
Speaking of one of the large streaming platforms, I’m all for one of the large ones having TV rights if they are willing to pay and give a DTS-like show. I can then watch the racing live from my phone anywhere, which is my preference with Peacock. I’m almost 50 and I’m not going to camp out on my couch all day to watch a race. I want to watch it on the go or catch the highlights. But I never miss a race and rarely miss qualifying.
I’m probably in the minority but I love the format of the Iowa weekend. I’m finally going to get to go this year because my wife and daughters will go to watch the concerts. I’m also a fan of the race at the Thermal Club. Highlighting IndyCars in a high-end facility isn’t a bad thing. Yes, the tickets aren’t for the average guy, but let’s play it up and have it look like a grid-walk at F1. IndyCar needs to be on a pedestal.
Justin
MP: IndyCar needs a million more fans like you, Justin. Thanks for being all-in.
Q: It is clear a third manufacturer has no interest in a hybrid IndyCar motor. They haven’t since this was announced years ago. One of the two existing manufacturers no longer wants to compete due to their disinterest in the formula and lack of return on investment. It would seem it’s time for IndyCar to shift to a new formula altogether.
Formula E is clearly a huge draw for automakers. And while those seem like golf carts compared to IndyCar, it would seem the logical step to make those batteries even more powerful and take them racing in the big leagues rather than around lousy city circuits.
My preferred option would be a hydrogen or another alternative fuel. I understand that the motors used in IMSA would not fit in modern IndyCars, but clearly that formula is much more enticing to manufacturers as well. Would switching to a non-spec formula and letting teams build to a spec Dallara work? Or, say, a Dallara, Panoz, or Swift chassis? Clearly the costs associated with this switch would lower the car count for some time, but increased manufacturer participation seems key to the survival of IndyCar. What are your thoughts on increasing manufacturer participation?
Kaleb
MP: IndyCar would be headed towards more powerful electric punches or hydrogen or other options if that’s what it was told a bunch of manufacturers wanted, but that hasn’t been the case so far. Part of the issue is there’s no magic single decision that will drive manufacturers to the series. As an aside, Panoz no longer exists as a chassis supplier, and it’s been a few years since Swift was in the game.
Q: Any update on the Foyt driver situation?
Terry
MP: At the time of this writing on Friday, December 29, no. We know Sting Ray Robb has signed a contract to drive for the team in 2024 and that Benjamin Pedersen signed a three-year contract that started with the 2023 season.
Q: First off, thank you for answering my question from a couple weeks ago about the sizes of the U.S. audiences for F1, IndyCar, and NASCAR. I had no idea that many people watched NASCAR.
Has anyone at IndyCar, or other racing series, done any fan survey type research on what contributes to viewership growth/retention, particularly by age demographic?
I feel like the plethora of emails about aging chassis and engine design hurting IndyCar are missing the point. F1’s viewership is growing quickly in the U.S. and has had the same engine formula for nine years. The upcoming 2026 engines are just changes to the electric motor.
In my opinion, the racing is fine and IndyCar needs to work on making the actual broadcasts better. Not having commercial breaks during green flags, having onboard cameras that point the right direction, and having a points system that a new fan could understand in less than 30 seconds seem like pretty clear things to work on. Having a “Drive To Survive”-type show would help a lot with driver recognition as well
Will, Indy
MP: I’m sure most racing series do all manner of fan surveys. The point about engine age has some merit, but if you wind the clock back to the start of the “Drive To Survive” phenomenon, it wasn’t nine years old. DTS debuted in 2019 and took off in 2020. New cars debuted in 2022. So to a DTS F1 fan, the thing they discovered and love is still very new to them. The same would be true for newish IndyCar fans, who only know the DW12 with its 2012 engine formula and its UAK18 bodywork and aeroscreen as something that’s fresh for them.
And if there were huge waves of new IndyCar fans in the way we have a giant wave of DTS fans, the DW12 and the rest would be a total non-issue. The reality is most of IndyCar’s fans have been fans for a long, long time, and the car/formula is just plain old for those who’ve expressed that sentiment.
And for the umpteenth time, nobody is saying the IndyCar racing isn’t awesome.
Calls for fewer/no commercials have been made thousands of times since F1 returned to ESPN and ESPN ran it without commercials, and at least as many calls for IndyCar to do its version of DTS have been made since the first episode of DTS became available on Netflix.
Q: I am a very long-time fan of F1 and IndyCar. I appreciate very much the long-term support and commitment to IndyCar from Chevrolet and Honda.
Nothing happens in a vacuum, and for sure these two manufacturers have consistently made IndyCar management aware of their needs. Honda’s recent announcement regarding the lack of ROI in IndyCar can have been no shock to the Penske Entertainment Group.
For me (and maybe HRC US) the turning point toward major fear for the future came when IndyCar’s management took public victory laps when a 2-4% increase in viewership for 2023 was announced. Jeepers, that’s their bar for success?
On top of Honda’s direct message regarding the lack of ROI in IndyCar, it has added that its reason for spending some of its racing budget from 2026 on F1 is because having three F1 races in the USA gives it a good ROI for that money. Oh, my!
Penske/IndyCar appear to put all of its major success goals on running a highly competitive series with fun track action plus 33 entries for the Indy 500, and ignores the fact that the OEMs must have major growth in viewership to satisfy their spending. R.P. is no business lightweight, so this can only be deliberate policy, IMHO.
Ergo, is R.P. really wanting a single-spec engine from 2026 onwards, as HRC US suggests, produced by Penske’s own Ilmor? Did HRC US mention this possibility because Penske has already suggested that he has this option if Honda leaves in 2026? So HRC US is letting this alternative be known to see how it all plays out in public — i.e. will fans rise up and revolt?
Frankly, I would rather keep Honda and Chevrolet happy by reducing the series car count to 20 — 10 each for the two manufacturers, which would reduce their respective annual budget considerably. The racing would still be great as the downsized seven cars are never really competitive entries. But that would make reaching 33 cars in the Indy 500 quite difficult, if not impossible.
What is very clear is that Penske/IndyCar have thus far failed to give a long-term vision for the series. They also have no viable digital media vision, or a vision which sets a much higher bar for increase of viewership.
Regarding Chevrolet remaining remarkably quiet, they are balancing many racing series already and may, or may not, have a big commitment to being an OEM in F1 within a few years. Until this latter issue is resolved, they are hardly likely to make major public statements re IndyCar.
Ian, Charlotte, NC
MP: I can confirm IndyCar did not learn about Honda’s various concerns for the first time in my article with Honda.
Idea No. 4: Drivers battling monks. Motorsport Images
Q: With all the recent interest in an American F1 team and possible American drivers, why not introduce a scholarship system for promising Americans from the current U.S.-based ladder system (i.e., Road to Indy) to go to Europe to race? Couldn’t some of the American companies currently sponsoring F1 teams (e.g., Oracle, Microsoft, Monster Energy) offer rides in European series like F3 and F2? You win the Indy Pro 2000 championship, and you get a scholarship to race in F3. Or, win Indy NXT and race in F2.
The scholarship should be for at least two seasons to allow the racers to learn, acclimate and then compete and win. Finding the next Josef Newgarden or Kyle Kirkwood and getting them into a FIA Super License-earning series early should prove a far easier way than through IndyCar. Further, the amount of publicity and goodwill generated for the sponsors for finding the next great American F1 racer would be tremendous.
Scott, Miami
MP: If a company had an interest in raising funds to send American drivers to F1’s ladder, there’s nothing stopping them from making it happen. Exactly why such a plan would try and take those who are on IndyCar’s ladder escapes me, though. The reason a Jak Crawford is racing on the European ladder is because he’s an American who wants to race in F1, so that’s where he needs to be training. If you’re serious about racing in F1, you’re racing F3s at Silverstone or F2s at Spa, not lapping in Indy Pro 2000s or Indy NXTs at Mid-Ohio.
Q: I recall when the IndyCar Series had two special awards at season’s end: the Mario Andretti Road Course Award for the driver who scored the most points on road and street circuits, and the A.J. Foyt Award for those who did the best on ovals during a season. What happened to those two awards, which added some special recognition at season’s end to add to the big championship prize?
If IndyCar likes those “club track” events, and I have no problem with it, why not have those be points races and schedule some after Labor Day? The fact that IndyCar ends its season while all others still run late into the year doesn’t help the brand. Out of sight, out of mind, don’t you think?
Dennis Jones, Garnett, KS
MP: It’s a great question, and I think those awards went away when Randy Bernard went away, which is a shame. I reached out to Randy, who provided more details:
I wanted to showcase and identify us as the fastest, most versatile racing series in the world, separating us from F1 and NASCAR. I figured if I took two of the greatest drivers and named them after them, any driver would be honored to win it. I remember going down to the basement of the museum and looking for trophies for inspiration for the year-end IndyCar Series champion, and those two. There were so many trophies that just nobody’s ever seen. It was fun to be able to pick three of them.
Also, with just four oval circuits left on the calendar, I’m not sure there would be much fanfare over the oval side, at least. Maybe if it was spread across ovals, streets, and roads?
Q: I posted a comment to this effect in the comments of the Dec. 20th Mailbag, but I felt it needed to be expanded upon and given the opportunity to be presented to a wider reader base, so here we go…
Your response to Mike Talarico, though I disagree with the specifics — a great many of the younger fans I’ve spoken have quite a different view on the engine front — does hit at the problem a lot of the people who are freaking out are keen to ignore: The younger fans that IndyCar needs to attract are not necessarily going to be interested in what the old-school fans are. It is not at all crazy to acknowledge that things that would have been a death sentence in the past might not make any discernible difference today.
At the end of the day, change is scary, even to me. I do mask my own concerns with a veneer of optimism most of the time, but it’s not like I’m blind to the potential problems that both change, and a lack thereof, can cause. But here’s the thing: Look at the numbers. Unless their brain is short-circuiting due to sparking against their tinfoil hat, anyone can see that, while it is slow, IndyCar’s numbers have by and large been growing.
As long as those numbers are going up, IndyCar will be OK, even if its position is not ideal. And that means that unless those numbers begin to take a massive nosedive, IndyCar has time to figure things out. And given the widely positive response to IndyCar I see nearly everyone who gives it a chance tends to have (even if certain factors prevent them from becoming from a full-time fan), I can be pretty optimistic that we’re not going to have such a rapid nosedive without IndyCar signing a particularly idiotic TV deal.
The simple truth is that whatever is best for IndyCar’s future will likely not be what anyone on this site thinks it should be. Certainly not people who propose taking a step back and fitting old engines that, while certainly awesome, are still technologically outdated — and especially not the hypocrites who call for that while also claiming the IR18 is too old.
Funnily enough though, my own idea for what would be best for IndyCar does involve looking back to the past a bit… But not to revert to it, or to emulate it, just to help IndyCar find a uniqueness to accentuate what it has going for it.
The only thing I can say with confidence is likely to be true is something that will enrage many readers: The DTS crowd already has F1, they have no interest in F1 Lite. IndyCar needs to be its own thing. This in part means accepting that IndyCar is a domestic series first and foremost, and should only be pursuing foreign events when the money is too good to ignore.
IndyCar has all the components to be its own thing, even while still attracting F1 washouts. It’s just a matter of arranging the components correctly.
FormulaFox
MP: IndyCar is a great series that anybody could love. Just need to find a lot more people to introduce it to who weren’t born before 1990 because its pews are predominantly filled with those of us who were born before 1980, 1970, and 1960. That’s a giant problem when it comes to audience sustainability.
Said another way, when most of your audience responds to the names “grandpa” and “grandma,” there’s a hard and uncomfortable truth to accept with how much longer their fandom will last, hence the need to establish a big new audience with a super-long runway to follow and support the series.
For IndyCar to have a long future ahead of it, it needs to build a bigger fan base that’s visibly younger.
Idea No. 5: OK… next. Paul Webb/Motorsport Images
Q: I really admire Roger Penske and was very positive when he bought the series, especially his efforts ensuring the series continued though the COVID era, but not so much anymore. He and his team appear over their heads or heading in the wrong direction. It’s clear that he mostly cares about the Indy 500, to the series’ and fan’s detriment. I definitely had higher hopes. I have been involved for years as both a competitor and fan. These drivers and teams were gods to me, and I hope IndyCar continues.
There are a number of situations that have arisen in the recent past that indicate that the management of IndyCar is making poor or questionable decisions, which puts the future of the series in question. They have clearly shown time and time again a lack of a grasp of Management 101. The first and foremost is stakeholder management. IndyCar management has focused too much on the needs of the owners, and disregarded all other stakeholders. This is huge.
Following is a list of items that have come up in only the last few years that shows the consistent failure of the management of IndyCar. This list will be no surprise to anyone, but when looked at in total, shows the number of and magnitude the failures. If I or anyone else had a failure list as long and consequential as this, we would be shown the door very swiftly.
Failure of the video game (selected company unable to deliver)
Third manufacturer continued failure (total lack of confidence in the road map, or just lack of interest to involvement)
Texas Motor Speedway’s cancellation (finally showing progress, then gone)
The Thermal Club race (shows the series’ emphasis is owners, to everyone else’s detriment)
The 2.4-liter hybrid cancelation (total failure, may have had major ramifications for lack of manufacturer support)
Untruthful minions, continually showing disdain and the implied disrespect for fans (Frye’s B.S. answers in his Mailbag,)
The 2.2-liter hybrid delay after delay (comment on hybrid setup priority days before delay announcement, probably known internally)
Honda’s statement on ROI (clearly they are done and must have already communicated it to IndyCar management )
The word salad Chevrolet non-statement (not even written by Chevy)
Roger Penske’s lack of comment (says volumes, where is the future?)
Antiquated cars and power train (unacceptable in racing at any level)
Very long off-season (this may ultimately be the downfall; have to listen to this doom and gloom for quite a while too)
The future of IndyCar looks very dim indeed. The continued failure of hybrids just adds icing to the cake. That said, hybrid is old technology and at this point it has been in street car production for about a decade and is it basically yesterday’s news. If IndyCar wants to be on the cutting edge, which it was founded on and manufacturers clearly are most interested in, it needs to do something way beyond bringing a yet another hybrid to the race series.
All manufacturers these days are very much focused on battery electric vehicles, and I would recommend that IndyCar looks strongly at what this means for its series. I know the lack the noise of an ICE and have some other issues, but change is inevitable. Formula E, with its technology, has no shortage of manufacturer interest — this is a huge clue. I’d use Dallara’s design expertise and radically improve the performance, appearance and functionality of the Formula E concept. All else (Buick, etc.) is looking backward. We need forward and independent thinkers, and I’m just not sure the current decision-makers are up to the task.
I don’t have a clue about what is being done as no roadmap has ever been provided. An overall series direction/communication is badly needed. This silliness has gone on too long. The time is now to lead, follow or get out of the way.
What are your comments/thoughts? I am definitely interested in your take on the series future direction. Thanks!
Bruce
MP: At 666 words, that’s a hellacious submission, Bruce. We’ve had a number of letters on the same theme, and many have offered similar observations and asked for the same type of response, so I’ll keep it shortish.
IndyCar puts on a great show with its current package and could keep putting on that great show for another 50 years with the existing car and formula. But if Penske wants IndyCar to be great again, it won’t get there by staying frozen and doing the same thing over and over again because it hasn’t worked for more than a decade. I don’t consider a two-percent growth in TV audience to be a cause for celebration; it’s a positive number, no doubt, but it’s tiny at a time where something bigger is needed.
So, if there’s a true desire to restore IndyCar to the more prominent place it once held as one of America’s most popular forms of sport, IndyCar’s executive leaders will need to take more than baby steps to make that greatness become a reality. And if there isn’t a desire to make IndyCar great again, it should keep doing what it’s doing, accept the small, niche corner of the American sports landscape it lives in, and dedicate its dollars and energies to making its current fans as happy as possible.
I know what I’d like for IndyCar’s future to be, with cooler and faster cars for our incredible teams and drivers to wield for our enjoyment, but what I want genuinely doesn’t matter.
Q: Thinking about Honda’s announcement, it seems like they’re more interested in the hybrid/electronics part of the equation and don’t care as much about the combustion engine. (Probably an oversimplification.) For me, the interesting part about the entire thing is, it seems to be similar to Ford and GM’s interest in F1. Again, an oversimplification, but both of those brands seem more interested in the testing/R&D for the electronics than the combustion engine itself. So maybe that is the direction IndyCar should go: Have Ilmor build a stock engine that allows manufacturers to bolt on their electric components. Almost like an “aero kit” for engines.
Maybe this gives Honda, GM (who are already trying to do it in F1) and others in F1/FE/etc some incentive to join the party to test more of their electronics? Rules could be written that allow as much freedom as desired (especially if you want to have parts that could work in multiple series), but put some BoP in to keep it fair (e.g. max speed of XXX or electric output limited to things I don’t understand).
I know that for some of the older fans, this sounds awful. I get that many grew up on the powerful V8s, brand affiliations, etc. But those days are gone, and to be honest, for fans in my age bracket (<40), we’re less concerned about that.
Or, IndyCar could bring innovation back to the 500 and say, “Screw it, build whatever you want, as long as it fits in the car. We’ll put a BoP on you to ensure things are fair, but you pick whatever you want, Hybrid, V8s, full electric, hydrogen, McDonald’s french fry oil…”
Randy Williams
MP: I love everything you’ve observed and suggested, Randy.
Q: Amid all of the anguish regarding Honda’s warnings and Chevy/GM and IndyCar’s responses about “spec” engines it is forgotten that the “golden” (and much beloved) roadster era was essentially a spec series. The cars were knockoffs of Kurtis and Watson designs. The engines were almost always an Offy that was an upright or lay-down configuration. These are generalized recollections, but I seem to remember that the racing was pretty good.
Greg
MP: Indeed, just as the IndyCar racing today is generally excellent and close. Same with Champ Car when it went to a spec Cosworth formula where Lolas and Reynards were in use and when it went to the spec Panoz-Cosworth package in 2007 that rates as the favorite IndyCar for all of those who drove it.
Q: My memory needs some context for the timeline. What came first: IndyCar stopping the 2.4L engines and then Honda deciding to run theirs in IMSA? Or had Honda already planned to use the same ICE in both series before the cancelation was announced?
To add what Pat said in the Dec. 20 Mailbag, the Caddy GTP remote control car is a joint promotion for the latest Forza Motorsports video game. In fact, it’s the cover car on the box art. Just imagine…
Gabe, NW Indiana
MP: The Acura ARX-06 hybrid IMSA GTP car had been testing for many months before the joint decision by IndyCar, Chevy, and Honda was made to halt the 2.4L IndyCar motor move for 2024. In fact, we were at Daytona for a December 5-7 hybrid GTP test where the same Acura/Honda 2.4L motor was in action when RACER got wind of the change of plans.
Idea No. 6: Time for a sequel. Or even better, a prequel. Motorsport Image
Q: Any word yet on Dale Coyne’s seats to be filled? Or even the other A.J. Foyt seat for 2024?
Keith
MP: The Foyt seat is the one of intrigue; I haven’t heard anything to suggest DeFrancesco’s out of the picture at Coyne, but I also haven’t been chasing it over the holidays, so I might be out of the loop on any changes there. I need to make calls to both teams right around the time you’re reading this.
Q: What is it going to take for IndyCar management to share its vision for the future with its fans? IMSA and NASCAR seem able to do it regularly. The Jay Frye Mailbag a few months ago should have been a good chance for him to tell us what the thinking is at HQ but he didn’t seem to feel like talking. Come to think of it, do you know if anyone in IndyCar’s leadership reads the Mailbag to check the pulse of what fans are concerned about?
Dennis West
MP: No clue, and oh yes, it’s read at the home office.
Q: The problem with auto racing right now is that horsepower suitable for racing just isn’t hard to get anymore. We can buy 700hp street cars with reasonable drivability on the street. So rules packages just get weirder and weirder, and now we’re freaking out because something F1 did nine years ago (hybrid) got delayed and Honda is threatening to leave.
You guys are right that IndyCar has a chance to lead here, but it has to look different. I would argue that close racing matters, and horsepower competition doesn’t. If IndyCar wants to save the sport and actually lead the industry, it needs to focus on what the industry cares about, and I think it can do this without being beholden to industry demands, because it won’t require huge costs. It needs to have completely open competition on fuel efficiency in such a way that still produces close racing.
I can’t know all the problems with this idea, but here is where I would start in my ignorance: cap peak horsepower (750?), cap integrated horsepower under the RPM curve, cap fuel volume (apply same volume to liquid fuel, batteries, whatever), set a minimum weight, and specify a location of the center of gravity for the total power unit (including fuel). Then the kicker — make sure all of these numbers can be hit with a small block Chevy crate motor. Then let teams run whatever they want, within reasonable safety guidelines.
The idea is to create a homologation setup that results in close lap times and let fuel efficiency be the differentiator. Depending on how yellows fall anyone could still win, but teams with better power units will be rewarded in the long run. Small teams will save money compared to the current situation if they can buy a small block Chevy, particularly if the numbers don’t push it to the ragged edge. And I suspect auto manufacturers will like the opportunity to demonstrate what they care about (efficiency) in the world’s largest race. Who doesn’t want to see a Tesla IndyCar?
Maybe this requires an engine cradle and/or a new chassis, maybe not. Maybe it’s too bold and too stupid. I don’t know.
John
MP: Well, everything Elon touches turns to gold, right? (Kidding.) Happy New Year, John.
Q: After the recent delay with the hybrid engine and the potential Honda departure from IndyCar, it’s another gloomy time for IndyCar. Although the series would certainly benefit from more manufacturers and a new chassis, I’m not convinced that either would be a game-changer. If we suddenly had four manufacturers and two or three chassis makers, although all the fans of the Mailbag would be ecstatic (myself included), I’m not convinced that would change the overall health of the series. The fans who get hyped about car designs, engine sounds, etc. already follow the series, and I’m not sure that any new fan would suddenly turn onto IndyCar because of those things.
When I talk to new F1 fans (because of “Drive To Survive”), they are fans of the drivers and the teams. Most don’t have more than a superficial knowledge of the engineering of F1 but they are excited by the people and the competition. The next generation is more interested in gaming and personality than car horsepower and chassis configuration. Like it or not, that’s where I think IndyCar needs to focus its efforts to get new fans. The return to iRacing is good, but IndyCar needs to spend more effort making the drivers of the series well-known as personalities “100 Days To Indy” was good, but needs to be on a streaming service so that fans can see it.
Also, the constant emphasis of the Indy 500 to the exclusion of all other races is why no one cares about the other races enough.
Only when more fans are excited by the IndyCar drivers and the series that they race in will more people show up to race, which will improve the fans in the stands numbers, and the TV numbers as well. I think it is only then that we will see manufacturers and money come into the series and a hopeful return to the glory days.
Arvind Mahadevan, Peoria, AZ
MP: All great points, Arvind, and the only thing I’d add on the call/question about going to a new car is one of giving the series something fresh and hopefully exciting — something that’s visually stunning — to draw attention to itself. It’s not that the DW12 looks bad, but with the aeroscreen, it does look a touch weird compared to an F1 car, so thinking strictly in that superficial way, it can’t hurt to try something new to attract more eyeballs and interest. Because what we have now, and have had for many years, isn’t working. Totally agree that the drivers and human rivalries are what’s stoking the Drive To Survive generation’s interest in racing, but they can get that in any other sport.
Our sport features cars, and fast ones at that, so let’s not completely dismiss the importance of the machines in this wave of popularity, and even if the average DTS fan knows little about the technical side of racing, they do know what pleases their eyes. Maybe meeting those eyes with a new IndyCar that looks like it’s from 20 years in the future would draw them towards our racing and our drivers and our drama. And maybe it wouldn’t. But doing nothing, which we know isn’t working, doesn’t seem like the answer to me. Solving a problem by doing nothing isn’t how you solve a problem.
Q: Your disclosure that IndyCar’s Marketing VP SJ Luedtke was not replaced speaks volumes. This would appear to be a very important position in the structure of IndyCar management. That her responsibilities were absorbed among others tells me her duties were not appreciated as anything other than following directives, as opposed to generating viable marketing strategies.
Mark Miles stated no candidates of interest were found. Does this mean no candidates were willing to work within the current corporate framework (be a yes person), no candidates were willing to work for the salary offered, no candidates were willing to work with the current marketing budget? If you can’t find someone credible to work in that marketing position, it tells me you have a serious problem with your product and how you run your company.
John, Seville, OH
MP: I’ll admit that doing a deep dive into why nobody was hired to replace SJ holds no interest for me.
Idea No. 7: Put a bigger spotlight on the drivers and their personalities by taking away the cars. Studio Colombo/Motorsport Images
Q: Big Possum apologizes for speaking in the third person in his last question for Mailbag but he failed English class in high school on two occasions so is unfamiliar with third person. So here goes one hopefully not in third person.
Two things with the command to start engines – actually four.
Go back to “Gentlemen, start your engines.” if we keep on this path it could become “Persons, start your engines” or “Lifeforms, start your engines.”
What would be the command if, God forbid, IndyCar goes electric? “Engage your rotors?” “Turn on your voltage?” “Watts on?” I am becoming ill just thinking about the future.
These are the most famous words in all of sports, not just motorsports. What is better? “Play ball?”Or blowing a whistle to start a foot ballgame?
No one ever said it better than Tony Hulman — no commercial pitch, not screaming like at a wrestling match — said with the gravitas it deserves.
Big Possum, Michigan by way of Texas
MP: Since “Sanford and Son” was (and still is) one of my favorite shows, I’ll refer to myself as “Big Dummy” going forward, Big Possum.
Even if IndyCar goes full-electric, we’re talking about electric engines, so the “start your engines” command would apply.
I’m not sure what’s wrong with “Drivers, start your engines.” It must be “Gentlemen, start your engines,” no matter what, in order to be good or authentic? Come on, man. I mean, person.
Q: With regard to the infinite number of questions regarding a new chassis and allowing multiple chassis, I have had a thought over the past few years: Why does the series not allow more options in terms of interchangeable parts? While teams have options for different smaller parts (wickers, wing extensions, etc), IndyCar could offer secondary wings and pods for teams to consider at certain courses. That would diversify the look of the cars while also adding a layer of strategy. Just a thought. Thanks!
Tim, Fishers, IN
MP: I like the idea, but as we’ve seen, when multiple aero options are allowed in a spec series, it doesn’t take long for one option to emerge as the better choice, and then everybody uses that option.
Q: When it was just Honda supplying IndyCar, Ilmor made all the engines. They make the Chevy engines now. If Honda leaves, Penske-owned Ilmor isn’t going to leave IndyCar without engines.
This means Honda’s proposal to have one manufacturer with companies tweaking the software to badge it makes sense.
My question is, does it really matter? The engines manufacturers have always just badged engines. Ilmor made the Mercedes Beast, too.
Jason, Green Bay, WI
MP: Citing two examples doesn’t equate to “always,” but your point is taken. It only matters if the series and its manufacturers care. This is yet another question for IndyCar to ask and answer as it attempts to chart a plan for the future.
Q: Here’s the part that I don’t get about the now-dead-in-the-water IndyCar video game: Why didn’t IndyCar go with Codemasters? That company has a proven track record and has made the Dirt series, F1 and GRID games, to name a few. They were the creators behind the last IndyCar game made in 2005. They know what they are doing. They get it when it comes to motorsports.
I hadn’t even heard about the Motorsport Games publisher that IndyCar had making the defunct video game before they were given the contract and went belly-up, to be honest Also, iRacing is a fine platform, but you have to ask yourself how many people know about it, and if the average person can afford all the gear to truly experience it?
With a game on a major system like XBox, PC and PlayStation, you’ll be able to play online or offline, any track you would like, at your own skill level.
People on iRacing have paid to be there and for their cars. They don’t like newbies that may crash out. That’s a common complaint I have heard. Why can’t IndyCar put out content for iRacing and a video game on XBox, PC and PlayStation for the rest of us?
The series has really shot itself in the foot with trying to reach and keep younger fans. It seems that IndyCar takes a step forward and then two steps back as of late with hybrids, poor marketing for Thermal Club, the possibility of Honda leaving after 2026 and the TV contract not being decided past 2024. They aren’t out in front of stories and are making fans uneasy. Things may be going well at 16th & Georgetown, but the negative perception after these stories lingers and affects what people new to IndyCar think.
David Colquitt
MP: As I’ve always understood it, Penske Entertainment went with its now-former video game provider because one or more of its senior executives has close and longstanding ties to the organization.
Q: This will not be another Honda/IndyCar doom and gloom letter, but rather food for thought. We know the issues IndyCar has among its aging demographic fan base, and a lack of new OEMs, and the howling for a new car, etc.
The reality check question is: If IndyCar abandoned its current open-wheel business model, and instead pivoted to adopting the WEC-style cars and technical/engine formulae — especially at the Indy 500 — would 80% of fans even notice? Would they even care?
I’m going to say no.
With a decade-plus of cars being nearly identical, the call to put out a new car is loud, but step back as a casual fan and ask if most of the people in the stands would notice a difference of cars from 100 feet away on track if there was a next-gen evolution of the current Dallara. Doubtful.
It was said in Mailbags that adopting a common spec engine and rebadging for other OEMs is a viable solution to that issue. Hardcore fans would love to see 1000hp, and anyone who’s been a fan over 35 would love to hear the return of the 2.65L V8s. Myself included, but it’s a long shot.
Back to the cars: Do you think if 22 WEC cars showed up on grid on Memorial Day weekend that 80% of the fans attending would be howling at what an awful thing it is? I’m calling no, they wouldn’t.
Can you discuss your thoughts on that?
As another reminder, the same 10-20 people who make all the comments on the comment section on RACER do not make up the majority of the IndyCar fan base. Like current political climates, the loudest 10% of the population are not the feelings of the other 90% majority of the population, yet this is who gets the most attention given of their comments — because they are consistently the loudest.
Ed, Westfield
MP: Would Indy 500 attendees, aka “IndyCar diehards,” complain about things being different at the 500? Sweet Baby Jesus, any answer other than “**** YES” is wrong.
I’d love to see the WEC at IMS, on the road course, but not as the cars used for the Indy 500 because those aren’t the cars used for the Indy 500. I go to Le Mans, or COTA, or wherever else to see the WEC cars, just as I go to the Indy 500 to see the IndyCars. It’s a bit like suggesting NFL fans at the Super Bowl wouldn’t be mad if most of the players were replaced by the stars of Major League Soccer. An armed revolt would take place.
The loudest voices are the ones that get heard the most in any situation, as you point out. Doesn’t mean they speak for the majority. It also doesn’t mean they don’t. We’d need data to make an informed statement there. But we do know that when the majority are happy, we tend to hear and read happy things. Maybe 90 percent of IndyCar fans love the state of the series, and if they do, I’d truly welcome more submissions from them, but let’s also not discount what the critical or displeased folks have to say.
The Mailbag is a proverbial town hall where those who are motivated to participate send in their thoughts and ask for input on whatever items they’re wanting to discuss. Whether it’s smiles or frowns, I take the topics raised each week as a reflection of those who care enough to step up to the mic and speak their truths. Whether they’re speaking from the minority or majority doesn’t matter to me.
Idea No. 8: Something involving Jarno Trulli, who, based on the number of photos we have of him doing random promo appearances, seems to have been up for just about anything. Including, in this case, demonstrating a seatbelt simulator. Motorsport Images
Q: I have read that many streaming services do not make money. How many folks subscribe to DirtVision and FloRacing?
Pete Pfankuch, Wisconsin
MP: I have no clue, Pete. The two forms of racing I’ve dedicated my personal and professional lives to are IndyCar and all of its related junior open-wheel feeder series, and sports cars. While I have an appreciation for what you’d find on those streamers, and have been to a handful of midget/sprint races, I’m not the guy to look towards for answers on such things. But if you’re curious about IndyCar, IMSA, Belgian beers, Rush, Big L, or other things in those areas, ask away.
Q: Toyota probably manufactures more hybrid vehicles than any company in the world. What better way to demonstrate its engineering skills than to provide a power unit for IndyCar, a series watched by its largest consumer market? The GR010 Hypercar is a hybrid, but hardly anyone in the U.S. knows of its existence. Perhaps NASCAR provides better ROI than either IndyCar or WEC, but NASCAR will not adopt hybrid technology before the end of the decade. It will be too expensive for small teams and deeply unpopular with the audience. Toyota providing power units to IndyCar seems like a perfect fit — especially if it can bring its vast hybrid expertise to the series.
The Brazilian actor Gabriel Leone plays Alfonso De Portago in the motion picture “Ferrari.” He has also been cast as Ayrton Senna in an upcoming Netflix series. Wait, Netflix is making a series about Senna? How did we not know about this? Filming started in Brazil this past October. Perhaps Chris has the inside scoop on the series and its genesis.
Jonathan and Cleide Morris, Ventura, CA
MP: It was maybe 16 months ago when Roger Penske told me he came very close to signing Toyota, but a change of CEOs in the U.S. nixed the deal; the CEO who he knew extremely well was in, but then he was replaced, and all that progress fell through. So, yes, it would be a great fit, but the people who run the company at the top do not agree.
CHRIS MEDLAND: Yes, Netflix is! Well, Gullane is producing it for Netflix. It was actually announced back in 2020 amid plenty of interest in new F1 stuff, but it appears production was delayed as an initial target had been to launch in 2022. What’s exciting about the Senna project — which is a miniseries that looks set to be around six-to-eight episodes — is that it has the involvement of the Senna family.
The Netflix synopsis reads: “The miniseries will explore Ayrton Senna da Silva’s personality and family relationships. The starting point will be Ayrton’s career debut, when he moved to England, and will culminate in the tragic accident in Imola, Italy, during the San Marino Grand Prix, when he died.”
I wish I could bring you more of an inside scoop than that, but as it’s not an official F1 production it’s largely a project that has been shot in Brazil and details are still limited, although there appears to be a target to release it by the end of this year.
Q: Not a question, but a comment. There are many parallels between Las Vegas and the 2005 U.S. Grand Farce at Indy, at least in terms of lack of communication and travel and expenses being used without the return of an enjoyable experience. In Vegas, the prices charged even for practice being so astronomical, Reginald from the recent Mailbag and those like him deserve better from F1.
At least in the case of Indianapolis we got some free tickets courtesy of Michelin for the following year’s race, but I believe that 2005 event secured F1’s ultimate demise at Indy. Crowds never came back — those last two races were so sparse. I doubt the same fate will befall Vegas. It’d be nice if F1 could find a way to offer this year’s practice day attendees a practice day gratis ticket next year. But I won’t hold my breath for it either…
Marc Hamann, Columbia, MD
CM: All I can really say to that, Marc, is that I agree — it shouldn’t be taken for granted that F1 is a mainstay in the U.S., and the race at Indy was definitely a prime example of how damaging it can be if you don’t treat fans well enough. As you say, we’ve had messages from people who were impacted by the issues, and the compensation was poor in my opinion. Finding a way of rewarding them this season too would be a really good step.
Q: Historically, F1 has been an old boys’ club; understandable with the investment it takes to get a competitive car to the grid. However, in the 21st century it has moved far beyond the old boys’ club into the rarified air of exclusivity. Between the Eurocentric requirements for obtaining a F1 Super License and payments for each point scored in renewing the license, it is a barrier to new drivers.
The B.S. of having “new” drivers test in FP1 at selected events is just that – BS. In the 20th century, teams would tend to seek out the local hotshoe driver of the country (or continent) where an event was being held. Not only did those selected drivers get to drive one session, they got to drive all sessions and race.
Teams should be required to run a third car at events. The third car would be driven by a “new” potential driver — the local hotshoe. These drivers will not possess a Super License, any driver will be granted a maximum of four races with a team; they may be permitted to go through the four race test with more than one team. The new driver’s performance will be evaluated after the completion of the four race tests and then granted a Super License if the driver’s performance was satisfactory. Earn the Super License based on F1 performance, not non-F1 events.
I understand it is easy for me to spend other people’s money!
Chuck McAbee, Sykesville, MD
CM: I think one of the main issues here, Chuck, is how much F1 has changed since the 20th century, especially when you look at garage space (finding garages for 10 extra cars in modern F1 would be pretty much impossible short-term) and the complexity of the cars. You can’t just jump in and drive one for the first time at a race weekend, but testing is banned too because of the cost, and the extra cars themselves would cost a huge amount to build and run compared to the past.
So that would all add up to any hypothetical seat only being available to the highest bidder, and not necessarily talent. What I think the cost cap has done is significantly improve the driving talent, because just being a pay driver isn’t enough — you don’t bring enough value solely through finance these days, you have to pair that with being a multiple race-winner from F2 level at the very least.
Just as an aside: Drivers do have to complete a certain amount of mileage in an F1 car to be able to get a Super License too, to ensure they’re capable in F1 machinery. It’s another reason a Super License point was offered to drivers who cleanly complete over 100km during an FP1 session — so that those sessions could act as a pathway to a race seat for a rookie, like in the case of Logan Sargeant.
But that’s not to say I disagree with your logic. I definitely feel there should be more chances for rookies to race (an extra team or two would really help that, wouldn’t it…) and think it would be great if there was a way of seeing the odd wild card third car entry, with no need for a full Super License for those opportunities, but perhaps solid Super License points on offer for racing.
And the U.S. ladder in particular really needs better rewarding in terms of Super License points, so that drivers can at least get close enough through IndyCar to then run a few FP1s and get the license if they’re of interest to an F1 team.
Idea No. 9: Run a car at Times Square. Wait, that’s already been done? Michael Kim/Motorsport Images
Q: The Villeneuve and Pironi documentary is now being carried by Max (HBO) streaming. Now, if we can get the documentary on Ecclestone then the planets will be aligned.
Steve
CM: I’ll admit for my sins that I’ve yet to watch “Lucky!” — the Bernie documentary — but I’ll try and play that off as being in solidarity with everyone else waiting for it to come to North America. I remember you asking about both docs last year, Steve, and they were both working on it but hadn’t yet secured anything, so at least Villeneuve and Pironi got somewhere, but there’s been no further info that I can get about any broadcast partner for ‘Lucky!’ so far.
THE FINAL WORD
From Robin Miller’s Mailbag, January 7, 2014
Q: When USAC and then CART started to really get their feet wet with road racing and ultimately street racing, who were the old-school oval racers who really adapted to it well, and who weren’t embarrassed when the road racers from Europe and South America showed up? And assuming there were some, how come it wasn’t that way 15-20 years later? All the IRL drivers from its early years got absolutely blown away once the ex-CART and Champ Car drivers arrived.
Steve May, Corpus Christi, TX
ROBIN MILLER: Lloyd Ruby was a damn fine road racer and Gordon Johncock was always exciting because he’d charge into corners, spin, and storm back to the front. We kid Vuky at our lunches that he was one of the worst road racers ever (and he agrees) and Tom Sneva actually went from a disaster at road racing to half-decent (in 1984 he ran third at Long Beach and won at Caesars Palace in Vegas). I just think the old school racers drove anything and everything every weekend and during the week and were so much more on top of things than the IRLers. Sam Hornish was interesting in that he came from Atlantics, sucked when the IRL went road racing and then improved greatly with Roger Penske’s tutoring.
