DW12 Issues at IMS...Problem or Not?

[LawGuy60606]

We've all heard the stories about the DW12's teething issues and that it isn't performing at IMS like Dallara had modeled. It snaps loose, can't get the speed up, etc...

So here's my question...assuming that the car isn't ridiculously horrible and objectively impossible to engineer to a reasonable base level...is this lack of performance maybe a good thing in some ways?

Let's say next year the pole speed is something like 215 or 216. Wouldn't that add some intrigue over the next few years as aero kits come out and as teams try to engineer solutions to the car's issues? Maybe the pole speed goes from 215 in 2012 to 225 in 2015...to me, that adds interest from a technical perspective. Which teams found answers? Which aero kits are making the car work best? Blah blah blah.

[ttturner68]

There is some validity as long as it a aero issue and teams are free to move around the weight.

Any new product has thing that need to be improved on each step of development otherwise you could go straight to production.

[cc]

It's incredibly unlikely that the problem won't be fixed before May.

[Lemming51]

Being slower than "modeled" is not a problem.
But the current state of the sport has a heavy emphasis on driver safety, so while a car that "snaps loose" is a good thing to separate the good racers from their grandmothers, it has the potential to be a very big problem if it's likely to result in a lot of seriously injured drivers.

[Inline]

It's good for Dallara, it allows them to come out and sell an upgrade kit next May. Maximize profits on their business plan.

[Hitokiri]

It's incredibly unlikely that the problem won't be fixed before May.

Exactly.

I think the issue is that the simulator's are getting things wrong which is affecting the quality of the car on track. It's not really the car itself but the simulators not matching the real life expectations. Once they figure this out I can't see a reason why the DW12 can't at least match the speeds of the last generation Dallara.

[drdisque]

That's what I was thinking too.

I thought all the hawks around here were clamoring for a car that's less "stuck" and "harder to drive" and "requires the drivers to lift".

Isn't that exactly what this is?

[BADGER]

It is ridiculous to suggest that an ill handling car is a blessing in any way. IF the car handles like crap, do any of you think the new car will be racey? Drivers need confidence in the handling to go off line and make passes, the last thing they want is a car that is unpredictable and puts them in the wall with little warning.

[Dez1013]

I believe there was a thread on this already with a great discussion between Spike and 220mph.

[FlatOut]

To think for a split second that a poorly balanced car thats out of whack is something that should be fixed by aero kits is completely ludicrous.
If I think were your going, why not do it an easier way: allow Firestone to produce a hideous tire compund that marbles and blows out in 25 laps, let the teams and engineers figure it out. Why not? There is nothing positive with the car turning 217's at Indy and its not for people to make aero kits to fix a problem with the chassis out of the box.

[Hitokiri]

It is ridiculous to suggest that an ill handling car is a blessing in any way. IF the car handles like crap, do any of you think the new car will be racey? Drivers need confidence in the handling to go off line and make passes, the last thing they want is a car that is unpredictable and puts them in the wall with little warning.

I disagree. If you read the quotes by guys like Paul Tracy or even Gil De Ferran a car that is too confident is not good. You need some level of unpredictability to pull the real drivers from the wimpy drivers. This is even the logic of NASCAR where the car is purposely made to under perform to match the skill and the bravery of the driver. Even in road racing this is true where often times cars are dumbed down to make things more challenging. It's a signature of all sports and that's why F1 is often criticized today. The cars are too full of gimmicks and even vets like Rubens Barrichello are saying that its take the driver out of the driving.

[LawGuy60606]

To think for a split second that a poorly balanced car thats out of whack is something that should be fixed by aero kits is completely ludicrous.
If I think were your going, why not do it an easier way: allow Firestone to produce a hideous tire compund that marbles and blows out in 25 laps, let the teams and engineers figure it out. Why not? There is nothing positive with the car turning 217's at Indy and its not for people to make aero kits to fix a problem with the chassis out of the box.

Well I did qualify by saying: "assuming that the car isn't ridiculously horrible and objectively impossible to engineer to a reasonable base level"

So we're out of the realm of the '08 Brickyard or the '05 USGP.

I'm merely suggesting that coming out of the era of the big packs, it would be interesting to see the teams engineer 10 MPH out of the car over a period of years. And I'm reasonably sure that we're not ever going to see race speeds above 230, so if we're going to see speed gains it's going to be because we started lower and built up.

[shuhzayum]

I disagree. If you read the quotes by guys like Paul Tracy or even Gil De Ferran a car that is too confident is not good. You need some level of unpredictability to pull the real drivers from the wimpy drivers. This is even the logic of NASCAR where the car is purposely made to under perform to match the skill and the bravery of the driver. Even in road racing this is true where often times cars are dumbed down to make things more challenging. It's a signature of all sports and that's why F1 is often criticized today. The cars are too full of gimmicks and even vets like Rubens Barrichello are saying that its take the driver out of the driving.

I think you are a little off base here. You want a car that is hard to drive. You want the power to be controlled by the drivers right foot, you want them backing off. You don't want a car that is completely unmanageable and basically soft-peddled around the track well down from its potential because of an error in the cars very design. Apparently the gearbox was too heavy and other things that Dallara's simulator didn't figure into the building of the car. The problem should be solved pretty quickly and hopefully when it debuts at St. Pete it will have a ton of power relative to its downforce and at every race next season only the good drivers can make the car dance. That will be a HUGE step forward for IndyCar.

Chris

[Z28]

November 'stories' don't scare me, especially after so few test miles. People who thought the things would be at 230mph right out of the computer deserve to be in a tizzy until May.

[ttturner68]

November 'stories' don't scare me, especially after so few test miles. People who thought the things would be at 230mph right out of the computer deserve to be in a tizzy until May.

[railroad]

That's what I was thinking too.

I thought all the hawks around here were clamoring for a car that's less "stuck" and "harder to drive" and "requires the drivers to lift".

Isn't that exactly what this is?

I think most of us want a low downforce, hi HP car, but we want it to be safe and overpowered within known parameters. This car sounds like a big question mark right now. And a potentially dangerous one at that.

[Stick500]

if IICS is coming out with an all-new car and all-new engine (isn't this for the first time since '97?) that is said to be lighter and more powerful, it better darn well be as fast as the last car- if the pole speed tops last years 227 mph I'll be happy and will so will the press corps and fans

if it's slower than last year's cars, that's what the papers and Sportscenter goobers will be focusing on during the lead-up to the 500- the new lighter and more powerful car that is actually slower than the old one...

[Big Mo]

It's already been discussed elsewhere. An unstable chassis with weight distribution problems and snap oversteer must be fixed before you can race it at Indy. Period.

Mario recently discussed a new Parnelli chassis he and Al Unser Sr had to develop one year. They both knew it was crap and unraceable. The same currently applies to the DW12 at Indy.

[ttturner68]

if IICS is coming out with an all-new car and all-new engine (isn't this for the first time since '97?) that is said to be lighter and more powerful, it better darn well be as fast as the last car- if the pole speed tops last years 227 mph I'll be happy and will so will the press corps and fans

if it's slower than last year's cars, that's what the papers and Sportscenter goobers will be focusing on during the lead-up to the 500- the new lighter and more powerful car that is actually slower than the old one...

But it is not more powerful at Indy, the boost is going to be dialed back to around 550hp. The only ones who will even know what the pole speed was last year are people on this board.

Was the Nascar COT faster in its first year? Was the story in 97' that the cars were slower? I was there it wasn't.

[BizzyV]

1) Speeds must stay the same, at least
2) You need a car that drivers are confident racing each other with. If i'm a driver no way in hell I'm going 3 wide knowing that either of our cars are a second away from snapping.

They'll get there. There is a fine line between "tough to drive" and "bad." You want a car that a talented driver, with a good engineer can make work, and that a not so good driver and engineer combo will struggle with. That's how you create seperation and competition. Right now everyone can drive easily. That's no good. But if no one can drive easily... well that won't be good either!

[The Stickman]

Where have any of the drivers testing the car say it "snaps loose" or any other phrase? I have read there is a weight imbalance. Seems to me all this second guessing is coming from us here at TF. The car is doing fine in testing at everywhere but Indy. I am sure they can fix it. BTW the last car was an Oval car that could do road courses. Now we have the opposite.

[The Stickman]

if IICS is coming out with an all-new car and all-new engine (isn't this for the first time since '97?) that is said to be lighter and more powerful, it better darn well be as fast as the last car- if the pole speed tops last years 227 mph I'll be happy and will so will the press corps and fans

if it's slower than last year's cars, that's what the papers and Sportscenter goobers will be focusing on during the lead-up to the 500- the new lighter and more powerful car that is actually slower than the old one...

Actually they never promised this for ovals. In fact they said the HP would be around 500-550 for ovals which is less than the previous car.

[debris on the track]

It'd be nice to have a car where some teams can make great leaps forward rather than all teams fighting for tenths of a second at the end of the curve.

[Threewide]

Actually they never promised this for ovals. In fact they said the HP would be around 500-550 for ovals which is less than the previous car.

HP is suppose to be no lower than 550 and upwards to 750, depending on which track they're running on.

[Threewide]

Where have any of the drivers testing the car say it "snaps loose" or any other phrase? I have read there is a weight imbalance. Seems to me all this second guessing is coming from us here at TF. The car is doing fine in testing at everywhere but Indy. I am sure they can fix it. BTW the last car was an Oval car that could do road courses. Now we have the opposite.

None of the drivers that have tested at IMS have stated nothing publicly about the driving characteristics. However, the quotes from Will Phillips in Robin Miller's article definetely state that the concern is the weight distribution and that the car is very good in entry and develops an understeer condition on exit. That's got to be a big concern and would be pretty nerve racking to drive it. Lack of mechanical grip on the front end is not fun to drive at a place like IMS. That's a big concern, especially with cars are suppose to be shipped in 30 days to the teams. Sounds like a design flaw.

[Team Canada]

Actually they never promised this for ovals. In fact they said the HP would be around 500-550 for ovals which is less than the previous car.

Horsepower vs drag vs weight is what they were saying. I would have rather seen too much horspower vs drag vs weight and let the drivers figure out how much they have to let off the throttle (or God forbid, touch the brakes) in the corners. The braking thresholds and the setups are going to determine how the passing elements are going to make the races still exciting without all 25 cars running laps within .5 of a second of each other, help them to spread out, hopefully make passing easier for the faster cars.

[puzzled one]

That's what I was thinking too.

I thought all the hawks around here were clamoring for a car that's less "stuck" and "harder to drive" and "requires the drivers to lift".

Isn't that exactly what this is?

I guess it kinda depends on your viewpoint................ A car that the driver does not have confidence in knowing what it will do when he turns the wheel...............is a problem, which were this the case, could easily lead to lots of spares business for Dallara..................

[The Stickman]

Horsepower vs drag vs weight is what they were saying. I would have rather seen too much horspower vs drag vs weight and let the drivers figure out how much they have to let off the throttle (or God forbid, touch the brakes) in the corners. The braking thresholds and the setups are going to determine how the passing elements are going to make the races still exciting without all 25 cars running laps within .5 of a second of each other, help them to spread out, hopefully make passing easier for the faster cars.

The poster said more powerful which is not the same.

[The Stickman]

None of the drivers that have tested at IMS have stated nothing publicly about the driving characteristics. However, the quotes from Will Phillips in Robin Miller's article definetely state that the concern is the weight distribution and that the car is very good in entry and develops an understeer condition on exit. That's got to be a big concern and would be pretty nerve racking to drive it. Lack of mechanical grip on the front end is not fun to drive at a place like IMS. That's a big concern, especially with cars are suppose to be shipped in 30 days to the teams. Sounds like a design flaw.

Big difference between that and jumping to snap loose or oversteer. Also the problemn is that of a weight imbalance. Hard to say it is a design flaw when you have no idea why there is an imbalance. Sounds like a let's throw Dalara under the bus because we didn't want them and their ugly car. Iwould lay odds that the extra weight is coming from the engines and transmission. It has been reported that one engine is overweight and the other is overheating which could mean they are using larger radiators and coolers to compensate. None of which is a chassis flaw.

[Threewide]

Big difference between that and jumping to snap loose or oversteer. Also the problemn is that of a weight imbalance. Hard to say it is a design flaw when you have no idea why there is an imbalance. Sounds like a let's throw Dalara under the bus because we didn't want them and their ugly car. Iwould lay odds that the extra weight is coming from the engines and transmission. It has been reported that one engine is overweight and the other is overheating which could mean they are using larger radiators and coolers to compensate. None of which is a chassis flaw.

Maybe there is no oversteering going on, but it's a severe understeer problem to be only running 216's. Balance is all messed up, regardless if one engine manufacturer is overweight or if it's indeed a design flaw. Not sure what you mean by not wanting Dallara, if anyone can it figured out, it will be them. The whole problem in my eyes is that the league tried to push this car out the door too quickly with limited testing on it. It's a total brand new car, it needs plenty of testing on it. Given there is no competition with regards to chassis selection, we have a big problem.