I understand the purpose of the bumper on ovals, but I'm not sure I understand why they would have it on road courses. Also, and maybe it's just a optical illusion, but I find the cars looked very slow. Could be just the size and width of the aero kits, but if I didn't have the timing charts to look at, I would tell you this car is much slower then its predecessor.
Frankly, I don't believe you. It's easy to use make stuff up to support your own opinion. I asked three people I work with that don't typically look at this forum, and they don't believe you either. Next time, just try saying what you yourself thought and be done with it.
Here's how you do it...
I like the look of the car with the exception of the bulbous wheelramps. The bumpers give the car a pretty sweet look as they're going away from you, but then I'm an A$$ man, so take that for what it's worth. Despite what some others think, I think they're needed on road courses...it's not just a matter of a car getting into a fence, but sometimes a car will ramp over another one and come down a little too close to a driver's head (think Brazil 2010). As far as the wheelramps...like I said, I think they're ugly and unnecessary. A car should be about function, not just trying to look the part...those parts look to be only about "flare" and it would have been more efficient and cheaper to make to have typical "wing" wheel ramps.
The bumpers and the long sidepod undertray give you a better visual reference of how the car relates to the ground. You can much more clearly see how the rear end of the car is rolling around by watching how the distance between the bumper and the road changes. These cars look very ungainly and clumsy.Also, and maybe it's just a optical illusion, but I find the cars looked very slow. Could be just the size and width of the aero kits, but if I didn't have the timing charts to look at, I would tell you this car is much slower then its predecessor.
"Is that my *** that I smell burning?" ... Helmet Stogie from "Death spasms of the Mabuchi"
Did anyone take out their samurai sword and actually fall on it?Originally Posted by 9rows
Seriously though, the sarcasm went over my head. Seems like everyone else was complaining that I just ASSuMEd you were as well. Oh well, I still dispise posts that seem to use other fictional people's opinions to support their own. My coworkers think I now have egg all over my face. I hate them.
All off season eveyone was saying "THE SKY IS FALLING" because we were going to have 50 cautions because of the rear bumpers putting debri everywhere. People said Will Power and Dario Franchitti were still going to dominate the series. Guess what? None of the things people b&m about over the off season happened.
I guess it shouldn't surprise me that everyone is STILL screaming "THE SKY IS FALLING". If AOWR ever dies, it is thanks to the fans that can't stop b&m for one second and enjoy something. At least we have an IndyCar series, at least we are able to watch it LIVE and in FULL every race. At least we have more than 18 cars every race. If the look of the car and the sound is all you have to b&m about, things must be pretty good imho.
The coverage is so bad that I don't blame anyone who turns it off. This has been a real problem for a lot of years, and I used to excuse it simply because I remember when the Indy 500 was shown for about 10 minutes, two weeks delayed between segments of water ballet and bowling on Wide world of Sports. I remember when the Ontario 500 was pushed off the air by the Liberace birthday special.At least we have an IndyCar series, at least we are able to watch it LIVE and in FULL every race.
I remember when you simply could not see an Indycar race unless you actually went to it, so for a lot of years I was happy tpo be able to actually see it, no matter how bad the coverage.
But today, if the Indycar telecast sucks, you can flip over to nascar and see profesionals at work....... and that's the problem. Why watch crap once you have gotten used to a professional telecast? If we ever want to challeng nascar, it has to start with how the sport is presented, and when the partner acts like they cpould care less, why should that fans care any more?
I don't know how they got 26 brand new cars together in this economy, but that part of it was a damm good job.At least we have more than 18 cars every race.
While I was hunting around the dial to try & find the race I landed on Speedvision where they were doing a documentary (or something) on an Indian kid who races karts. Now I see where they got the inspiration for the DW design. From the few laps of the St. Pete race i caught, the cars are even uglier in motion on the track than standing still. Just hideous. And slow-looking.
Len Terry, where have you gone when we need you?
I took two friends that have never been to an indycar event.....they came away breathless and several thats unbelievable statements....the sound..the look(they loved the look of the cars, and i do too).....im over the whiny threads...
the event was incredible....the EVENT....beautiful layout....there was a huge crowd there...the racing....ehhhh...itll get better......
fyi...we already are making plans for next year...yeah...they liked it.....
now if i can get them to indy.
I was using the Verizon app for most of the race, and got to see the ABC telecast for the end. Honestly, the cars looked better and the race seemed more interesting on my 5" phone screen with IMS radio network audio than with ABC coverage on the big-screen. The cars looked awesome from Will Power's onboard cameras, but i only saw one shot from a car that didn't use the roll hoop cam in the last 30 laps on ABC. If there are cars out there with other cameras on them, show those off! The cars look so much better from ground level than they do from that 3/4 overhead shot.
Those megga, bulbous side pods is the biggest eyesore of the car, knowing that the highest amount of drag is at the top of the tire, I can see these pods run at Indy. But I dont see why they are needed for street or road courses. Visually, they looked to be going even slower then last years cars because of the cars girth.
The car looks fine from a low angle side view but ponderously heavy from every other perspective. I too just can't get away from thinking bumper cars. It's sad that the car was not made to look great...a beautiful car costs no more than an ugly one. Have body kit spec's been released for next year?
My thoughts on the cars now that the race is over.
1. Overall they look fairly sleek and pleasing to my eye at least. The only downside is the lack of variety which will change in 2013. However, looking at Tony Kanann's car damaged my retina. Man is that thing bright.
2. On TV they sounded pretty nice, although a bit muffled due to the turbos. In the future this may help dealing with the various noise restrictions one finds at the local level.
3. The change to the new cars didn't affect the running order much. The top teams are still the top teams and the field-fillers are still fighting for scraps.
anyone that thought they looked slow has never watched an IndyCar street race.
I think the carbon brakes will damper passing. I saw that repeatedly yesterday.
Perhaps you just need some training from those people who can clearly see the speed differential betweena 216 and 230 lap at Indy....Could be just the size and width of the aero kits, but if I didn't have the timing charts to look at, I would tell you this car is much slower then its predecessor.
oops sorry, just couldn't resist that one.
new sig pending