[captrat]

Originally Posted by Puppy

So does this mean that you think the comment about the demise of dirt racing in the so-called National Championship is historically inaccurate?

[Brickyard]

Originally Posted by captrat So does this mean that you think the comment about the demise of dirt racing in the so-called National Championship is historically inaccurate?

Blaming Penske, like some of you do, is laughable at best. His team had only ran 12 races up to the end of the 1970 season and wouldn't be full time until around 1972. I would love to hear how he strong armed USAC into this decision.

https://speedsport.com/racing-histor...r-1970-season/

USAC wasn't the only one to remove dirt at the top level during this time period, it would be gone in NASCAR by 1972. Evil Penske at work again? I guess he summoned the dark forces to bring those evil rear engines and put wings on them as well.....

There are paths to full time series if drivers want to take it, either Road to Indy or go to Europe where you can hone your road racing skills and, in the case of Europe, get your name out to a wider audience. All of the current American drivers, part and full time, did one of the two or both.

BTW, one of your own didn't even go to Eldora to find a dirt slinger to run Indy this year. They put a female Brit in the car.......but yep, the toxic twins of Ganassi and Penske.

I'll add, in many cases, USAC seems to have been it's own worst enemy. There's a reason Gurney and those guys did what they did and the case was outlined in black and white in his White Paper. When USAC got a second chance during TG's failed experiment they screwed up royally and got punted. One can make a very good argument that the second split made it tougher, not easier, for those guys to get to Indy. Yep, you got da King and Hewitt layin' it all out on da line at Indy in a dumbed down version of an IndyCar, but at a great cost as it pertains to the future. That was a real smooth move in creating a situation that ran off big teams and drivers and resulted in a twelve year war that financially weakened this type of racing resulting in more than a few cases in teams shutting down.

[Puppy]

Originally Posted by Brickyard Blaming Penske, like some of you do, is laughable at best. His team had only ran 12 races up to the end of the 1970 season and wouldn't be full time until around 1972. I would love to hear how he strong armed USAC into this decision. https://speedsport.com/racing-histor...r-1970-season/ USAC wasn't the only one to remove dirt at the top level during this time period, it would be gone in NASCAR by 1972. Evil Penske at work again? I guess he summoned the dark forces to bring those evil rear engines and put wings on them as well..... There are paths to full time series if drivers want to take it, either Road to Indy or go to Europe where you can hone your road racing skills and, in the case of Europe, get your name out to a wider audience. All of the current American drivers, part and full time, did one of the two or both. BTW, one of your own didn't even go to Eldora to find a dirt slinger to run Indy this year. They put a female Brit in the car.......but yep, the toxic twins of Ganassi and Penske. I'll add, in many cases, USAC seems to have been it's own worst enemy. There's a reason Gurney and those guys did what they did and the case was outlined in black and white in his White Paper. When USAC got a second chance during TG's failed experiment they screwed up royally and got punted. One can make a very good argument that the second split made it tougher, not easier, for those guys to get to Indy. Yep, you got da King and Hewitt layin' it all out on da line at Indy in a dumbed down version of an IndyCar, but at a great cost as it pertains to the future. That was a real smooth move in creating a situation that ran off big teams and drivers and resulted in a twelve year war that financially weakened this type of racing resulting in more than a few cases in teams shutting down.

Well said Brick.

[captrat]

Originally Posted by Brickyard Blaming Penske, like some of you do, is laughable at best. His team had only ran 12 races up to the end of the 1970 season and wouldn't be full time until around 1972. I would love to hear how he strong armed USAC into this decision. https://speedsport.com/racing-histor...r-1970-season/ USAC wasn't the only one to remove dirt at the top level during this time period, it would be gone in NASCAR by 1972. Evil Penske at work again? I guess he summoned the dark forces to bring those evil rear engines and put wings on them as well..... There are paths to full time series if drivers want to take it, either Road to Indy or go to Europe where you can hone your road racing skills and, in the case of Europe, get your name out to a wider audience. All of the current American drivers, part and full time, did one of the two or both. BTW, one of your own didn't even go to Eldora to find a dirt slinger to run Indy this year. They put a female Brit in the car.......but yep, the toxic twins of Ganassi and Penske. I'll add, in many cases, USAC seems to have been it's own worst enemy. There's a reason Gurney and those guys did what they did and the case was outlined in black and white in his White Paper. When USAC got a second chance during TG's failed experiment they screwed up royally and got punted. One can make a very good argument that the second split made it tougher, not easier, for those guys to get to Indy. Yep, you got da King and Hewitt layin' it all out on da line at Indy in a dumbed down version of an IndyCar, but at a great cost as it pertains to the future. That was a real smooth move in creating a situation that ran off big teams and drivers and resulted in a twelve year war that financially weakened this type of racing resulting in more than a few cases in teams shutting down.

So are you saying that Penske with his road racing background along with Patrick and others did not influence the decision. They complained they did not want to maintain 2 types of cars then went out spent money on Formula 5000. We can agree to disagree, but Penske and his ilk changed the racing in this country, IMHO not for the good. Our unique brand is now gone. Checkout the attention given it by the general media.

[Brickyard]

Originally Posted by captrat So are you saying that Penske with his road racing background along with Patrick and others did not influence the decision. They complained they did not want to maintain 2 types of cars then went out spent money on Formula 5000. We can agree to disagree, but Penske and his ilk changed the racing in this country, IMHO not for the good. Our unique brand is now gone. Checkout the attention given it by the general media.

"Penske and his ilk" were not behind the formula change that happened during that time. Roger Ward was the one who convinced Cooper and Brabham to test the European style rear engine car at Indy. It was pretty much done for the front engines at that point and the dirt that accompanied them....and guess who wrote the rules that allowed it?

Coming from a business standpoint, why would someone want to spend more money on something that by 1966 didn't even constitute a quarter of the schedule and wasn't even close to even fitting the current formula that ran the majority of races to include the biggest one? That's called common sense. If I'm an owner in 1968, which was Penske's first effort, I'm going to see the writing on the wall. Less than 14% of races are dirt oval, the norm for the formula is a European style rear engine car......you better believe I'm going to sock my money into something that will develop a driver for what of the majority of the schedule is. I would have also more than likely been on the side of advocated we drop dirt all together due to the cost associated with running so few races on that side. I can run one type of car that will run on all paved surfaces with minor modifications rather than having to build two types, one of which will only be used at most five times in a season and doesn't even fit the formula needed to be successful at the biggest race. Once again who wrote those rules and made up that schedule.....

Which leads me to the best Penske and his ilk story of them all....the 1994 Indy 500....you know, how that evil man from Shaker Heights, OH cheated his way to victory? Not really, even the tech director at that time admits his engine was well within regulation. He basically just took USAC's rule book and and beat them over the head with it.

The only constant in this world is change and when things evolve you either keep up or stay home and complain about the folks who kept up and whine about how they "got an advantage" or "forced their ways on everyone else". For some folks it's just easier to stay in their comfort zone and then complain about how everyone left them behind.

My opinion? We have a few that have never gotten over those nancy boy right and left turnin' furriners taking the God given right to run Indy from our hero dirt slingers. Like Mike Devin, former USAC tech director said in a book on the 1994 Penske engine,
“Those people who complained would turn right around and go to a baseball game where the nine guys on the field, maybe two of them are American and the other seven are from Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Mexico, all different countries,” said Devin. “That doesn’t seem to be a problem. It’s just a fact of life.”

[Danny Burton]

Against my better judgement...

For all my friends who are not fans of various and sundry safety innovations, may I suggest that you, in your daily lives at home, work, your health, play or travel, give up all safety advances made in the years since, say, the first roll cages were bolted on the first sprint car. Try living your life as you do without the benefits of increased safety.

I'll offer just one example in my life. In July, my wife was taken to St. Francis Hospital and received a heart pacemaker. She survived and the pacemaker is doing fine. I missed the first part of Indiana Sprint Week, but it was worth it.

Okay, two examples. In September, she had a mild stroke, if there is such a thing. Thanks to a neurologist who practices up at St. Vincent's, she is recovering from that as well. Oh, she picked the Thursday morning of the BC39 at IMS to have the stroke. (I see a pattern here.)

Thanks to these technological advances, she's still here and I'm better off for it.

During those two events, ISW and BC39, several racers took some nasty rides, as some do most every week. Would it be appropriate to suggest that those racers, their families, friends, car owners and fans appreciate the safety improvements that we now take for granted? Perhaps we could ask racers themselves their own opinions of safety and medical care in these times as opposed to even a few years ago.

Their responses would be interesting and should be taken seriously.

[captrat]

[QUOTE=Brickyard;521597]"Penske and his ilk" were not behind the formula change that happened during that time. Roger Ward was the one who convinced Cooper and Brabham to test the European style rear engine car at Indy. It was pretty much done for the front engines at that point and the dirt that accompanied them....and guess who wrote the rules that allowed it?

Coming from a business standpoint, why would someone want to spend more money on something that by 1966 didn't even constitute a quarter of the schedule and wasn't even close to even fitting the current formula that ran the majority of races to include the biggest one? That's called common sense. If I'm an owner in 1968, which was Penske's first effort, I'm going to see the writing on the wall. Less than 14% of races are dirt oval, the norm for the formula is a European style rear engine car......you better believe I'm going to sock my money into something that will develop a driver for what of the majority of the schedule is. I would have also more than likely been on the side of advocated we drop dirt all together due to the cost associated with running so few races on that side. I can run one type of car that will run on all paved surfaces with minor modifications rather than having to build two types, one of which will only be used at most five times in a season and doesn't even fit the formula needed to be successful at the biggest race. Once again who wrote those rules and made up that schedule.....

Which leads me to the best Penske and his ilk story of them all....the 1994 Indy 500....you know, how that evil man from Shaker Heights, OH cheated his way to victory? Not really, even the tech director at that time admits his engine was well within regulation. He basically just took USAC's rule book and and beat them over the head with it.

The only constant in this world is change and when things evolve you either keep up or stay home and complain about the folks who kept up and whine about how they "got an advantage" or "forced their ways on everyone else". For some folks it's just easier to stay in their comfort zone and then complain about how everyone left them behind.

My opinion? We have a few that have never gotten over those nancy boy right and left turnin' furriners taking the God given right to run Indy from our hero dirt slingers. Like Mike Devin, former USAC tech director said in a book on the 1994 Penske engine,
“Those people who complained would turn right around and go to a baseball game where the nine guys on the field, maybe two of them are American and the other seven are from Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Mexico, all different countries,” said Devin. “That doesn’t seem to be a problem. It’s just a fact of life.”[/QU

It is so typical of those who think as you do that we who feel we have lost something special that set us apart are xenophobic Neanderthals. You are correct that change is inevitable, but it is not always positive or progress.

[Brickyard]

Originally Posted by captrat It is so typical of those who think as you do that we who feel we have lost something special that set us apart are xenophobic Neanderthals. You are correct that change is inevitable, but it is not always positive or progress.

Mike Devin was the one who pointed that out in Beast, you're not going to like this, but he also went on to say that the only one's he ever heard be outwardly negative to foreigners, contrary to what ever Tony George was claiming at the time the fanbase wanted, were the rednecks of the fanbase. USAC.....technical director..........

I have to be quite honest, it's always blown my mind that some fans of a form of racing that has existed since the early 1900's, has ran on everything from road courses(even in the early days), dirt, board tracks, asphalt, has continually evolved with changing tech, and has a centerpiece race that was billed as an international event and technological showcase(which sadly is not what it once was) and saw international competition starting from day one with exception of the world war and post war periods, get so upset that a guy in one of the cars of said international showcase event doesn't have some good small town name and short track nickname like Jack "Weight Jacker" Jones.

The special part of Indianapolis wasn't having 33 American dirt slayers with cute nicknames like "Stomp and Steer" and "Macho Man" lining up to hang it all out on da line for da fans, the special part of Indianapolis was having a month long celebration of speed and technology that attracted some of the best drivers, owners, and manufactures around the world ...future and former F1 champions, endurance race winners, some Cup drivers, and those who had proven themselves on the local scene, etc.....American and foreign.

I love dirt racing, but not at the expense of one of the biggest races in the world or what is slowly building it's way back to being a respected series, because I'm mad online that I can't see Sunshine lay it all out on da line in a Dallara chassis.

[Stevensville Mike]

Well, the Formula 1 race in Bahrain proved the halo once again saved a life. In this case, Roman Grosjean. He was turned and hit a guardrail head on, splitting the difference.

You see the right rear of his head rest just above the shovel handle on the right. Directly in front of that head rest is the right side of his halo. This made the difference.

I am done posting on this thread and feel the original point of it has been made and proven. Luckily IndyCar has gone to a safety device of the sort.

[antidownforce]

Obviously the halo is a good idea since it saves lives. The problem is with formula one patting themselves on the back as if they somehow invented the roll cage just because they made it out of fancy carbon fiber and shaped it little different. Roll cages are old tech (so is open wheel, open cockpit, engine behind the driver) so many elements of formula one are 1960's era tech yet somehow F1 gets credit for being innovative.
Dirt champ cars had cages long before formula one. Steel is the best material for cages since it can absorb more energy and is ductile.