Quote:
Originally Posted by aceace
Until the day Indycar offers multiple chassis/engine combinations it can not compete for viewership/purses. The big names will move to Nascar for the money. A 35th place driver in Nascar pays more or at least as much as Indycar. The cost of the car needs to come down (competition needed). With the safety inventions(safer barrier,seats,hans) why does the car have to be nearly all carbon fiber? Why not just the drivers pod and maybe a few other components absolutely necessary? The increased weight from using high tensil strength steel is minimal. They were doing 220in these cars in the past. Yes, they were more dangerous but the other safety measures has nullified much of this. Is there really that much difference between 225 in a Dallara vs a chassis that could cost 1/4 of the money? How many more teams could afford Indycar? Carbon fiber cars look just as bad post crash, while reducing the cost with multiple chassis/engine combinations the series could thrive again. If reducing costs is not the answer then what is? Does the series fold up and go away. Maybe my enigineering thoughts are out of whack here, but if no one can afford them what happens to racing. I'm open for suggestions here. I can't see Indycar surviving unless big changes are made. We need to bring back some of the old. Maybe we need drivers with a bigger nut sack (apologies to Danica and Sarah) If someone is scared of the new car, I doubt they would have trouble finding another driver.
|
I pretty much agree with all you said here. But they in my opinion are in much more serious trouble than the cost of the cars. It is the OTHER costs of fielding a team that are the problem now. Even if cars were given away, the other costs would be far more than the available revenue. I think they'll have to start over and do WHATEVER it takes to keep the costs in line with what revenue the series can support.
Unless I misunderstood your point, multiple chassis/engine combinations would probably do the opposite of what you are suggesting. In the US we tend to think that "competition" is always a good thing that brings prices down. That's not really the case in a lot of situations. True competion is described as a market with many sellers and many buyers. In markets that have few sellers they tend to NOT compete on price. The IRL muddies this market even further by mandating the price of the chassis. That's why Dallara is the last man standing. G Force and R&S made decent cars, but they weren't quite as good as the Dallara, yet cost exactly the same price. So why would anyone buy the almost as good one when the best one cost the same?