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?

I understand your points, very valid as things are today. Why does an Indycar honda agreement cost 1.1 million (full season) and you can buy 1 new sprint car engine for $45,000 producing 800hp that teams can make last for several races. Lower the compression and or cubic inches to produce 650hp would they last 500 miles? A team could use 6 engines for an entire year. Has racing become so costly that the series has to fold.

Indy car needs an enema.

WHen you market yourself to a limited audience,P.O.potential customers because they don't fit your preferred demographic, lie about your original intended concept, and fail to atract the best drivers in the country you run most of your events,it's alot more than just chassis and engines.

They wanted the Penske's and Ganasis's and Andretti's back in the sport and the results are everyone else got phucked.Down to a three owner club racing series for a select few, what a disgrace.They need to get rid of all of the computer's and aerodynamics and make it so they can not run wide open all the way around the speedway,I agree with the earlier post on here the pucker factor needs to be put back in Indy car so it is all on the driver like it used to be,when it was the number one auto racing division.

Well it's now jsut a two owner club. Penske and Ganassi are the only two teams able to contend for a championship and the majority of the race wins. AA/AGR has fallen fromthe ranks of the "Big Three" teams.

Indycar is not going to change back to the days of what made it so popular. Everyone wants to say it was the 80's and 90's that made it popular and was at it's heights. It was also then that people had kids who were from parents of when drivers like Foyt, Unser, and Andretti were kids and raced the national championship trial on dirt, they still made a few USAC races throughout the country. They made diehard fans and those fans grew up, had kids and passed the love of racing onto them. Now, there are no Foyts, Andretti's, or Unsers to cheer for. We don;t have drivers that short track American fans can relate to. The drivers people see in USAC and WoO don't get the rides in Indycar. They get them in NASCAR. People will follow their favorite drivers wherever they go. Until Indycar realizes that and can caputer that it will linger on as a Page 6 item in the sports section next to FIFA and Wolrd series of Poker.

Do we need costs to be brought down? Absolutely. All forms of racing need to be enacting cost cutting measures. Racing started out as a hobby and as a "mans" domain to see who was better in the drivers seat. It has now become a battle of who has the most money. If a budget cap could be placed into it so that everyone has the same amount of money to spend it would be a good start. In terms of Indycar, limit in season car redevelopement/testing. The inseason testing (on track) is what F1 did and it did produce better racing in 2009. Still a bore at some tracks, but overall better racing. Indycar, does need a new chassis. Is the DP01 the answer where teams are restricted to what they can do for and to it? Perhaps, but we don't know that for sure as the DP01 was never tested on ovals and that is where the Indycar "great divide" is shown. If the cars are limited in refinement and testing special "trick" pieces, the sompetition becomes mor level but the innovation wide goes away even more and that has been a complaint for years that innovation needs to come back into Indycar racing.

If it was possible, get rid of expensive carbon fiber with the exception of the tub as it would stay carbon fiber. Replace the carbon fiber body panels with aluminum or fiberglass where energy disapation is still possible in the event of a wreck, open the engines up to stock block engines with stock heads, replace the small narrow wings of today with the larger wings ala 1970's, enlages the nose for better driver protection and to ensure a larger hole is punched in the air creating more drag and slowing the cars down. Speed in racing is great, but we have seen what those high speeds have done and that is more important.

Remember back in the '70s when somebody like the hoffmans or bill finley or the purcells had a chassis and somebody had an engine and they got together and ran the Speedway in May? That allowed guys like Dickson and Vogler and Chassey to run the 500 and make some money and let them sprint car, midget, and silver crown race the rest of the year and be able to eat all winter. How about how cool it was when a real life Indy car driver showed up at a sprint or midget event? You could recognize him by the Goodyear fire suit he wore that was given to him for running at the Speedway. Why can't this happen again? I figure there are at least 50 current IRL chassis in the world so cars aren't a problem. They have been around for a number of years so there should be as many parts for them as there were for a '72 Eagle back in the day. The problem is the insane engine lease agreement. We have to come up with a formula that would make a reasonably priced engine available for purchase for people to run an Indy car. USAC is full of great owners who deserve a shot at the biggest race in the world, Johnny Vance, Jetstar, Wilke, Rotondo- Weirich, Hoffmans, TSR, and a bunch more. The south is full of reliable 800 horsepower engines that can be had for cheap money right now and guys like Gaerte, Shaver, and Rick Long could adapt the systems to a current rear engine chassis and Indianapolis is full of great racing mechanics, fabricators, and machinists who could fit the engine in the current car. In my minds eye I see 50 cars trying to qualify at Indy with some doing well enough to venture to other races. This is probably senseless drivel to most people but it seems like the people who dream are the ones who make things happen because they move forward regardless of the naysayers. The real racers need to take Indy back and make it where a kid with talent and an owner with heart and enthusiasm can stand next to their car on the grid when Jim Nabors sings "Back Home Again In Indiana". Oh yeah, make the dirt miles a part of the national championship, too.

I follow a Canadian racing blog, and this title caught my eye:$9.2M loss for Edmonton Indy race is mind-boggling, the full story is below. If you don't have time to read it, it says that the city of Edmonton lost 9.2 million over two years.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sport...958/story.html

I only live 5 hours from Indy, and have only been to the Speedway for F1. I would like to make a round trip and do the 500 one day, it just seems so boring to me. And I call my self a hardcore race fan. Have Stewart and Montoya run it, and I think it could bring back some excitement. I haven't been around long enough to remember USAC guys going to Indy. Although it would be nice to have such a strong racing lineage in the midwest.

Edmonton is 31 hours from me. Has a population of 760,000 and is 8 hours from the Montana border. Obviously the Belle Isle Grand Prix is in a much more populous area. So the idea of racing in some far off city without a lot of support from fans, and only suppport from a city dumb enough to pay them to come race there is only going to last for so long.

I felt that when the IRL started; they needed to have a flat bottom car to promote better racing.

The cost of the IRL cars is not really that out of line when compared to NASCAR. Yes the car itself is more expensive, but a team doesn't have to have as many. Two or three per driver compared to 10-15 per driver in NASCAR.

Personally; I feel the engine lease is far cheaper than running your own engine program. A million dollars and I don't have to own any engine equipment or hire engine specialists. The teams that do their own development have around 10-12 million a year in their motor departments alone. If you just lease a motor at say 40,000 a weekend for a NASCAR race, your budget for the year is around 1.4 million.

Initially; I felt they should have used Fiberglass engine covers and the alike, but pretty soon carbon will be as cheap to use as fiberglass. Maybe cheaper. I'm not sure, but I don't believe they use any titanium bolts. All of the bolts I believe are aircraft grade steel. The IRL teams need substationally less manpower than the NASCAR teams. An IRL budget is around 6-8 million a car while the best Cup teams are 28-35million a car.

I will say this, I never felt that the origional model of the IRL would survive and I always felt it would eventually have to follow CARTS footsteps to a degree. That said......Tony George was a man of his word and provided many great opportunities for the Midget and Sprint car guy. He funded out of his pocket many deals that helped the "local" racer.

JJ Yeley,Tony Stewart,Billy Boat,Jon Herb,Jason Leffler,Andy Michner,Jimmy Kite,Tyce Carlson,Jack Hewitt,Steve Kinser,Sarah Fisher, and on and on all got their chance at the dream along with other Americans form other types of racing. Unfortunately, the fans didn't follow to support their activities. If it had been successful, more of these guys would have been there.

The reason they are doing what they are doing is because that is where the money is. Street racing sucks, but they get sponsors. Face it, the fans don't come out for the IRL at many tracks and they have to where they are wanted and can make money. I would love to see the miles on the schedule again, but if you can't seat 50,000 it isn't worth doing.

The IRL is expensive as is all of the racing, but not as expensive as it seems.

But it's more expensive than can be supported by the available revenue. nascar spends more. That's true. However, nascar can spend more because they have more. If you waved a magic wand and 50% of nascars money disappeared, we as fans would see almost no difference in their product. If is was cut in half again, same thing. But if you cut the average IRL budget in half, half the field would disappear immediately and that's half of an already pathetic field.

I'm not a big Tony George basher, but I can't agree that he was a "man of his word." The reason is that he has publicly stated that he wanted a CART like series from the beginning. I, like many others supported the original "vision" and thought it had a chance. In my opinion they didn't go far enough and didn't stick with it long enough. But considering that he has since said that it wasn't his real goal, I can't support the contention that he was a man of his word.

Concerning engine leasing being cheaper than running your own program. The results of engine leasing were "special" team favorites getting the good stuff and everyone else getting the scraps. This was true earlier in CART and proved all over again in the IRL. A case can surely be made to support your contention, but the reality is that engine leasing caused many teams to quit.