They didn't run very close and there was little to no passing because everytime they got close to the car in front of them they PUSHED like a dump truck. Go look at the results to see how LITTLE passing there was. And I didn't question Ashmore I pointed out he has NEVER did an F1 car and if he was in the class of a Newey he'd be making millions and not doing this car. And I don't do drugs but anyone with half a brain can see that nose will cause lift due to it's shape, the fact it slants FORWARD and has several pockets to catch air. Has the great wizard done ANY wind tunnel time on that nose and sidepods? And why would you hire a company to build an open wheel body for use on high speed large ovals that has never done anything but stock car bodies for short track racing?????? Kind of like hiring Cessna to build the next space shuttle body.... I think you may be doing drugs if you think this deal, which FAILED completely and totally with USAC and NASCAR behind it can fly with a person who has NEVER ran a racing series in charge. Go toss your money in the trash if you want but don't cry to us AGAIN when it fails. Your fan base, the people who love the crown cars, didn't support it before and won't now. Good luck, you're going to need it, and with your attitude towards those of us who have loved and supported the crown cars for years you're going to need alot of luck, like hit the lottery type of luck!

Answer Lucky 161 Having built and designed Indy cars from the transition of front engine roadsters and Champ dirt cars with steel tube frames to a crushable monoque crushable structure. The rules mandate that now. Ask Mr. Ashmore if he ever built a steel tube high speed formula car for 1.5 oval races? This would be a start for you to ask that question. I have to add I am envious of Mr. Ashmores achievments. And I am not on his level. What a life he has had. Most of our design and build was trial and error. I am sorry, I thought these were a new design. I did not know these were used race cars.

Lynn

Okay you want me to post something positive. Hmm, lets see. Oh, I am positive that the post above has to be one of the worst I have seen on IOW and trust me I have seen alot of bad ones but you definately get the award now.

While it is a nice reply, arrogant as hell, but still a nice reply. It shows your true personality and respect (or lack there of) for other people. You can goad me all you want to, sc96, but you little tempertantrum like this does nothing for your own credibility. My credibility is still intact and those who really do know me on this board know that. Just because I don't associate with the likes of you doesn't mean my credibility is any lesser for it.

So like I have said to you before, if you are going to attack me personally, do it in pm's to me. Obviously, you are not able to that and instead use a public forum to do such attacking. Which is fine. I can take it. I will do to you like I have done to others, I will brush it off and go about my way. Am I always right? No, but I am right alot more times than I am wrong. I have yet to ever see where you admit you are wrong but then again I am not an ego driven person so I guess that's where the big difference is.

I bid you good day and hope the happy pills find there way to you as it seems you need some.

I don't believe Mr. Ashmore is another Frank Kurtis, or A.J. Watson.............

Ashmore has worked on CART type cars. Not really close to the 'high tech' level of an F1 car, and so fricken far away from an all oval, upright, front engined car....that it's laughable.

Did he wrap a pig in new clothes.....yep
Did he make a few changes to the pig.....sure
Is the slightly changed pig in different clothes going to fly.....???

USAC didn't try to phase this style of car in, they just dumped the traditional pavement Champ Cars...did the owners like that? I seem to remember the owners having meetings and discussing their displeasure.

The NAPCAR fans didn't fill the stands to watch the last incarnation of these cars.

Why did the first attempt at starting up this type of car fail? Why are some people on here so hell bent sure that it is going to fly this time? Is Mr. Ashmore spiking the Kool-Aid....

What are the ticket prices going to be to see these cars race? If it's more than $20-$30 it just might be a hard sell.......

Not being negative, just looking at this with some reality, and not through the eyes of somebody that is trying to make a buck or two off this.

Show me any link to a quote where anybody of importance within the F1 community ranks him as an egual to Adrian Newey as you stated in your post earlier. You can't because there is no such thing. You are the one who stated he is as good as Newey, if so why isn't he making millions a year designing F1 cars? Why hasn't he ever designed even ONE F1 car? Why isn't he STILL doing Indy Cars if he is so great???????? No sir, you are unbelievable because what you post is false and without backing and shows a lack of credit when all you can do is take cheap shots and not back what you claim.

You seem to making a big jump to conclude that tube framed cars would be "unsafe for sure..." There were a lot of changes going from tube frames to aluminum monocoque to carbon fiber. To assign only one of those factors as the reason that one material is unsuitable is not likely to be correct.

Aluminum monocoque replaced tube frame design mostly for weight reasons not safety. It turns out they were not very safe. Carbon fiber was introduced to take replace the aluminum monocoque, but was deemed too expensive. The promoters of CF then proposed that CF was safer than the alumnium. The main comparison of CF with steel tube frames was that they were stronger at the same weight, which is true. However, that doesn't mean that steel tube frames cannot be safe (relatively speaking, since no race car of any kind of construction is completely safe). It means only that to build a race car using steel tube frames there would be a weight penalty for doing so. In a scenario where going faster is the goal and where there is plenty of money, that would significantly favor the CF construction. However, that is no longer the case. The cars can already go considerably faster than the sanctioning bodies will/can allow and money is tight.

Maybe it's important to remember that one of the original goals was to create an upright car capable fo doing something upright cars of the modern era could not do.

Why is there so much negativity concerning these cars? It seems to me that the glass was empty and now it is half full. If the glass becomes full we will have a new racing series with traditional front engines and a destination for sprint drivers to aspire to. I feel that if they can keep the aerodynamics out of the series and leave the racing up to the drivers and not engineers, this could be an exciting series and truthfully all we as fans want is to see exciting races that leave the racing up to the drivers.

This could not have been said better THANK YOU.

---------- Post added at 04:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:35 PM ----------

This is very true.

ATTENTION SC96, THIS IS A NON NEGATIVE POST

I feel the negativity is more along the lines that these things were shoved down people's thorats when they were labeled New Generation Silver Crown cars. When they were introduced, USAC forced out the original pavement cars and put these in their place. That power pull alienated alot of fans and a few car owners against the cars and USAC. Also, negativity stems from people seeing how these things failed before and a few people emphatically saying these will be a success now.