|
|
Post by mjjracer on Aug 9, 2011 12:56:48 GMT -5
Sorry, I don't have any super-secret spy pics, just the official ones from Indycar. Great to see it on track, becoming a reality. Wish I could hear how it sounds. I think I like it. Not too fond of the flat nose, and the airbox has got to go (IMHO) but overall, not bad. I'm ready for 2012. Already making plans for a cross-country trip to Indy. photos.speedtv.com/gallery/IndyCar_2012_Car_Unveiling |
|
|
|
Post by indycals on Aug 9, 2011 14:09:23 GMT -5
Why does everyone hate the airbox so much?
|
|
|
|
Post by trevor83 on Aug 9, 2011 14:41:14 GMT -5
It looks tons better without the tailfin. But if you cover up the front half of the car picture with your hand the rear half looks like an ALMS LMP.
|
|
|
|
Post by harveythedog2 on Aug 9, 2011 14:56:54 GMT -5
I don't hate the airbox so much but wonder why they need it with a turbo? Unless the airbox brings air into something other than the engine I don't see the need.
Stu
|
|
|
|
Post by 2lapsdown on Aug 9, 2011 15:25:49 GMT -5
I don't mind the airbox, but I hate the tailfin and the bodywork behind the rear tires.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by indydog on Aug 9, 2011 15:30:14 GMT -5
I'm not real crazy about the car, but I don't care for the back end either.
Is the one with the red tires the road course car? I don't mind the airbox, but Stu is right, all a turbo really needs is a NACA type intake.
|
|
|
|
Post by mjjracer on Aug 9, 2011 15:51:55 GMT -5
To me, the Indycars of the late '80s to mid '90s are some of the sleekest, best looking racecars ever. Part of the sleekness came from the low profile engine cover. Now it made sense to have the airbox when the engines were switched to N/A. But with the turbo it's no longer necessary. And I don't think racecars should have anything on them that aren't necessary.
Those are my reasons for not liking the airbox. But either way, it's not a deal breaker.
|
|
|
|
Post by professor on Aug 9, 2011 17:08:50 GMT -5
New paint scheme opportunities for sure!
|
|
|
|
Post by indycals on Aug 9, 2011 17:55:58 GMT -5
I think Indycar's explanation for the airbox was to the effect that you still need to deliver air to the turbo intakes and that this was a way to standardize it.
|
|
|
|
Post by gparrow on Aug 9, 2011 18:34:54 GMT -5
It looks tons better without the tailfin. But if you cover up the front half of the car picture with your hand the rear half looks like an ALMS LMP. I was thinking the same thing, I guess I'll get used to it I love the fact the shark fin is gone. I just seems to have so much going on that it just kinda looks like a cobbled together model made of spare parts. |
|
|
|
Post by trevor83 on Aug 9, 2011 20:24:43 GMT -5
For those looking at the pics in the link above, the first 4 pics are the car they actually tested on Monday. The rest were the display cars from Indy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Calvin on Aug 10, 2011 1:06:52 GMT -5
I think its fine, its pretty easy please me with how a race car looks. Im also not taking this current design too seriously just because prototype street cars/race cars always change when the time comes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2011 7:31:48 GMT -5
I'm sure the air box is to cover the roll bar, mount a camera, oh, and an air inlet.
Be prepared for a lot, a whole lot of caution flags to clean up all those knocked off extra body parts. Don't forget all the extra pit stops to change tires from those Ben Hur inspired wings and side plates.
Don't really like fenders on open wheeled cars. It's kind of a CanAm II look. Not the best look and certainly not necessary.
|
|
|
|
Post by mjjracer on Aug 10, 2011 11:20:00 GMT -5
I personally have no problem with the rear "bumper". No it's not attractive, but there are several drivers walking aroung with limps who I think would be in favor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2011 0:25:48 GMT -5
Love the turbos and front end but from the roll bar on back?  Agree with wisdonm....lots of parts to cut and fall off. I also don't get the airbox deal. |
|
|
|
Post by indycals on Aug 11, 2011 0:51:35 GMT -5
There is a discussion on trackforum is that the airbox standardizes the air inlet for all the body kit makers, so they don't have to make different accommodations for different engines. Now for the most part the engine companies will do their own aero kits, and you wont' be allowed to use a Chevy Aero kit with a Honda engine, but there is anticipation that other non engine manufacturers will do body kits as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2011 10:48:51 GMT -5
Track Forum also had somebody photoshop the airbox out of the Mid-Ohio press release photo and the rear looks so much better---a lot like the 90s cars. Don't see how the accommodations to different engines would be affected by no airbox. I am just glad we have a new engine formula. The bodies of the car will change regardless.
|
|
|
|
Post by mjjracer on Aug 12, 2011 11:12:10 GMT -5
It seems to me that Indycar could mandate the inlet be where ever they want it. It would still be the same for all manufacturers.
The one argument I see in favor is that it is the best way to route the air when some engines use only one turbo and others use two. By having it far away from the turbos it equalizes for all.
Maybe that was discussed at TF, I haven't looked at that thread. Whenever I go on TF I get depressed because of all the negativity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2011 21:42:49 GMT -5
So, are these new body kits really going to be available for the 2012 season or will they not be around until 2013? I like what I see so far (and should make for interesting model challenges).
|
|
|
|
Post by trevor83 on Aug 31, 2011 22:08:04 GMT -5
No body kits for 2012. If you're in Indy the car will run the road course tomorrow 9/1.
|
|
|
|
Post by trevor83 on Sept 1, 2011 14:04:07 GMT -5
Short clip for you from today's run.
|
|
|
|
Post by trevor83 on Sept 1, 2011 15:29:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by trevor83 on Sept 1, 2011 16:37:38 GMT -5
Better video
|
|
|
|
Post by gparrow on Sept 20, 2011 19:29:19 GMT -5
With all the new aero stuff on the car I wounder how it will handle the dirty air on ovals, it seems to me that as these cars have become more and more dependant on aerodynamics the more troubles they have passing on ovals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2011 20:24:46 GMT -5
My guess is that half of that crap will be off the car come spring training. I am still hopeful that the aero and engine boys will conclude that the worthless airbox is nothing but drag ugly.  |
|
|
|
Post by trevor83 on Sept 22, 2011 9:07:50 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2011 0:37:34 GMT -5
Personally, I think the current Dallara looks much better than this new car. Ive seen this new car in person. Dont like it yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by senn65 on Sept 28, 2011 8:28:10 GMT -5
Why does everyone hate the airbox so much? Most who don't like it are CC fans who want it to look more like a Lola or DP01. They never did like the "crapwagon" or "lawn dart". |
|
|
|
Post by SWT500 on Sept 28, 2011 8:31:38 GMT -5
The new car made its maiden voyage on the IMS oval yesterday.
|
|
|
|
Post by senn65 on Sept 28, 2011 8:41:15 GMT -5
The rear fascia was designed to limit front to rear "wheel climbing". It's a safety addition. I doubt it's as flimsy as it looks.
|
|
Agree with wisdonm....lots of parts to cut and fall off. I also don't get the airbox deal.
