Racer - Fall 2013

and at the same time making sure that we
have good competition. That needs to be
carefully balanced, because it’s not easy
to encourage technological development
and keep competition. We’re a little
different from some formulas in that
that’s not part of our charter, to be totally
relevant to what happens on the street.”
In some respects, the very constraints
of the current regs create relevancies
within themselves. A 2,500-mile minimum
engine life may inhibit innovation in many
areas, but on the flipside, as Griffiths
points out, “no manufacturer produces
short-life road car engines.”
Ironically, any proposed expansion of the
current engine rules might not necessarily
translate into significant changes. According
to Berube, the current cost cap on engine
leases – an arrangement that burdens the
manufacturers with a large chunk of the
cost of engine supply in addition to their
design and development spends – means
the scope to do much more is limited.

“There’s no burning desire [for more
open rules] right now,” he says. “The
engineers always want to do more, but
looking at the business side of the equation,
doing more than we’re doing now would
probably involve limiting other areas.”
Honda, however, has expressed interest
in exploring energy recovery in the future.

“Every manufacturer appears to have
some form of energy recovery technology
on their vehicle,” says Griffiths. “It doesn’t
necessarily have to be the straightforward
hybrid solution such as kinetic energy
recovery. But we certainly should be
looking at heat energy recovery,
particularly with the turbocharger.”
But even that is secondary to the broader
need for rules that not only keep the current
manufacturers engaged, but hopefully act
as a lure for other manufacturers to join.
Both Honda and Chevy have openly spoken
of their desire for a competitive rival to fill
the gap left by Lotus, not only to help
share the load in supplying the field, but
also to drive broader interest in the sport.

Despite the central role played by the manufacturers, IndyCar’s road relevance chops aren’t restricted to engines. The cars aren’t as fast as they used to be, but they’re still operating at speeds Walker believes could present broader tech opportunities.

“One thing we’ve got is speed,” he says. “We are one of the fastest cars in the world in a closed-course situation, so we deal with a lot of air, and I think there is a lot that could possibly be applicable in the area of management of airflow and optimization of the aerodynamics. On the surface, it might not seem that relevant to the road car right now, but down the

Rolling out additional areas in which to develop and showcase road-car relevant technologies could keep IndyCar’s current manufacturers engaged and attract new ones. OPEN UP THE BOX

THE CAR DALLARA DW12 CURRENT ROAD-CAR RELEVANT TECHNOLOGIES Small displacement (2.2-liter), direct injection, turbocharged V6 engines. Extended (2,500-mile) minimum engine life. FUTURE ROAD-CAR RELEVANT TECHNOLOGIES Alternative fuels in place of E85? Energy recovery systems (kinetic and heat energy)?

CURRENT ROAD-CAR RELEVANT TECHNOLOGIES Nothing much. It’s a spec-heavy car designed to deliver close racing on a variety of track types. FUTURE ROAD-CAR RELEVANT TECHNOLOGIES Body kits are over the horizon. Given a meaningful box to work in, manufacturers could hone and showcase aerodynamic concepts. CHEVROLET INDYCAR V6

Ri c k Gra ve s GM H on da

THE ENGINES HONDA HI13RT

(TOP) IndyCar’s spec-heavy formula limits, but doesn’t entirely remove, the areas in which a top team such as Penske can engineer an advantage. (ABOVE) HPD’s Roger Griffiths believes IndyCar should consider introducing energy recovery systems.