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.
Mi
ch
a
el
Le
vi
tt/L
AT
INDYCAR’S BALANCING ACT