American Racing News Vol 1, Issue 2 Issue 3 | Page 4

Bench Racer
ues. Many of us fear those measures
will ruin the 500, like it arguably has
done with Daytona and Talladega.
I think there is an answer. Don't artificially restrict the power, instead return IndyCar to the automotive
innovators they used to be.

The Next 100 Indy
500s
By the time you read this, the 100th
running of the Indy 500 will be in the
history books. The race ran, the milk
drank and the fans returned back to
life as usual.
As fans, we are impacted by memories
of the race, good or bad. Some of us
will carry those memories with us forever. Some will not remember who
won a month or two from now. Regardless of the extent, anyone that
spent all morning watching the 500
was impacted, but is the 500 merely
an event, is it just a spectacle for the
fans?
While Indy is much more than "just an
event" to millions of fans, it could be
so much more, with average lap
speeds reaching 230 mph the track’s
ability to stretch the limits of a modern IndyCar is in question. Can cars do
240 within the confines of the speedway? 250? Does it matter? More
importantly are higher speeds safe for
the fans in attendance? Sooner or
later the sanctioning body will have to
contemplate power restrictors like
NASCAR does at its two largest ven-

It used to be that the major players in
the auto industry would use racing as
a laboratory for future passenger car
advancements. You can thank the racers of yesterday the next time you
look in your rearview mirror, use your
disc brakes or take advantage of the
countless other automotive advancements we have today.
IndyCar could be more relevant to the
auto industry by making some key
changes.

By Dennis Keeley
advancements in fuel efficient but
powerful engine development.
These changes may cause speeds to
drop, but I believe the action and drama would increase. There might be
times when a manufacturer would
have an edge, but overall the health of
IndyCar would be at an all time high.
Manufacturers would return with
both marketing and R&D budgets. We
always hear talk of reducing the costs
of racing, but the increase of manufacturer support is much better for the
health of the teams. Racing at the top
level is expensive. Nothing fuels the
best competition better than cubic
dollars.
Fans would relate better with brands
they know, with a stronger connection
to the cars on the track.

First, any chassis is welcome as long as
it meets certain technical criteria.
(Open wheels, certain length, width,
etc.) This would encourage chassis
and suspension innovations.

Teams would benefit from increased
factory support options. Three more
manufactures coming back would support anywhere from six to twelve cars.

Second, engines must be must be
heavily based on a production car of
over 5,000 units sold. Not only would
the auto industry learn new performance and fuel saving technology, the
fans would identify better with their
favorite brands. Just think how cool it
would be, if the winner of the Indy 500
had the same base engine as your Accord.

Will it happen? I could only hope. I
know there is a lot to consider before
making changes like this. It is a huge
gamble to rock the boat. Would these
changes work or just drive everyone
away?
We will likely never see these changes,
but in a bench racer's world all is possible.

Third, tires must be limited in number
of sets used in a race. This tire rule
would encourage smart suspension
technology.
Finally, the amount of fuel must be
limited to 95% of the previous year's
allotment. The fuel rule would push

4 | American Racing News | Bench Racer