Barnhart pointed out that the essential parameters of Indy car design were laid down almost thirty years ago when Jim Hall debuted his John Barnard-designed Chaparral 2K. “The look of an Indy car hasn’t really changed since 1979 when Jim Hall brought the first real ground effects car with front and rear wings and tunnels on it,” he commented. “Basically that’s been the car for the past twenty-eight years. I don’t know that it’s necessarily the time to change but it’s certainly worth a look into the future and to become more relevant. Relevant technology is important.
“As you’ve pointed out in some of your writing, not everything from the NASCAR model applies to what we’re doing. You do have to have relevant technology in our type of racing. But again, achieving a balance is always the hardest work. You can never be all things to all people, and in the end it’s all about balance. This is our way of looking at the style of our cars and it’s all about innovation and relevant technology. This is our future and we’re excited about it.”
Both Honda and the IRL want to find a new engine formula for 2011 that will encourage other manufacturers to compete a point also made by Dario Franchitti in Monday’s column. “Our ultimate goal would be multiple engine manufacturers in a competitive environment,” Barnhart said. “That should be our target and our goal. It would be ideal if we can achieve that and get into that type of arena.
“The hard part - as you’ve discussed in your columns - is, do you do that with multiple manufacturers under the same set of rules, or do you do different types of fuels for different manufacturers with V-8s, V-10s and V-12s? I guess that’s the ALMS model, but it’s never really worked or been applied at this level and philosophically I think that’s a difficult question to answer by saying this is the direction we want to take the Indy 500.”
