Welcome to the Robin Miller Mailbag as presented by Honda Racing / HPD. You can follow the Santa Clarita, California-based company at http://hpd.honda.com/ and on social media at @HondaRacing_HPD and https://www.facebook.com/HondaRacingHPD
Your questions for Robin should continue to be sent to millersmailbag@racer.com We cannot guarantee we’ll publish all your questions and answers, but Robin will reply to you. And if you have a question about the technology side of racing, Robin will pass these on to Marshall Pruett and he will also answer here.
Q: I agree with you it was a very pleasant surprise so see the Byrd family’s full-season backing of Conor Daly and continuing to take Bryan Clauson to Indianapolis. It’s fantastic, but their Indy Challenge is even more intriguing. Who are the top contenders you foresee giving the best run to get at least five of the seven wins? Is this Sierra Jackson’s best shot at getting to Indy?
Gordon from Dallas
RM: Best off-season story to date and David Byrd is quickly becoming a player in open-wheel racing. He and brother Jonathan delivered last May and got Clauson hooked up with KVS Racing and putting the deal together for Conor with Dale Coyne really raised their stock with IndyCar fans. The Byrd Challenge, which offers a top prize of an Indy 500 ride if a driver can win all seven races in 2016 (Lawrenceburg, Belleville, Lincoln, Calistoga, Eldora, Granite City & Ventura) is geared towards a full-timer in USAC midgets who excels on the dirt. So the guys with the best odds would likely be Tanner Thorson, Chris Bell, Darren Hagan, Dave Darland and Zach Daum. Of course, depending on his stock car schedule and what Keith Kunz has available Rico Abreu would also be a favorite – as would Clauson. Sierra is a pavement racer so that won’t be her path.
Q: In the last mailbag, you make a couple of references to the cool reception received by Smithfield at Indy. Can you tell us more about this? I cannot imagine why any sponsor would be treated poorly these days.
Kirby, Indianapolis
RM: I’m not going into much detail other than to say if a major NASCAR sponsor had invested in a young American driver for the Indianapolis 500 with its eye on possibly more involvement, I would have hoped that IndyCar and IMS rolled out the red carpet. Or, at the very least, made them feel welcome and appreciated. That didn’t happen. And that’s more than bad business. It’s unacceptable.
Q: OK, standing starts – gone; double-file restarts – kaput. Now Chip Ganassi recommends that IndyCar should eliminate the final double-header event that the series has in Detroit. Some call this just a consequence of changing of the guard at Hulman & Company. Some of the old farts may even call it progress. It’s so typical of AOWR to immediately believe when there is a change leadership that everything the predecessor did was bad had has to be undone.
Randy Bernard understood that racing is an entertainment business and updated the cars and the rules to enhance that entertainment. But it seems that when Mark Miles or some of the snakes in the paddock see a tiny uptick in TV ratings, they construe it as a sign that they are making all the right moves. At this point, I would think that alternate tires and push-to-pass are next on the chopping block. What say you?
Don, Chardon, Ohio
RM: I say that Chip and Roger Penske encouraged Randy to try some things to spice up the show and help the promoter – like double-file restarts. The fans loved them so, naturally, they’re no longer part of program. The double-header concept was embraced by the promoters at Houston, Toronto and Detroit and it makes a helluva lot more sense than awarding double points at a road course where you can’t pass. And The Captain likes two races at Belle Isle, so Ganassi needs to find another crusade.
ABOVE: Chevrolet engineers with this year’s Indy 500 front row.
Q: Just read the article about Chris Berube leaving as heady of Chevy’s Indy program. Why did he leave and go to another division (seems more like a demotion)? Why would Chevy do this with no successor in line? Seems like there is more to this?
As I write this on Dec. 18, I tried to locate your Mailbag column to get your address. Usually I can find you in the list of “Latest News.” You were there on Wednesday and now poof! Then went to homepage and scrolled all the way down and poof again, you disappeared. Thanks again for an excellent year to you & Marshall for giving us the news and behind the scene goings-on in racing.
Peter in Phoenix
RM: From Marshall Pruett: “It’s fairly common these days for a major auto manufacturer to cycle people through their racing programs, and Berube was no different. He came in, learned, led, and is moving onto his next destination to do the same. HPD did the same when Robert Clarke moved on. They brought Erik Berkman in from the road car side to run HPD for a few years, and he returned to a new road car post once his tour was done.”
As for our occasional vanishing act on RACER.com, it’s just one of them ‘racin things I guess. Thanks for reading.
< (Editor’s note: If the Mailbag has been pushed off the home page by more recent features you can always find it here, by clicking on the “more” link to the right of the INSIGHTS AND ANALYSIS header. -Ed.)
Q: Did you ever throw a plate of spaghetti against the wall to see what would stick? Well it seems Honda did that with their aero updates. There is a little Chevrolet over the front of the wheels, some of the ’15 curved pieces of the Honda front wing and the upright “turning vanes”(although larger) of the original DW12 design. Sure hope it works and at least they are testing on the track.
John Boltik
RM: Not sure you can say much of anything until you see how it stacks up against Chevrolet in the open test at Phoenix in February. But we had a story that Nick Wirth’s involvement has been diminished, so that might be the best news yet for the Honda teams.
Q: In your opinion, who are the three most attractive women in motorsports broadcasting and why?
David, Waxhaw, NC
RM: Are you trying to get me killed? OK, I work with two of them at NBCSN – Katie Hargitt and Kelli Stavast – and Jamie Little would get my other vote. As for why, well they’re all good-looking with great smiles and personalities but they’re all serious about getting the facts right and doing a good job of reporting them.
A mid-’70s IndyCar in the logo? Mario Andretti (McLaren) leads
A.J. Foyt (Coyote) and Johnny Parsons (Eagle) at Pocono in 1976.
Q: I just saw the “new” IndyCar logo and to say I was underwhelmed is somewhat of an understatement, but the reason I am emailing you is this: What is the car in the logo? It looks like a mid-to-late ’70’s design to me, and I’ll probably spend all night looking through archives trying to come up with the answer, but whatever it is they clearly used an image from 40 years ago! (Which sadly sums up the entire shebang right now. The head is so disconnected from the body that they cannot even notice when their “new” logo is 40-plus years out of date…). So can you ID the model of car that the logo uses? Inquiring minds want to know!
David E.
RM: Well, it kinda looks like a Crapwagon without the airbox but I don’t think it’s from any particular era. And you should know that IndyCar was so proud of it they waited until 5 o’clock on Friday evening to unveil it to the media.
Q: OK, I think the new IndyCar logo stinks. It’s weak, faded and bland. But I’ll try to be an optimist, and put on my consultant hat about this, so here goes: I think it’s a great logo, because it does four things very well:
1) The lack of any capital letters, unlike NASCAR and F1, shows that IndyCar, i mean indycar, recognizes it is the little dog at the feeding bowl. I understand the committee was leaning toward pink crayon in a cursive font, but that was deemed too expensive to reproduce on ticket stubs until attendance drops another 50%.
2) I think going with a gray instead of black as the main color shows the series acknowledges it is fading away from it’s prior glory. Never be bold, let’s fade away gracefully. It’s just polite.
3) I think the lack of any bright color other than some tiny tick shows the series is trying to downplay the excitement and speed of racing, because that can be dangerous.
4) Finally, I think the white space gap where a car should be shows how narrow-minded it is to think that racing is about cool cars, and that is a key step to getting racing fans away from this whole “car” thing.
Maybe the Indy 500 (or should I say indy500) will be one massive flea market in a few years instead, completing the move away from things like speed, excitement, boldness, cars, and danger. The logo was clearly developed by folks with no sense of what racing is about, and that’s a great step to help transition to a future with no fans at all.
Sleepy in Knoxville
RM: The early voting to the Mailbag is 19-0 siding with your sentiments but you have to think that Verizon signed off on it so, if that’s the case, I guess it’s acceptable. But I really don’t think a zoomy logo is going to create more fans or send Wall Street running to IndyCar. What I really hate is the 100th Indianapolis 500 logo and billboards around town. You really can’t tell what it’s advertising because somebody thought he or she was Salvador Dali. Just put up the Wing n Wheels with the date. Sorry Mr. Hulman.
Q: Let’s say I am a considering a one-off Indy 500 as an owner. Would I be able to bring in a sponsor with the chance of not making the show? What happens to the sponsorship if the car does not make it? If I’m a company considering this, I would think the chance of not making the show would be enough to scare me away. Could the high cost of IndyCar racing be preventing 34, 35, 36 or more cars showing up?
Jim Fleming
RM: I guess the simple answer is that if you were an owner with a sponsor you probably would take it to a current team and run the car out of its shop because it’s too expensive to just start up a team from scratch for May – unless you really have John Menard money. There can’t be any more than 36 cars because Honda and Chevy are committed to 18 each (maximum) for the 100th running but I don’t think it’s a question of anyone being left out, I still think it’s going to be tough to field 33 cars. So, yes, to your answer that high costs are a deterrent. But, if you somehow ended up missing the show, you could find a place for your sponsor on another car and that’s happened many times throughout IMS history.
Q: Lots of great hype being produced for the 100th Indy 500, but no mention of a one-off, first-place purse increase for the historic race. Given brisk ticket sales and other revenue increases surrounding the event, has there been any discussion of a record payoff, even if just for the winner?
Joe Darmofal
RM: There has been an effort made to find a presenting sponsor for the 100th Indy 500 but I’ve not heard of any special payoff for the winner. I’ve been preaching for years that if it paid $1 million to start and $10 million to win, there might be 40-45 entries. I asked Richard Childress once why he didn’t field a one-off at Indy and he said why would he want to spend $1 million to race for $200,000? It’s too late now because, as explained in the question above, there will only be 36 available engines but there’s simply not enough financial incentive for an IMSA, NASCAR, WoO, USAC or F1 team to give it a go.
Q: I have been absent from the mailbag for a few months. Justin Wilson’s death seemed to affect me more than the many others I have seen through the years. So, a break was in order. Time to build back the excitement. The Conor Daly announcement helps. My questions remain the same: Are there any new rumors on Gateway for IndyCar? And, an update on Mr. Gurney’s autobiography?
Lastly, I am sure that you know, but George Follmer claimed that you were one of his favorite writers in the Madigan biography. I wasn’t sure Mr. Follmer liked anyone. Good book. I knew that I was a fan of his during childhood for a reason.
Keep up the good work, Happy New Year.
Mike Walsh, St. Louis
RM: I think there’s a very good chance that IndyCar will return to Gateway in 2017 if a proper TV date can be secured, because both sides say they want it to happen. And the fact Ed Carpenter tested there tells me it’s serious. I’m having lunch with Evi & Dan on Wednesday so I’ll get the latest on the book but she’s cranked out over 800 pages so I think 2016 is realistic. That’s very kind of George and he ranks as one of the most under-appreciated and versatile racers of his era – just ask Parnelli.
Q: I would be interested in hearing your thoughts regarding last weekend’s Indy Invitational race in Indianapolis. The turnout was strong, but the on track product needs work. I am also curious why there was no coverage or a report on RACER.com or even the Indy Star.
Jeff Norris
RM: I only saw the videos posted on Facebook but obviously it was a good idea to have a race in conjunction with PRI, yet a disaster in terms of actual racing because of the tiny track. It may have been better served to just run it on the pavement like they did at the RCA Dome.
Larry Rice, Duke Cook and I promoted an indoor midget race at Cincinnati Gardens in 1981 and ran it on the concrete because there just wasn’t enough room for dirt. We came back at the same place with a motorcycle flat-track race on the dirt and it was a good show (although we had more ushers than paid attendance) won by Danny Ingram. I never heard from the Banker’s Life promoters about times or how to get credentials and I know they alienated a lot of the photographers with demands about rights to pictures, so most of them blew it off. Nobody sent out the results either, so I guess the promoters didn’t really care about coverage – before or after the event. It was a big crowd so obviously they didn’t need The Star or anyone else to help advertise it and I imagine they made money. But they need to forget dirt if they come back in 2016 and a Friday night show might be even better.
ABOVE: A.J. Foyt in the Shrike in ’64 (author archive photo).
Q: This may be a long shot but I figured you might know ever have one of those questions that just stick in your craw and wonder why you can’t get the answer?
As a kid, my dad and I watched A.J. Foyt win the ’64 Indy 500 and as you know that was the last race won in a front-engine car. In the month lead-up to the race, I remember A.J. practicing in a Joe Huffaker-designed, Offy-powered car, the 1963 Watson driven the previous year by Ebb Rose and possibly his 1961 Floyd Trevis chassis roadster. So the question is, among the three, what made him decide to use the 1963 Watson? I guess the answer could be as simple as the Watson offered them the best combination of speed and reliability, but I have been curious. What made that car different from the 1961-winning car, assuming it was available?
Peter Lohmar, Lawrenceville, Ga.
RM: A.J. tested the Huffaker in March at IMS and practiced in it during the first week in May of 1964 before opting for the Watson roadster. Bob Veith got in the car after A.J. stepped out and qualified 23rd. A.J. also jumped in a Ted Hallibrand rear-engine model called the Shrike and turned some practice laps later in the month. But he and Parnelli both felt more comfortable in their roadsters, which were undoubtedly lighter than the ’61 cars and also running the new low-profile tires.
That was the season Super Tex won the first seven races, tried the Lotus at Milwaukee in Race #9 only to have the gearbox fail, then captured DuQuoin and Indianapolis in his Meskowski dirt car before a DNF at Trenton in his roadster. He won Sacramento for his 10th victory and ended the year in a Hallibrand rear-engine Shrike at Phoenix. Parnelli was on the pole in his Lotus with A.J. alongside but his fabulous season ended with a DNF.
“Anne (Fornoro, his publicist) tells me I spun out at Phoenix but I don’t remember spinning one time that season,” said Foyt to RACER with a chuckle. “And, if I did spin, I’m sure it was because something broke.”
Q: I was glad to see you giving Sam Hornish a fair retrospective in the last mailbag. Unfortunately, Sam will end up going down without the credit he deserves. But for anyone who challenges or questions Sam’s talent in an IndyCar, I’d point out the following:
1) Sam made the Fast 6 in six out of 11 road course races he competed in (IRL only had three road courses in 2005 and 2006, and five in 2007). He was the fastest guy outside of the Fast 6 on three more of those occasions, and at that time IndyCar had the cream of the crop of road and street course drivers (Franchitti, Dixon, Wheldon, Herta, Kanaan, Helio…)
2) Sam obviously knew his way around the 1.5-mile cookie-cutter tracks in the IRL era of high downforce pack racing, but even still he was never involved or caused a major accident, it seemed like he immediately had the trust of the CART guys who came over in 2002-’03 on those big tracks, and nobody except Tony Kanaan could put the car up in the high line and the marbles and make it stick at 220 at places like Chicagoland, Kansas, Michigan, Fontana, etc.
3) Sam was awesome at the driver’s oval tracks. He was always in contention at places like Richmond, Milwaukee, Gateway, Pikes Peak. This includes 2003 when he ran that dog of a Chevy engine for Panther before Cosworth provided a suitable engine and ran great at the smaller ovals in spite of being 40 HP down to the Toyotas and Hondas.
4) Sam was awesome at Indy. Sure, 2006 was the only year he put it all together but he was always fast at Indy and in contention. I’d love to see Sam back in IndyCar or even Indy but I think he’s made it abundantly clear that he’s moved on which is fine.
Clint, Chicago
RM: Thanks for all that research Clint. I think Sam got everyone’s attention as a rookie when he was driving for Paul Diatlovich’s tiny team and he passed Eddie Cheever on the OUTSIDE at Phoenix. Like I wrote, I was always impressed at how he improved his road racing skills after joining The Captain. Some people thought Sam was arrogant but I always found him to be quiet, kinda bashful except when in the car, and pretty damn gracious – win or lose.
Q: So I’ve been watching the #tbt on IndyCar’s YouTube channel, which is basically, every Thursday they post a full race from back in the day. I just watched the 1995 race from Cleveland and I was watching a bit of the 1997 race, in the rain, from Portland. A couple things stand out to me.
One, the cars sound amazing. Often times the engines over power the announcers voices. Second, the cars just plain look faster. The way they take esses and their straightline speed, it seems exponentially faster than today’s cars. And last, but certainly not least, the insane amount of sponsors and fans. It was everyone’s name on a car; VISA, McDonald’s, Valvoline, Pennzoil, Tecate, Budweiser, Miller, Marlboro, K-Mart, the list just goes on and on. And the attendance was unlike I’d ever imagined.
I’m only 28, I don’t remember those races at all, let alone in much detail. We all know about “The Split,” IndyCar’s current embarrassingly lackluster marketing, or how 900hp engines are absent. Much are all reasons I’ve read as to why the sport is where it is. But after seeing where it WAS, its gotta be more than that! This sport was once great. A real spectacle. You don’t go from standing room only, at an airport in Cleveland to less than 3k fans, 70 miles outside of Los Angeles (Fontana, my hometown ironically), in 20 years. No sport ever, aside from maybe boxing, has experienced a decline like that.
So I guess my question is this, what the hell happened? How did we get from point A to point B? The races I watched were awesome, truly edge-of-your-seat type stuff. That Portland race, you could truly see how difficult it was to drive and the true skill it took. And races are entertaining now, for sure. But my, how the mighty have fallen.
Tory, Las Vegas, Nev.
RM: I think you just described why IndyCar lost a lot of its fans and most of its pzzzazz. Those cars were “beasts” to quote Gil de Ferran and their acceleration, top speed and sound took your breath away. Four engine manufacturers (Honda, Toyota, Ford, Mercedes), four chassis (Lola, Reynard, Penske, Swift) and two tire companies (Firestone and Goodyear) battling hammer and tong 21 times from March to November – it was open-wheel’s zenith in terms of sponsorship, attendance, interest and media coverage.
The Split weakened CART because it didn’t compete at Indianapolis and gradually the owners (except Newman/Haas and Forsythe) deserted the ship and came to the IRL, which then became CART Lite (A.J.’s phrase). What happened? Egos over-ran common sense and NASCAR circled the carcass of open-wheel like a buzzard, licking its chops for the feast it was about to enjoy.
Comments