US Grand Prix could go into reverse
If the US Grand Prix remains at Indianapolis beyond 2007, which is by no means a foregone conclusion, it could switch to running counter-clockwise, the way IndyCars do. That's because Indy is trying to get a MotoGP race and having the bikes run clockwise through the banked turn 1 (turn 13 when running the road course) could prove to be too dangerous when accelerating out of the turn onto the front straight.
The banked turn has always been controversial even for F1 cars because no other modern day F1 track has a similar type of corner, and the cars and their tires aren't really designed for the stresses they face there. After six years of running at Indy you would think that teams and tire makers would have learned and compensated by now, but apparently they prefer to whine about it, then address the problem in their designs.
[Source: SpeedTV]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Galley 3:43PM (3/09/2007)
Tradition or not, Indy is a horrible track for Formula One.
Reply
chopsui 3:46PM (3/09/2007)
Maybe I'm just thick, but I don't understand what one race has to do with the other. Why do the GP cars need to change direction because of something the MotoX guys have a problem with?
Reply
Mike M. 3:52PM (3/09/2007)
You won't see a tear in my eye if F1 doesn't race at Indy.
Reply
Sam Gross 5:16PM (3/09/2007)
The tire issue is legit. A few years ago, Indy had only 13 cars in its start because Michelin's tires (the ones that everyone else used) weren't up to running turn one. They wrecked four cars in qualifying after their tires blew.
Reply
TicalWRX 4:45PM (3/09/2007)
This article doesnt make any sense. Why does F1 have to change direction, for a problem the MotoGP guys are experiencing??
Reply
JD 4:49PM (3/09/2007)
Yeah, I'm missing it too. And very true about the whining and politics that are dismantling that sport bit by bit. I was at the USGP in 2005, when they decided to not race. Blame who you will, but it sucked. There was not much coverage locally, so it was a surprise when most of the field just pulled into the pits. Stupid rules/politics/Bernie. But anyhow.... could anyone explain how MotoGP would influence the direction of the USGP? I also read the article at speed to see if that provides clarification. It doesn't. Thanks to anyone who provides a useful answer.
Reply
tiago do vale 4:50PM (3/09/2007)
... or redesign a car, tire or suspension or whatever, for a single race.
Reply
Kwyjibo 5:01PM (3/09/2007)
"and the cars and their tires aren't really designed for the stresses they face there."
Umm...WORNG! The Michelin tires weren't able to race there. Bridgestone had no problems and the cars were fine. It was a TIRE problem, and that's all there is to it.
It sucked for the fans that were in attendance, but the rules state you can only bring a certain number of tires/compounds to a race. Michelin failed their teams - Bernie has nothing to do with it.
Reply
Dodger 5:39PM (3/09/2007)
They should move the race to another track. Laguna Seca gets my vote.
Reply
ian 6:12PM (3/09/2007)
there weren't 13 cars.....there were 6. only 3 teams (2 cars each) were on bridgestone, the rest were on michelin, who made a colossal blunder and tried to blame it on anyone in sight but themselves. thankfully, they are no longer a part of F1. As to why the proposed motogp race should affect the F1 race i have no idea either. Also, Galley was 100% correct - the road course they came up with at indy is a micky mouse track.
Reply
Richard 9:54PM (3/09/2007)
First off, it should read: "than address the problems," not, "then address the problems..."
Second, WTF cares?
Reply
MikeW 10:41PM (3/09/2007)
They should try something like LeMan racing
10 F1 cars
10 IRL cars
10 CART cars.
That would be something to watch.
or run 10 F1 cars clockwise, and the other 10 CCW-a real deathrace.
Reply
Bob-o 1:59AM (3/10/2007)
#12: Mixed fields in open wheeled cars is a recipe for disaster.
Michelin, and other race teams did have a valid point. Did you know there were Indy tires? Yeah, even Bridgestone did. They're specifically suited for the USGP because of those high lateral loads. The cost effectiveness of having a tire built for that one race is pretty low.
Reply
fm 2:44AM (3/10/2007)
Second what #13 said. From What I heard Bridgestone had the same enginering problems with IRL (or was it CART) cars at Indy the year prior because of a redisegn of the track. Bridgestone had the advantage of having faced the problem before and knowing what to expect for F1 cars. Not to say Michelin shouldn't of thought of that before they arrived at the track. Michelin did reimburse the attendents AND gave them free tickets to the following year's USGP.
Reply
jim 8:20AM (3/10/2007)
Back to Watkin's Glen. Or Road America, Laguna Seca or anywhere else that has a real road course.
Reply
White Goodman 1:51PM (3/12/2007)
While Watkins or Road America or a similar track would be awesome, it will NEVER happen. Bernie's number 1 priority is making money (which is why he forces race tracks PAY HIM to host a race rather than the series paying the track like 99% of other motorsports events), not to provide a competitive or entertaining product, and the people with big $$$ to blow won't attend a race in rural New York, Wisconsin, Georgia, etc. F1 is more about the circus than the racing nowadays; a chance to see and be seen. Which is why it wouldn't surprise me if the USGP were moved to the Las Vegas area sometime in the near future, along with a race near Dubai and maybe even Moscow with all the nouveau riche in those places willing to pay for the prestige.
Reply
Ford Mustang 4:58PM (3/17/2007)
Regardless of what they do, I really hope they keep the banked turn. It's what makes that track so special.
Reply