Comments on: Long Beach Preview

By: Deke

Deke — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 18:08:15 +0000

If Honda happened to be supplying Hinch’s engine when it blew, you don’t think they would have done exactly what Chevy did?

I may be wrong on this next point, but wasn’t Hinch’s the first Chevy that actually failed in such a manner?

By: billytheskink

billytheskink — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 17:45:08 +0000

It isn’t too early to say that Honda is more confident in their engine’s reliability than Chevrolet, though. Chevy made that a fact.

By: Brian McKay

Brian McKay — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 16:58:55 +0000

I hope that Justin Wilson (backed by a Honda motor) wins GPLB.

By: Deke

Deke — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:29:18 +0000

I AM a Chevy homer, and I’m simply hoping we see a couple Honda’s pop this weekend just so the argument John raises (which I’ve heard before) goes bunk.

I think it’s too early to say that Honda is more reliable BECAUSE it’s slower. Look at the current Lotus: slow AND unreliable; no correlation on that engine. I think it’s too early to even say that Hondas ARE more reliable. Maybe after two races they seem that way, but like technology you can be bit anytime and it’s still a long season to go.

By: John R

John R — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 14:07:42 +0000

Don’t know if I’ve ever commented on your blog before but I’ve been a long time reader and appreciate the tone of your blog being strictly from a fan perspective (as opposed to journalist or “insider”).

I do disagree with your stance on the engine rule though. At first, I thought as you did but after thinking about it for a while, it for sure makes sense to me:

It is known in racing that a more powerful engine is less reliable. Chevy designed an engine that is potentially more powerful and gets better gas mileage but did so at the expense of reliability. Honda, however, stuck to the the rule to hit the milage limits of the engine, thus potentially sacrificing power and/or gas mileage (or some combination of the two).

When one says to punish the manufacturers instead of the drivers, it makes less sense than the grid penalty. Who really cares about a manufacturer championship in IndyCar? It is already hardly paid attention to in F1. Wins and driver championships are much more prestigious.

Also, the Chevy drivers have enjoyed the additional benefits of the Chevy engine (HP and gas mileage) while the Honda drivers have suffered (due to a less powerful/lower gas mileage engine). This has given the Chevy drivers and teams an unfair advantage. Therefore, it is indeed fair to punish both the driver and manufacturer with a grid penalty.

To be perfectly honest, most of my favorite drivers in the series drive with Chevy engines. So while I am upset/disappointed that they get the penalty, I am not up in arms complaining about it because I do indeed think that it is fair since Chevy drivers have been competing with an advantage over their Honda and Lotus counterparts.

Hope what I expressed makes sense. Sorry for the long winded-ness. Feel free to disagree though!

By: redcar

redcar — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 14:07:33 +0000

Dixon.

I think putting fast drivers mid-pack might create an interesting situation and those new fenders might be tested.

Looking forward to this one.

By: JohnMc

JohnMc — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 13:50:58 +0000

This one is Dixon. He will lead this parade around the streets of Long Beach.

By: Oilpressure

Oilpressure — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 12:53:10 +0000

I’m certainly not a Chevy homer. Personally, I pull for Honda. I own a Honda and have owned Hondas since 1981 (sometimes two at a time). If I pull for any manufacturer, it’s Honda. But I think people are too quick to just hand this victory to Honda. Chevy has been the fastest so far and I think they will be heard from on Sunday. – GP

By: JoeyT

JoeyT — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:56:55 +0000

George, c’mon man. I think your Penske bias is affecting your alzheimers. Are you that much of a Chevy or Penske homer? I know you hate Japan, but I didn’t know that applied to Honda too. No way a Chevy overcomes this without something crazy going on.

By: SkipinSC

SkipinSC — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 10:59:14 +0000

I think by the time we get to Indianapolis, a lot of people are going to be wayyy tired of this engine rule. I understand the efforts to keep costs down, but when the manufacturer (rather than the competitor) finds what is, in essence, a design flaw in the engines and mandates changing all of their engines, I question whether such a decision is in any way fair to the driver/team.

There are going to be failures and flaws along the way, particularly with all of the engines being tested in the heat of battle for the first time. And, particularly when we get to some of the tighter road/street circuits 10 grid spots is a pretty strict penalty.