The RACER Mailbag, July 30

Welcome to the RACER Mailbag. Questions for any of RACER’s writers can be sent to mailbag@racer.com. We love hearing your comments and opinions, but letters that include a question are more likely to be published. Questions received after 3pm ET each Monday will be saved for the following week.

Q: Help me understand the unforgivable behavior of whomever makes the call to throw the yellows. First, they decide not to throw a yellow when VeeKay spun out because they had to leave the pits open, which I completely disagree with. If you didn’t pit before the yellow, so be it! You live with the consequences of racing incidents. So VeeKay loses two laps when he likely could have been started in the sand and start going. Ridiculous. 

And then worse, and not the first race I’ve seen this, Ericsson spins out and is sitting in a very vulnerable position, and no yellow is thrown for many minutes. Someone’s going to die one of these days, Marshall.

Who makes these decisions? Why is the pit allowed to stay open while a yellow is delayed, resulting in risk to the drivers? Why is a yellow not consistently thrown the moment there is an incident? Why?

Jean K

MARSHALL PRUETT: Because every situation isn’t the same. IndyCar goes full-course yellow (FCY) instantly on ovals due to the high sustained speeds and nature of crashed things to slide down onto the racing line and get hit. It doesn’t always work as intended, as the WWTR crash involving Foster and Newgarden confirmed, but in general, if contact is seen, it’s FCY with haste. Great approach. Make no changes to it.

Road racing is different, and it doesn’t need to be treated in a blind, copycat manner where whatever’s done on ovals is applied to a radically different style of racing, and vice versa. That’s why I appreciate a nuanced approach to the officiating of multi-discipline racing.

For the sake of safety and physics, the instant oval FCY makes complete sense. In road racing, an absence of severity with whatever happened, coupled with an extremely low safety risk, is where race control can read the situation and make judgement calls on when to go FCY. That’s what VeeKay’s deal warranted.

VeeKay’s engine didn’t need restarting in the gravel trap to solve the problem. He needed to be pulled out of it by the AMR Safety Team because he was stuck and couldn’t move. He was losing a lap regardless, due to how deep he was and the time/effort to perform the recovery. Could the two laps have been cut to one? Of course. But the extended call to go FCY wasn’t the difference between staying on the lead lap and going a lap down.

Rinus was far away from the racing line and there was no reasonable threat posed by waiting for the leaders to get into the pits. He was in no immediate danger, and race control used its experience to accurately judge the situation. Cars get going quickly towards Turn 3, but aren’t outrageously fast, and he was far from the track.

The leaders were in the window to pit, and so they weren’t penalized for the timing of a caution that wasn’t an urgent matter to solve. If this was VeeKay spearing nose-first into the barriers, that’s an instant FCY. But this was nothing like that, so there was no need to overreact. I wouldn’t change a thing about how it was handled.

Can’t say the same about the Ericsson situation. That one is a head-scratcher. Giving Marcus time to try and fire his engine and drive away is perfectly reasonable. Waiting as long as they did to see if it would happen, which I timed at 1m31s from the moment the FOX broadcast cut to his car sitting sideways on the track to when the FCY went live, is a long time. Add a few seconds from when the spin started to when he was found by the cameras, and it’s closer to 1m35s. Palou was lapping between 1m11s-1m12s, so depending on where they were, some drivers passed Marcus twice before the FCY appeared.

Granted, there were local yellows waving with the SFR SCCA flaggers and the EM Marshaling System light panels blinking yellow into Turn 6 at the bottom of the hill and atop the hill, so there were warnings to all drivers of a problem ahead. That doesn’t explain away the long wait, but it’s not as if there was nothing being done to alert the other drivers to an issue prior to the FCY.

The leaders pitted between laps 69-72 and Ericsson’s issue led to the FCY on lap 78, so it had nothing to do with leaving the pits open for the leaders. I’d ask race control to do the same thing every time it has a VeeKay-like scenario on its hands.

I’d ask race control to take a more aggressive approach to a stalled car on the racing surface at one of the fastest points on the race track as it had with Ericsson sitting broadside to the field. He wasn’t on the racing line, or all that close to it, but he was on the pavement nonetheless, and that’s too close for comfort.

Q: With Practice 2 at Laguna Seca needing to canceled because of the low stratus marine layer, it makes me wonder: Does anyone at IndyCar consider weather when putting the schedule together?

I’m a meteorologist who got his graduate school meteorology education in Monterey. Anyone living or who has lived in that area knows that the marine layer stratus is a daily occurrence there in the summer, which makes spring and fall the best times to schedule a race at Laguna Seca. The Practice 2 cancellation should surprise no-one.

Was this date picked knowingly, but hoping it would somehow work out? Or was this a gap in the due diligence process?

Steve, Ann Arbor, MI

MP: Great question for which I have no answer. But I can tell you that during the hour-plus of walking up and down pit lane, I stopped with every friend, former rival, or teammate from my CART and Indy Lights days and either said, or had said to me, “So nobody setting the schedule has been to Laguna Seca before 2025?” or some variation of the theme. Having sat on the same pit lane or under a tent countless times in the 1990s while waiting for the same marine layer to burn off, we just shook their heads as the same old wait for 10:30am to arrive with clear skies took place.

Look for the permanent shift to a late morning Saturday practice session followed quickly by qualifying and a late afternoon ‘morning’ warmup to become the standard plan.  

Q: I know we are all aware of and in awe of the ever-evolving genius which is Alex Palou, and the fact that he is not only among one of the greatest drivers of the modern era, but also on pace to become one of the greatest of all time. I have no doubt that one day we will be talking about him in the same regards as Foyt, Mario and Dixon. But the real question, and I know I speak for all of us when I ask this, is how will he compare to all-time legend, Mark Plourde, when things are all said and done?

Alan Bandi, Sarver, PA

MP: I’ve met most of my heroes – Mario Andretti, Al Holbert, Dan Gurney, and so on – but I’ve never met the amazing Mark Plourde. A life incomplete. But I do still have my ‘Plourde’ shirt I bought years ago as a tribute to the greatest Champ Car driver of all time.

Q: Last Sunday, during the last stages from Laguna Seca, the FOX crew mentioned that Palou could equal or even surpass the record of most victories in a single season. On the broadcast, they mentioned that this record stands at 10 victories and it is held by Foyt and Unser Sr. However, as I recall, this record belongs to Ted Horn, who won 19 in 1946.

Did IndyCar stopped to recognize these victories – or the races – under the Big Car rules, or it was simply a mistake from the broadcast?

Pedro, Ouro Preto/MG, Brazil

MP: I asked my friend Scott Richards, an amazing statistician, to answer:

“This is one question I’ve been waiting for someone to bring up! There has long been a debate over whether the 1946 AAA season consisted of six races or 77. From what I understand, AAA for one year chose to include 71 ‘Big Car’ races that were under 100 miles in length due to concerns over car counts.  Some of these 71 races were incredibly short, including one race in Great Barrington, Massachusetts that totaled four miles!

“There’s been a strong debate from both sides of the argument on whether the 71 races should be counted since then, and technically the 1947 car numbers were assigned based on the 77-race points results. However, when IndyCar released its official record book back in 2011, it only recognized the six races that were over 100 miles long (Indianapolis, Langhorne, Atlanta-Lakewood, Indiana State Fairgrounds, Milwaukee, and Goshen).  It’s certainly an interesting quandary and one few people seem to know about, but if FOX was going by what IndyCar now determines is the official record, then they were not wrong”

Q: I have noticed an inconsistency in the clamor to remove oval races from the schedule. In 2023 at Texas Speedway there were around 20,000 fans in a speedway that holds 75,000+, and it was considered an alarming failure. Yet Toronto last week had around 18,500 fans in the stands, and it was nearly ‘sold out’.

The crowd at Toronto looked great on TV, therefore perception is reality. Street circuits have an inherent advantage – they can size their temporary grandstands to the expected ticket sales, permanent speedways cannot.

At Iowa there were 6,000 fans in attendance. Everyone saw the 18,000 empty seats on TV, and that is now a crisis. Yet how many fans were at Thermal Club? About 5,000?  We aren’t talking about their low attendance, because no one saw any empty grandstands on TV at Thermal Club.

Hy-Vee, Big Machine Music, and Bommarito have all consistently proven that with proper promotion fans will come out in strong numbers to see an oval race. So let’s compare apples to apples before letting the detractors declare “ovals are dead”.

Kevin P., Los Angeles, CA

MP: Texas was lucky to have 5,000 people for the last race. Iowa sure wasn’t 6,000 and Thermal was barely over 2,000. Ovals aren’t dead in IndyCar. But let’s also not ignore reality by skewing comparisons. I’ve been to Iowa when Hy-Vee wasn’t involved, and there were no big concerts, and it had healthy crowds. Same for Texas in its earliest editions. And WWTR/Gateway when it was loaded with fans.

For those of us who’ve been to these races for many years, often under different names like the CART IndyCar Series or Champ Car of the Indy Racing League, the ability exists to compare and contrast to today. Iowa was depressing. WWTR was pretty good, but not as good as it has been.

Milwaukee is the ‘ovals are dead’ canary in the coalmine. If it’s as good or better than last year on its return, everyone can exhale. And if it’s down, that will certainly feed the notion that too many IndyCar ovals are attracting too few fans. 

Q: Theo Pourchaire recently indicated that he’s working with Simon Pagenaud to try to open doors for him in the U.S.

Have you heard about rumors about him in 2026, whether in IndyCar or even IMSA?
In 2026, for me the only chance for him will be that Malukas goes to Penske to replace Power, and he will create a good opportunity for Pourchaire in the Foyt team.

Given his activities in the WEC this year, one might also think that he could continue in the WEC in 2026, and doing a few more races in IMSA could open doors for him in IndyCar in 2027.

I would love for Pourchaire to really get his chance in IndyCar. When you see that he dominated drivers like Lawson, Lundgaard, Armstrong and that he was almost on par with Piastri, I think that IndyCar cannot leave such a driver on the sidelines.

Yannick

MP: I haven’t heard from any teams that have him in P1 on their to-hire list. He’s on some lists, but not as the most coveted driver. An F2 champ is a hard thing to ignore, but his lack of oval experience is the real issue. Few teams are willing to wait two or three years for road racers to become threats on ovals, which makes a Linus Lundqvist or a Rinus VeeKay more appealing candidates. I need to check in with Simon to see if any IMSA opportunities are in the works. Hated losing him, and hope he finds a way back. 

Q: I was wondering what your opinion is on the Porsche Penske team considering only doing the Endurance Cup, or every dropping IMSA as a whole? Also with Ford coming in to the LMDh scene, could we see Penske move to being Ford’s factory team for IMSA and WEC, especially since Penske runs Ford in NASCAR?

Jack

MP: I don’t have an opinion since Porsche has repeatedly stated in recent weeks and months that it’s in for more full-time action in GTP. I know other teams are angling to replace Penske whenever the relationship ends, and yes, Ford+Penske has been rumored for a while now in Hypercar.

Q: In Germany there are some rumors circling around that PREMA will leave IndyCar at the end of the season because of costs, as Iron Lynx is not keen on paying for the program any more.

What’s your information about that?

Frank Lehmann

MP: There were heavy rumors in May that the team bankrolled by Deborah Mayer was closing its doors after the Indy 500. And then PREMA showed up to Detroit, and WWTR, and so on. From within the paddock where they compete, I’ve heard nothing to suggest the team is going away.

Q: The crowd at Laguna Seca looked bigger than I’ve ever seen on TV. How was it in person?

Kyle 

MP: First time since IndyCar returned where I wasn’t concerned for the race’s future. It wasn’t half of a CART-era explosion of humanity, but it was busy and energetic and youthful. The amount of fans in Pato/McLaren gear was amazing, and the volume of young women – often repping Pato in some way with a hat, shirt, bracelet, or similar – was also hard to miss. It felt damn good to be at one of my local tracks for an IndyCar race and not feel sad for the track and series with a small turnout.

Q: Once again, a Palou masterclass. He was as fast on blacks as everyone else was on reds. On reds, he was untouchable. I know it is a bit boring, but just wow. I appreciate extreme excellence when I see it. 

Now my comment/question on broadcast. I found it amazing that the broadcast completely missed the on-track pass Lungaard made on Herta. Maybe it was about 20 laps later when they caught it and showed it.

I wrote to the booth team and I know they have to cover for the production folks, but it seems like the production truck folks need someone who really knows racing and watching timing and scoring with them so they know what to look for. I know they are looking at 50 screens and they also decide what we see and what the booth sees, but it was a big miss in my opinion. An IndyCar intern could help them with this.

I saw it on the app because I was watching the gap Herta had come down, and it was for second place – not some midfield scrap.  

I have seen others here comment on the FOX broadcast and I know they are rookies in this sphere, but it seems like some stuff not getting better.  

Jeff Smith, State College, PA

MP: Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Q: Seems Mike Hull and CGR had the right strategy at Laguna Seca. The race was scratchy enough to keep our interest, even though the outcome seemed inevitable.

Palou is Tiger-esque right now. Him or the field? On TV it looked like a good crowd too – was it? (That’s my requisite question.) 

Congrats to Will Power for finishing first-in-team. As an ill-informed fan reading everything between the lines, I have come to the conclusion that he won’t be with Team Penske next year. Three reasons.

First, there hasn’t been a substantial enough difference in performance between him and Malukas. 

Second, if he stays, next year wouldn’t be a contract year. Rather, it would be a year of non-stop hoopla with everyone at every event celebrating his successes with Penske. Hell, some track owner might get confused and bestow a new Harley upon him. It would be awkward, it would get tiresome and I doubt he or the team really wants that.

And third, if he leaves after this season, he stands a better chance of landing a good multi-year deal somewhere. I hope there’s more poles and wins in his future, but my enduring memories will be his Indy and title wins, and the days when he and Cindric did great things together. Actually the double-birds are right up there too. That was an all-timer and it’s impossible to recall it without smiling. Good on ya, mate. 

Chris in Colorado

MP: So the best move is to drop Penske’s most consistent performer. Makes sense to me.

Q: Someone had raised a question in last week’s Mailbag that mentioned the Alex Palou-McLaren contract saga from a couple of seasons ago. I imagine it had to be a contentious relationship between Alex Palou and Chip Ganassi during that time. With Palou being on a tear this season, what’s the relationship between Ganassi and Palou been like since that debacle? 

Brandon Karsten 

MP: Strong. It was contentious; Alex sued Chip. At the time, Chip told me he barely knew Palou, which struck me as odd since Palou had just won a championship for the team, but yes, if you look back at that 2021-2022 period, you didn’t see the interpersonal relationship on display like you do today with the hugs and visible connection between the two. Ganassi is known to be backing Palou in the McLaren court deal, which says a lot about how far they’ve come.  

Q: Wow! I know IndyCar fans want more ovals, but hardly anyone showed up at Iowa, a track we might lose. Yet Road America, Mid-Ohio, the Indy Road Course, Laguna Seca and Barber, everyone shows up. I’m wondering if Watkins Glen, Mosport Park in Canada and New Jersey Motorsports Park will be added to the schedule next year? 

Alistair, Springfield, MO

MP: I love the first two suggestions; NJMP is the last place to send IndyCar. 

Q: With all the livery changes throughout the season, does each team have their own dedicated people that can wrap and re-wrap the cars? Or do they send them to a third-party that does that? Seems like it’s a constant thing. I can’t imagine every team has just tons of bodywork pieces standing by with new sponsor designs, but maybe they do?

Rich

MP: There’s 11 teams so no answer fits all. Bigger teams have their own graphics department and do their own; others bring in vendors. Wrapping spare bodywork is an option, but not the tub itself. 

Q: I was watching the Toronto race and I noticed Pato was trailing Kyffin Simpson. They were going to Turn 1 on lap 45 and Simpson went around the curb. Pato cut the curb and just went on the inside of Turn 1 and didn’t even go around the curb. I was wondering if that was legal, because it seems like everybody else should just keep cutting turn one and not go around the curb. Check out the video – there’s an overhead from a helicopter that shows it.

Mark

MP: Yes, it’s legal.

Q: Is PREMA still actively exploring buying charters from existing entries? 

Jim

MP: Are they going back to the same people who said no the first time? I don’t know, but no charter teams are going to sell their charters without selling the team, and none are for sale.

Q: OK Great Guru of IndyCar, explain CGR’s Strategy at Toronto in a way us mere mortals can understand.

Red

MP: Made no sense to me the moment I saw them pick primaries when it was clear the popular call would be to get the alternates off as quickly as possible, which five out of the six drivers in the top six chose to do.

This was a case of having a giant points lead and having the creative freedom to try a risky strategy and know you could survive if it went sideways. If Palou’s lead was 50 points instead of 129, there’s no way an unnecessary risk gets taken.    

Q: Going off my last Mailbag question suggesting that IndyCar allow for teams to field MotoGP-esque ‘wildcard’ entries at select races… what if IndyCar stole another idea, this time from NASCAR?

Specifically, I refer to the ‘Helio rule’ from Daytona. If a team wants to field a driver of international renown with a proven racing record, they get an auto-entry, provided that driver has completed a good test. This can be where your idea of the Chris Griffis Memorial-style test for the IndyCar guys can come in.

Yes, it’s a gimmick, and perhaps it might not have a huge impact most weekends, but it might work specifically for a weekend like Iowa. Let’s say DCR fields a World of Outlaws driver in car No.19 at Iowa Speedway and that driver does a little run at Indianapolis beforehand at the test day, which helps publicize this for their fan base.

You might argue that Bryan Clauson running Indy didn’t really bring that many people in, but Iowa, unlike Indy, isn’t already a huge international event that many WoO fans are likely tuned into for their yearly dose of IndyCar racing.

If I’m a huge Kody Swanson or David Gravel fan, I might already be watching Indy, but then I’d have to tune in to watch my driver at Iowa on TV. I might even come to the track! As I say, it is a gimmick, but I think we all agree that IndyCar has to try something to save this event.

This probably isn’t the golden ticket, but at least it’s something. All of this to say, I miss the NAPA livery in IndyCar and Brad Sweet hopping in a DW12 is the best shot we have of seeing it again.  

Taylor Smith

MP: Back in the beginning of Indy NXT, when it was known as the American Racing Series, the promoter used a ‘House Car,’ which it filled with a range of cool or interesting drivers to showcase the series as it stepped in to fill a void between Super Vee/Formula Atlantic and IndyCar.

What you’re proposing is what this needs to be: A Penske Entertainment House Car. Since Penske is the promoter of Iowa, it’s on Penske to facilitate something like this by trying to move the needle with a driver who everyone agrees would bring an extra 5000 people to the event. And if a Coyne or whomever has a great one-off driver for an event that could move the needle, use the ‘House Car’ entry with their own extra car.

Q: Just some advice for IndyCar. You have daytime ovals in summer heat and wonder why nobody shows up? Why do you think Sprint Car racing is exploding in popularity? Ovals at night! 

Indy is the only exception. Ovals should all be night races, not on a Sunday, and I don’t mean start in sunshine end at sundown. Use the 4th of July, no matter what day of the week it is. Make it a night before race with a giant fireworks show after, and most people are off work the next day and can enjoy another local firework show. If an existing oval on the schedule doesn’t have lights, try to help them with the upgrade.

Dave

MP: Problem solved.

Q: If NASCAR has any sense of humor, they’ll use CART’s Cleveland circuit configuration for next year’s Coronado Island race.

Kyle

MP: Burke Lakefront Airport was SOOOOO good.

Q: Call me crazy, but with NASCAR taking at least a year off, IndyCar should try to swoop in and get the street race in Chicago for a lower sanctioning fee.

From what I can tell on the internet, NASCAR doesn’t have a contract for a future return. It would give IndyCar another race in a major market with an audience that is already built up. It worked pretty well when F1 left Long Beach; why not try it again? 

Josh in Flo-Town, KY

MP: Not sure we can cite something that worked once, 42 years ago, as the reason to roll the dice on a street race that wasn’t a resounding financial success with fans from a series that is three or four times more popular than IndyCar. I’d love to take over the Chicago race, but I didn’t see anything to suggest it just needed a different series to blow up. It had the country’s most popular series and it was put down. 

Q: The Captain has proven he is an amazing businessman. He is a great operator and very efficient at deploying capital. What The Captain has yet to show is any innovation in business. Did he see any value in Willie T Ribbs in the 80s/90s? Did he see any value in Danica, Sarah Fisher, etc? The world was changing slowly and he either didn’t see or didn’t care.

Penske is of the Old Boys Club and is exceptional at taking existing businesses off big corporations hands and making them capital-efficient. Can Penske create value out of nothing? I would say no.

He runs IndyCar in a very capital-efficient way, but he cannot grow it. IndyCar and Penske sponsored races will go nowhere and have no fans. Their marketing is terrible. Their decisions leave a lot to be desired. The capital efficient corporate types Penske has running IndyCar are useless for the task at hand.

The long-term hope for IndyCar is Liberty Media. John Malone, who owns Liberty, is brilliant at capital efficiency, but he is even more brilliant at creating something out of nothing. His successes in the media, cable, TV and now F1 businesses show that.

Malone also hires the right people for the job. Penske hires the right people for getting efficiency out of the existing businesses he buys. They are far, far, far from being anyone Malone would ever dream of hiring.

Penske just doesn’t get it. The perceived or real favoritism his teams got from IndyCar didn’t matter to him even after St. Pete last year. So what if Honda was upset? He didn’t care. If he did, Tim Cindric would have been gone last year. It took Honda telling him they were out of IndyCar. Only then did he do ‘something’. He didn’t get the demographic or cultural change. (Miles Rowe maybe the exception).

My only hope for IndyCar is that it is costing Penske a lot to keep the series going and he decides to sell to Liberty. Without that, nothing will ever change.

SS

MP: Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Q: How about a new version of the old IndyCar ‘Triple Crown’ which Al Unser accomplished in 1978?

Only this time tune it to the unique attributes that make IndyCar so fascinating. I nominate a Long Beach / Indianapolis / Road America lineup. Toss in a few bucks to make it juicy.
Your thoughts?

Wiscowerner

MP: I love everything about this, and the choice of venues.  

Q: A recurring answer you give for why name the racetrack isn’t on the IndyCar schedule is said racetrack hasn’t reached out to IndyCar to come and play. This is the type of reactionary approach that got us here. Why not be proactive and reach out to them, put together a race and promote it?

Money, you say? This is where the capitol investment Zak Brown has mentioned that IndyCar needs would fit in nicely. IndyCar needs to get to 20 races starting the night before the Super Bowl. I had high hopes when Roger bought the series, but that ship has sailed with every failed timeline for name the project.

Any idea what the paddock thinks of Greg Penske’s future as the leader of IndyCar?

Vincent Martinez, South Pasadena, CA

MP: I’ve yet to hear a negative word about Greg being the succession plan. Saw him on Saturday and I suspect we’ll be seeing a lot more of him.

Q: Surely this is a repeat question, but what does Honda/Chevy typically do with an engine once it’s replaced? Is a replaced/damaged engine scrapped, or do they become organ donors?

AC 

MP: Engines are modular, so it would have to be a catastrophic crash that broke all of the major components – block, heads, etc. – for the entire thing to be scrapped. It’s a matter of reaching wear/mileage limits on the big parts, so as they’re retired, being melted down is the usual solution. 

Q: Andretti needs to put Colton Herta back with his dad, period. Bryan Herta has done great things with Kirkwood. Last season’s second place in points was long after the fat lady had sung!

Colton and Edwards does not work! Can’t anyone see it? Save Colton’s career while you still can. They always make stupid mistakes. You create your own luck. He’s the number one driver with Gainbridge!  Just put him with his dad and let’s see what they can do.  Let’s see what Edwards could do with Ericsson.

By the way, Ericsson is great at Indy and nowhere else! 

Dan, Celina, OH

MP: The guy who’s won three street races is only good at the Speedway. Copy. Kirkwood is the top performer this season for Andretti, so naturally, the smart play is to screw with that.

Q: Is there any public information about what goes into the IndyCar Pit Performance standings, or at least raw pit stop data during races?

Atilla Veyssal, West Allis, WI

MP: I don’t know. I don’t seek or use public information about pit stops. 

Q: It did one’s soul good to see Robert Kubica win the 24 Hours of Le Mans. In the lean years between F1 and his rallying accident, do you know if Robert considered for or offered an IndyCar test?

Jonathan and Cleide Morris, Ventura, CA

MP: If he was or did, I’ve never known about it. Amazing guy. Just not someone who had enough success in F1 to pique the interest of any team owner after his injury. 

Q: What was the reason for the delay in caution for the Ericsson spin?

Also, I’m loving RACER Network’s expanded coverage of other series in Europe and beyond. Any chance of a weekend wrap-type show? This worked previously (obviously, think Dave Despain and WindTunnel) and exposed a guy like me in Bristol, TN, to WRC, F1, Superbikes, etc. I think there is appetite for this now, and would help awareness of motorsport racing.

Rainsmith2

MP: Giving him the opportunity to refire the car and drive away.

MARC MAZARIN (Head of marketing and creative; RACER Network): You’re not the only one asking. This concept is very much on our radar. A weekend wrap-style show highlighting domestic and international series we carry is something we’d love to bring to RACER Network and RACER+. In the meantime, the RACER+ app now has a News section fresh from the team at RACER.com. We can also recommend subscribing to our RACER Daily Bulletin and RACER Network Hotlap newsletters for regular coverage, storylines, and results from across WRC, Superbikes, DTM, and more. It’s a great way to stay plugged in while we build toward something bigger.

Q: Regarding the Cadillac F1, is there a mandatory date for when the team will have to have announced its drivers by? Also, would having experience with the Ferrari engine give a driver like Schumacher or Bottas an advantage over drivers like Perez or Doohan?

Will, Indy

CHRIS MEDLAND: There isn’t a deadline for finalizing a driver line-up, but the closest thing to an initial date is the start of FP1 in Australia next year – a team needs to have informed the FIA of its entries for each race, so it has to name two drivers.

A team can name two totally different ones for the next race if it likes, too, but beyond that it can’t keep making changes. The rules state a team can only run a maximum of four different drivers in a season.

Ferrari power unit experience might be a tiny advantage to a driver, but I would say it’s barely going to register – don’t forget these are new power units for everyone next season so it’s of limited value. And sometimes having different experience helps to bring to the party.

Q: How does the data collected during a F1 Sprint weekend compare to a regular weekend? Is it more or considerably less? As good or maybe better because it is collected during race conditions?

Timothy Davis

CM: In many ways it’s a similar amount, but of different value. No FP2 means limited long run data at the same time as the race itself, but you do get a good picture of the car in race conditions (traffic, fighting etc) during the Sprint, albeit on around a third of the fuel.

Sprint qualifying also provides a good picture of track evolution through a qualifying session and low fuel running in similar conditions to qualifying itself, so that’s nice and comparable, but you may well be taking part in Sprint qualifying with a sub-optimal car set-up due to the fact there was only one practice session.

It depends what a team is after. If it has a car it knows well and no upgrades, then you could view it as a Sprint weekend providing a few more opportunities to get data in qualifying and race conditions before the main qualifying and race sessions. But if you have more data you want to gather in terms of different car set-ups or configurations, then three free practice sessions and a more controlled environment would be better.

Q: I watched the Belgian GP. My feeling is, every great driver from Fangio to Senna is rolling in their final resting place!

Sure it was raining, but once the worst was past, the stewards’ decision against a standing start was B.S. The track was drying.

Are these 20 guys not supposed to be the best in the world? We were robbed of watching Max pass both McLarens and a Ferrari before the end of the first lap!

Yanie Porlier

CM: I’ll admit I was a bit frustrated at how long it took to get started once there had been the initial delay.

I understood the instant reaction to almost every driver complaining about visibility on the first formation lap, because in my opinion it would be a waste to circulate for a few laps behind the Safety Car, then go through heavy rain that would probably lead to you red flagging it, or at least having to wait a number more laps to clear enough standing water. And that’s just robbing us of racing action, as laps would tick down in that scenario.

But it was clear from the radar when the weather would clear through, and race control waited for it to totally stop before then actioning the start procedure, which gives the teams another 15 minutes to get ready, and that was the spell with the sun out and no rain. For me, there should have been a call for the teams to be ready around 20 minutes earlier, for the moment the rain eased enough to get out behind the Safety Car.

One of the reasons there wasn’t a standing start was because race control deemed there to be more water on one side of the grid than the other, but then there’s more grip on one side, too. It’s a tricky debate, but it’s never going to be completely equal.

Given the history of incidents though, stringing the cars out a little to run through Eau Rouge and Raidillon on the first lap (when visibility is still an issue) is an understandable decision for me. I’d much rather be sitting here annoyed that race control were perhaps a bit too cautious than criticizing them after a serious accident. The drivers had also told the FIA that it left it too late to intervene in heavy rain at Silverstone, and that those conditions were too bad with the visibility, so to be more careful at Spa.

We did get almost a full race in this way as well – just lost the four SC laps before the rolling start, which I do think were two too many – and I’d argue if there had been more action, nobody would be complaining. But race control’s decisions are based on safety, not entertainment. They can’t control if Max makes it past Charles on the first lap and fights the McLarens, or the set-up that each team has opted for.

Just to give an example on that last point: Red Bull had Verstappen on a low-downforce set-up at Silverstone and we raced in heavy rain, so it stopped him being a factor. That’s not race control’s fault – if Red Bull had a higher downforce set-up then we might have got more excitement at the front, rather than just the two McLarens getting clear again.

Or for an example at Spa, Ferrari had Hamilton on a wet weather set-up and Leclerc on a dry one. That helped Lewis fight through early on but stopped him making further progress once he was behind Albon, and conversely helped Charles stay ahead of Max as it dried out. If that was the other way round, they both have different races, with Hamilton stuck at the back initially and Leclerc easily passed by Verstappen who might get to the McLarens early on, too. But none of that has anything to do with race control.

Q: During the Spa broadcast on Sky, Anthony Davidson made remarks about the hybrid system ‘learning’ about conditions. It sounded to me as if each car has a self-contained electronic system that adapts to different tracks and conditions in real time to optimize the charging logic.

How do these systems actually work? What are their inputs? Do they actually adapt without direct intervention from the pit wall or driver?

Jack

CM: The Energy Recovery System (ERS) knows where the car is on track, and how it can optimally harvest or deploy energy. It understands to deploy the energy at the start of a straight, and then stop deploying and start harvesting at the end of a straight (known as clipping, when the speed then starts to decrease at full throttle because you’ve gone from having additional power from the ERS to aid acceleration, to losing that as it slows the car to harvest).

What Davidson was explaining was that if a driver then changes the amount they brake or full throttle they use – obviously something that happens significantly in changeable conditions – the system has to re-optimize to catch up.

It does learn on the go, so if a driver is braking more than usual and able to harvest more energy on one lap, then the ERS will know it had ended up with more energy to play with and will deploy more on the next lap – generally not clipping as much at the end of a straight. Similarly, if it didn’t generate enough energy on one lap, it will start clipping earlier on the next lap to avoid a repeat, but that’s why you hear race engineers talking about the level of battery drivers are at and the time it make take for the ERS pack to come back.

Q: F1 cars have always thrown lots of rain spray. Some say these cars are throwing more, but I disagree. When you watch races from previous generations of cars, you see them racing in harder rain, which makes them throw the same amount of spray.

So, why not accept things are they are and try to live with it? Deal with this through tech. Create some HUD that shows the cars ahead, the ones behind or on the side (arrows like racing games do). The ones ahead can be drawn with a silhouette so that in case of a crash the driver will see a complete car and keep distance. Make it show the corner distance marks, maybe the edge of the track as well.

The tech for this can’t be that expensive nowadays.

This feels like when people try to deal with dirty air. It’s not going to work. Ground effect cars do not race better. Make tires that can handle the slides instead, and that will deal with the problem. See how cars could stay glued to the cars ahead for a long time before Pirelli. See how the McLaren duo can race closer to other cars for a long time. Whatever they are doing to control tire temp should be implemented in the regulations (but F1 already banned it for ’26 instead…)

William Mazeo

CM: I have to disagree with you on the first point, William, because these are the fastest cars ever seen. Piastri’s pole lap in Sprint qualifying was a lap record at Spa, so not only does that increase in performance impact spray levels (with this generation of car designed to throw dirty air upwards from the rear wing to try and reduce the impact on the car behind, but in turn meaning more spray going upwards) but it also means cars traveling faster in the wet, having less reaction time in that reduced visibility.

Even if it was the same amount of spray, going faster means you have less time to deal with the impact of that spray, so it’s more dangerous than in the past.

On the current tires as well, they are much better in terms of overheating and dealing with slides. It’s just simply that you can’t corner at the same speed if you are sliding, and sliding will always overheat a tire – even the most robust one – which actually tallies with your point that you have to accept that part as it is.

The main thing to accept is that these are the highest performance single-seater racing cars in the world, and they are all prototypes – not spec – so there will always be an inability to fully control dirty air (and the impact of it on a following car) and spray. If we want F1 to remain the highest performance, that’s part of the trade-off.

All that said, I fully agree with you that different solutions need considering. I’m not sure if the technology can handle the speeds that are required, or a total lack of visibility (does an HUD work in thick fog if your eyes can’t see the car ahead?) but it’s a good idea to explore that sort of tech.

We could also look at the tires themselves. Wider tires increase grip and help with following in dry conditions, but also disperse more water and increase spray in the wet. Could it be possible to have different tire widths in the wet perhaps? It would be headache for aerodynamic engineers and significantly widen the performance gap between a car in the wet and the dry, but if visibility remains the biggest issue it could address that.

Regardless, next year will be better because the cars will be slightly smaller (less surface area disturbing water/air) and considerably slower, therefore reducing spray, increasing visibility, and also increasing reaction time potential. As incremental as each of those things might be on an individual car, when it’s spread across a pack of 20 cars then just 5% improvement from each has a big impact.

Q: I’m surprised that the loophole allowing Haas to race each year in a white label Dallara with extensive bolted-on Ferrari kit is still permitted. When they initially entered the championship, this arrangement made sense. However, with the heightened popularity and financial success of F1 today, it seems unfair to the other constructors for one team to enjoy such a financial advantage.

Do you foresee a time when the rules will require Haas to become an actual constructor? While perhaps not for new fans, for many, the spirit of F1 is teams designing and building their own cars. It truly is an astounding accomplishment for teams to build their own cars.

Matt Ganser

CM: I think it’s slightly unfair to call it a white label Dallara – it’s still a chassis designed by Haas. The manufacturing is outsourced, but a number of teams outsource certain components for manufacture. There’s not a significant financial advantage either to the chassis approach nor the Ferrari partnership, because the cost cap regulations put a premium on costs for such items due to the difference compared to if you built them yourself.

I think you’d be surprised how many components are outsourced by some teams. Outsourcing the chassis is rare, but Cadillac outsourced its chassis manufacturing to what it calls normal suppliers in the supply chain – but don’t underestimate the importance of the Toyota partnership that Haas has entered into as well. That gives it the potential to manufacture more components itself (or through Toyota as its works partner if it evolves to that level) while the team is also looking at locations for a bigger new factory, that would also give it more space for machinery and facilities.

All of that is to say it’s still seen as an advantage to make as many of your own components as possible if you can, because of quality control and speed of manufacture, but it’s extremely expensive and takes time to move towards.

Q: With Bubba’s win at Indy, he became the first Black driver to win a crown jewel race in NASCAR. That’s a huge milestone for the sport, but it wasn’t mentioned on TNT’s coverage, nor by many publications, including RACER. You could see on the broadcast how people talking to or about Bubba wanted to note the hardships he faces from the fan base and how they affect his mental health, but were afraid to note how much of his abuse comes from people critical of his role in the Confederate flag being banned from races, among more distasteful viewpoints.

I wanted to know what led to your decision to not touch on the racial progress this victory symbolizes for both Bubba and NASCAR as a whole in your reporting on Sunday?

Jayke, MI

KELLY CRANDALL: It was not a ‘decision’. It was not mentioned on the television broadcast, nor in the media center when Wallace held his post-race press conference, because everyone was focused on the race and I’m not sure that many people registered in the moment what he he had achieved. It wasn’t until much later on Sunday night that I saw it even mentioned on social media for the first time. But it certainly wasn’t an intentional omission on my part. It’s a deserved achievement for Wallace, and it’s great that he will forever own a part of the Speedway’s history.

Q: I’m sure they already figured it out before the San Diego announcement, but many U.S. military bases either completely deny access to foreign nationals (non-U.S. citizens) or have vetting requirements for both foreign nationals and non-military personnel before allowing them onto the base. Any indication of how NASCAR plans to handle this? We’re talking thousands of various racing personnel, as well as fans.

Scott C., Greenwood, IN

KC: In a media availability last week following the announcement, Ben Kennedy was asked if this was an event that was going to be open to the public because, to your point, it is on an active military base. Kennedy said, “It will be open to the public. … Anyone who would like to buy a ticket is more than welcome to come and join us that weekend.”

THE FINAL WORD
From Robin Miller’s Mailbag, 29 July, 2025

Q: Can’t believe it’s been 30 years since Rich Vogler passed away. How about a Rapid Rich story to wrap up the Mailbag?

Jeff B., Joliet, Il.

ROBIN MILLER: A USAC midget show at Whitewater Speedway in 1981 and I’m starting on the outside of Row 1 and Vogie lines up fifth. On the first lap in Turn 3, he drills me and knocks me into the guardrail and tears off the right-front corner. After the race, which I think he won, we’re at the pay window and he comes over and starts apologizing: “It wasn’t my fault, Engelhart shoved me into you.” I said something like “Rich, it’s the first lap and you and I both know you’re going to pass me pretty quick, but you didn’t have to take me out.” I had just written a pretty glowing column about him in The Indianapolis Star so he felt more remorse than usual, and offered me $100 to help fix my car. I declined and he slapped me on the back and said: “No hard feelings, just hard racing” and he was gone. I always liked Rich and I never saw anyone with more aggression, and he truly could be a ‘Mad Dog’ but he was one of the best.