Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2006
My Photo

« Lola Gets into the Car Replacement Arena | Main | Vision Thanks Fans, Continues Collecting "Letters of Reference" »

February 08, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Thanks. This pdf makes it a lot easier to follow.


Cool ... just one critical question with this and all the other concepts we've seen thus far ... where do the sponsors put those monster logos they have to promote their product? The "crap wagons" of today are many things ... but they are good for one thing ... namely sponsor recognition.


I love this car!!! Option 33 is amazing!!! As for sponsor stuff, there's room. Plus, the overall design of the paintscheme is imporant. For instance, Ferrari in F1 or the red budwiser NASCAR, the scheme can make the sponsor memorable.


I can honestly say I'm not sure about Delta Wing anymore. The Swift thing is so good. All I am sure of is NO MORE CRAPWAGONS!!!!!!

Andy Bernstein

Sincere thanks for sharing the PDF.

Lots of cartoons on the wall to enjoy.

Nobody is reading the handwriting.


Chad Paff

"Crapwagons, crapwagons, crapwagons"...

Don't you CART/Champ Car people have anything better you can spout about?

Seriously. Get over it. Its a race car.

The Speedgeek

Now that you've seen something that you like, you're willing to throw the Delta Wing (which you were all over, like, three days ago) over the side of the ship? Dude, we haven't even seen it yet. Patience. Only 48 hours to go.

I'm basically OK with any of the Swift designs, same as I was basically OK with any of the Dallara designs. I don't see any of them as "extra awesome" or "freaking hideous", they're just race cars, which I like almost categorically. The Swifts could be interesting, but those light panels are kinda gimmicky. Who will be able to see those from the stands when the cars are flashing by at 200+ mph? And in broad daylight? And won't they be adding weight, which these cars are supposed to be getting rid of? That said, the aero ideas are interesting. I'll be waiting to hear more about downforce/drag numbers and some ideas of how the cars might be able to race each other.

One more thing: the verbiage in today's Lola presser sounds like a load of garbage. "Dual body style"? "Could compete even safer side by side and very close behind one another on all circuits"? Does this mean a choice of two different bodies for their one chassis? And I have no idea how the second part of the sentence relates to the first part. I'll be waiting for somebody to run that through the "Birrane to English" Google translator.


So we've had one crapwagon reference each. If you guys want to fight the CART/IRL thing, take it to a message board, OK? We ain't goin' there on my site.


The C word is my term for Dallara, based off A.) How it looks and B.) how it races.

Speedgeek: I'm not throwing Delta Wing out, it's just the Swift thing is something very, very good, and really might be equally attractive to Delta. I'd like to see Lola's too, the dual body style might bee good. But the lack of pictures is a little wiered. I thought Dallara's were pretty dull. And compared to Swift's, completley lacking.

I can't explain the wow factor, but I get it looking at these, and didn't get it looking at Dallara's. I really couldn't even blog about the Dallara's, becuase they were so dull, to me.

I get a wow factor from Swift, particularly option 33. It looks almost exactly like how I hoped the 2012 Indycar would look like, based off some of the early concept drawings.

H. B. Donnelly

SWIFTLIGHTS!!! That's just fun to shout at inappropriate times. The accelerator, brake, and fuel lights are pretty silly, but the position lights on the roll hoop NEEEEDS to happen. The position and class markers in ALMS races were a godsend, and I'm shocked that nobody else has implemented something like it.

Leigh O'Gorman

@ Speedgeek

See the Lotus 88 designed by Colin Chapman for his F1 team for the 1981 season.

It was "...a car which by careful (yet legal) manipulation of the rulebook, featured two chassis.
The car consisted of a primary chassis that carried the aerodynamic bodywork, side pods, skirts and wings. The secondary chassis carried the wheels, tub and engine.

The inner, primary chassis was relatively soft sprung, which allowed the driver to be in quite a comfortable position, as he would not feel all those harsh bumps. The outer chassis, thus lighter one, although it had to cope with the downforce created aerodynamically, was attached to the uprights (where brake blocks and wheel axis are located) by an extremely stiff coil spring damper arrangement..."

It managed one practice session before it was banned... (from about 40 seconds in...)


Swiftlights seem kind of gimmick-y, but I got to admit, I think they sound pretty cool too.

I like the look of 32 and 33 a LOT; car 23 is just too similar and doesn't have a wow factor for me.

But of course I guess it really comes down to how they can race.

Also, I find this paragraph very interesting:
SwiftLights will display car information like
throttle, brake and fuel levels as well as race position. Our light sheets are made from a 1 mm thick clear plastic which can be molded over complex
shapes like an IndyCar’s bodywork. SwiftLights are light‐weight, efficient, inexpensive, safe and extremely bright. TV‐like sheets have also been
demonstrated with this technology, offering amazing possibilities for team and series sponsors.”

So it sounds like the sidepods might even be covered in TV-like sheets. This would mean they wouldn't need to do paintjobs; the sponsor logos would be on an LCD-like display and so the car could change "paint schemes" and sponsor logos mid-race etc.

I actually think that has a lot of potential and could be pretty cool!

Nick Kuhar

Thanks Dog for making this available. Not sure what I think of the lights, but that would look pretty cool at Texas. As I'm no aerodynamacist (that a word?), I couldn't begin to know how that would work.


I just love all these cars coming out. Friggin great stuff. It's nice to see some of the thinking out there. Can't wait to see how it all shakes out!

The Speedgeek

The first time I read through the Lola release, my reaction was also "Chapman's Swansong 88". But, after some reflection, I wondered how a sliding skirt chassis would help any of the current cars' problems, or make sure to provide for good racing. This lead me to read the release about four more times. I think what they're saying is that it's a chassis that will have two body options, but like I said before, it's such a poorly worded, vague piece of publicocrap, it's kind of impossible to tell. I'll be real interested to hear more when anything is forthcoming from Lola.

Good points, everybody, on the Swiftlights. The position lights are an absolute no-brainer. They've made ALMS about 50% easier to follow in person. As for using big sheets to display changable sponsor info or logos, that's a great, great idea. If we want to go forward into the future, the new cars have to have such a thing, as it'd be something that'd instantly set IndyCar apart from any other series in the world. Well, unless when you smash them against a wall, they release a cloud of radioactive gas or something. In which case, paint'll work just fine, thanks.

Drayton Sawyer

God bless America!


@Andy Bernstein:

I came here to read Pressdog and this is what I found.

[ img ][ /img ]


Thanks for all the comments and for keeping it clean and mainly constructive. Manly tears. I'm geeked to see the proposals and eagerly anticipating the D-wing and Lola's images.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Get the Indy Inside Scoop!

pressdog® Merchandise


  • Get notified by e-mail when
    the blog is updated.


    Your e-mail address won't be shared/sold/rented/loaned etc.