Welcome to the RACER Mailbag. Questions for any of RACER’s writers may be despatched to mailbag@racer.com. We love listening to your feedback and opinions, however letters that embody a query usually tend to be revealed. Questions obtained after 3pm ET every Monday will seem the next week.
Q: When the Penske automobiles received busted for utilizing a P2P button that ought to have been inoperable, Colton Herta was amongst one of the vital vocal folks within the paddock. He mentioned any excuse that Penske and Newgarden had “was bull***t.” He additionally mentioned, “It’s not the motive force’s fault that was within the automobile, however it’s the driver’s fault that they used it and had been going to make use of it once more in Lengthy Seashore.”
Quick-forward to this weekend at Portland, and Herta pushed a button for a system that was speculated to be inoperable on the pit lane. When interviewed after the race on NBC, he mentioned he didn’t comprehend it was a rule that you just couldn’t use the hybrid on pit lane. I’m wondering if Newgarden would say Herta’s excuse “was bull***t”? How did Herta not know a easy rule, or was he mendacity on TV? Why did he push it in pit lane? Why did he suppose he would have it in pit lane? Would he say it was his fault for utilizing it?
And most significantly, why did it work in pit lane? Was that an IndyCar error or some Andretti code within the automobile? Does Colton really feel that the Penske drivers are getting handled otherwise by being DQ’ed for utilizing a button that was speculated to be inoperable, and he himself solely needed to drop behind a backmarker? Does he really feel he ought to get Penske therapy?
I might love to listen to him requested why it’s totally different. I might love your ideas, too.
Mark, Cincinnati, OH
MARSHALL PRUETT: As a result of these had been various things. Group Penske activated a system they weren’t allowed to make use of, had been the one group to take action, two of its three drivers used the system, completed 1-2 within the race the place it was used, and had been penalized for it when it was found the next month.
Andretti International did not activate a system they weren’t allowed to make use of. One in every of its drivers used a system which each group might use, was penalized for it proper after it occurred, and completed fourth.
After the activation/deactivation points IndyCar had at Mid-Ohio and Iowa with the ERS items on pit lane, they sequence selected to depart them on always and depend on its drivers to conform by not utilizing the ERS on pit lane. Herta, who mentioned he was unaware of the rule banning ERS use on pit lane, obtained an in-race sanction from the sequence.
Newgarden and McLaughlin each mentioned they had been conscious of the rule in opposition to utilizing push-to-pass on restarts, with McLaughlin, particularly, saying his temporary single-time use was a results of an error. Newgarden used it a number of occasions, but additionally mentioned he and his crew thought the rule had modified. His group boss and race strategist Time Cindric, in distinction, was not aligned together with his driver’s view, and mentioned there was no confusion in regards to the rule being the identical it had all the time been.
With the Penske utilization going down practically six weeks previous to it being caught throughout the pre-race warmup at Lengthy Seashore, IndyCar was unable to use in-race sanctions.
So, one group turning on a system for anytime use that no different group was supposed to make use of versus one group utilizing a system all people had the power to make use of just isn’t a like-for-like scenario on the how and why aspect.
The place there’s a level to be made, unbiased of the how and why the P2P and self-starting programs had been used, is the truth that each had been deployed and delivered time benefits to the customers.
Whether or not it’s having extra horsepower when others don’t and utilizing that energy to construct a much bigger lead, or saving time misplaced on pit lane by not having to attend for a handbook restart to occur, the time-gain end result is similar.
Since Herta’s was caught and rectified whereas the occasion was dwell, I wrestle to see how or why additional sanctions — lack of all factors — would make any sense. In hindsight, do I believe giving up 5 seconds was a adequate penalty? No. So long as it’s unlawful, the infraction must be stiffer so no person will wish to pay the worth.
Since IndyCar didn’t catch and subsequently couldn’t rectify the P2P scenario at St. Petersburg and erase the time benefit that contributed to the drivers’ means to win and place second, taking away the spoils of that benefit — the factors they earned — is sensible.
Not all “urgent buttons once you’re not speculated to” infractions are created equal. Perry Nelson/Motorsport Pictures
Q: Plainly Rahal is all the time getting a qualifying penalty for an unlawful engine swap. What are the principles, and is the penalty actually efficient in that case many Honda groups are opting to swap anyway?
Brian, Ohio
MP: The rule has been round since 2012, and the penalty has modified through the years from hurting the producer within the producers’ championship alone to hurting the entry/driver with a grid penalty and the producer.
Right here’s the principles that get violated:
Rule 16.1.2.3.2. A fifth (fifth) Engine is eligible to earn Engine Producer factors if a Full Season Entrant has accomplished the Full Season Entrant Engine Mileage with its first 4 (4) Engines. In any other case, a fifth (fifth) or extra Engine doesn’t earn Engine Producer factors and might be thought of an Unapproved Engine change-out.
Based on Rule 16.1.6.1.2., the penalty is a six-position beginning grid penalty on street and avenue course occasions and 9 positions at oval occasions and might be served on the sequence’ subsequent occasion.
Q: In IndyCar P2 from Portland, Will Energy simply spun and stalled his Chevy. The security group arrived and turned him round and restarted him with the exterior starter. I assumed one of many advantages of the brand new hybrid system was that stalled race automobiles would have the ability to restart themselves (assuming the ERS system was working correctly)? Whereas I do recall a few cases of IndyCars self-starting in the previous few races, it appears the bulk nonetheless require an exterior begin. Are my perceptions appropriate? If that’s the case, why have we seen so few onboard restarts?
Invoice M, Austin, TX
MP: There have been two self-starts on the hybrid debut in Mid-Ohio that I recall, and a few at Portland, as nicely. It isn’t allowed on ovals. Overstating the apparent right here, but when Energy was capable of begin and depart on his personal, he would have, so if he didn’t, that tells us there was an issue. As Herta realized, self-starting can also be disallowed on pit lane, so exterior begins are required.
