IndyCar: Baretzky Makes The Pass

Google translations can be very entertaining. While we can expect nuances to evaporate into the ethernet, "no " is pretty hard to misinterpret.

That's what Ulrich Baretzky, head of engine development for Audi Sport, has now said about participation in the IndyCar Series. Baretzky has been the spokesperson for proliferation of the GRE Engine, and his words below apparently speak for the intentions of Porsche, Audi, and the Volkswagen Group.

The headline:

VW: There is no interest in the IndyCar engine
The VW group has an interest in the new IndyCar engine initially shelved: as excess capacity and fuel ethanol are major obstacles

http://www.motorsport-aktuell.com/automobil/vw-derzeit-kein-interesse-am-indycar-motor-1892258.html

Baretzky has previously stated that other manufacturers are developing or planning high output, low displacement engines that fit the guidelines of the GRE plan. Perhaps one of them will come forward in the months ahead.

The most interesting point in the article above is Baretzky's stated objections to the 100% ethanol blend mandated by the IRL. This is information that had not appeared in Baretzky's many previous public statements.

Through sponsorship agreements with Apex Brazil and now Sunoco, the IRL remains dedicated to the future use of this fuel. No specification for fuels alternative to pure ethanol have been mentioned by the IRL.

Honda designed their HI7R V8 engine in 2006 to accommodate the IRL's selection of fuel. To maintain the power output produced by their previous methanol burning 3.0L, they raised the displacement to 3.5L for competition in 2007. That's the same engine running in the Iowa Corn 250 on Sunday.

That leaves little doubt that Honda's concept for their new 2.4 V6 turbo, which was the basis for the ICONIC engine specs, will be an engine that burns 100% ethanol.

So where does that leave other auto manufacturers? Will they share Baretzky's objection to the specifications, based on fuel choice?

There has been a lot of speculation dedicated to the Mazda derivative currently raced in ALMS. Dyson Racing runs the 2.0 MZR-R engine, built by AER, on BP Isobutanol bio race blend. Interscope Racing runs the same engine, although they use E85 ethanol.

That implies compatibility between those two fuel choices, with perhaps engine management changes but no significant internal modifications required.

What compatibility issues might arise for AER to comply with the IRL mandated fuel is unknown to me. One fact I learned today was printed in a Racecar Engineering article from May 2008: "With just 29 employees, AER is Minnow-like in comparison to the likes of Audi Sport."

Perhaps AER is a larger manufacturer today, or has benefited from increased support from Mazda. Perhaps the existing AER engine will make power just fine on ethanol. If you have any knowledge of these details, please post them below. I'll do the same if facts are available to answer more questions.

So Mazda might decide to badge the MZR-R, AER might be able to meet the supply volume and cost mandates of the IRL, and their existing engine might be compatible for use on pure ethanol without significant development and modification. The amazingly low lease cost published by Robin Miller and Marshall Pruett might be accurate, and the reliability of the AER may be improved to match the standard set by Honda with their HI7R V8.

Or not.

Three race engine builders I spoke with early this year did not have a concern about making power from 100% ethanol. Whether an auto manufacturer is willing to base an IRL engine program around this spec is now a valid question, if Baretzky's objections have traction.

Otherwise, the IRL will have to add the complexity of equivalent power output from disparate fuels to their new set of specifications. Apex and Sunoco might be interested in the outcome of that decision too.