An F1 car would lose to Indy purely on the occassion when you put the present F1 car which is not designed for an , in a Oval just because it will DNF, the F1 engine was never meant to last more 300 kms and the Indy car engine sacrifices it performance to last that monsterous distance. I can claim that Indy car will get toasted if you put it along with drag racer. But running in a straight line is not my definition of racing, or neither is an Oval. Why do you need to put F1 v/s Indy in Melbourne? Just because it is twisty, and an F1 is only fast around twisty bits and a tortoise in straight line? Indy car is lousy when it comes to braking or accelerating. Tell you what, put a two corners in the Oval, the Indy will get blown away. Aerodynamics? The Indy teams spend a pittance compared to F1 teams when it comes to wind tunnel testing. The F1 car needs to generate enough downforce to keep it sticking to the ground around 250kmph+ corners. While the Indy car will end up in a gravel trap trying to do the same. Horsepower? The Ferrari and BMW develope 850 bhp+. In Monza, Montoya became the first guy to do a 260 kmph average. Look at Ferrari's reliability, its rock solid. Do you need anymore? Traction control? Ever happen to watch a F1 steering wheel? Does the Indy steering wheel look pale in front of it. F1 has the best traction control, drivers can control the parameters from the cockpit. There is no competition for F1. Want to watch an F1 doing 350kmph? Go to Indianapolis GP next year. Sato was doing 350 kmph at the end of the home straight.