Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bil588
I just don't want the performance of the cars balanced in a new LMGT class.  |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by paul-collins
I believe this is the position of IMSA. Whether it will translate well into French is another matter, I suppose
|
I guess that performance balancing is a matter of perspective. The GT-2 rules are a performance balancer to the point of when the means and want are in place to be able to maximize the car to the rules: read money, ala Porsche and Ferrari, it is somewhat balanced at the top. And currently if it should happen that one of these two create an overwhelmingly superior car then it can be adjusted at
anytime (
article 19 (pg.21) during the season if the ACO deem it necessary!
And let's not forget that the ALMS/IMSA is much more prone to adjusting things during the season as compared to the ACO.
And let's face it, it is highly likely that next year that we will see neither Spyker or Panoz and it will become a two Marque class.
If the ACO are trying to forestall this from happening, with the inclusion of/ supplantation with the GT-3's, then incentives will be needed (IMO) to keep the diversity of Marques that now compete in GT-3 to step up to GT-2. Read; homologation performance adjustments to keep each entrant within a pre-set range. Otherwise we would see them already! I would not have too much problem with this if it were to be adjusted up and not down, with enough rules latitude to allow for individual teams to do their thing -
With no adjustments during the season unless something was extremely awry!
Then that would allow them to make GT-2 into GT-1, with the incentive (sort of) of the new LMP coupes for the current GT-1 protagonists.
I know a little more than just GT-2/3, but was just keeping my ducks in a row.
L.P.
