Quote:
Originally Posted by Maelochs
No way the ACO can let DPis race head-to-head with P2s, for the same reason IMSA can’t let P1s race with DPis ... it would make the class look bad and steal all the glory from the regulars. For the good of the teams which support WEC and ELMS, DPis cannot be run as P2s ... unless they want to buy Gibson engines and stock bodywork.
|
Yet, somehow this magically wouldn't apply to Le Mans if you had the US-OEM-whatever-P2s competing against/with privateer LMP1s?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maelochs
I don’t see the issue with sticking DPis in with p1 privateers ...
|
Because they would be LMP2 cars racing in LMP1. I don't care how far the truth is being squeezed with the whole DPi thing, but that's the reality. Enough with the sub-sub classes and unnecessarily complex integrations. Also
Scenario 1)
BoP is not applied and the American cars are hopelessly crap against the non-hybrid P1s, leaving to endless moaning from Americans.
Scenario 2)
BoP is moderately applied and it becomes same wildly bouncing fiasco as it has been between DP-P2, leaving to endless moaning from everybody.
Scenario 3)
BoP is heavily applied, probably to the level of handicap-spec-rules for non-hybrid P1s, and the technological supercars are turned into jokes against cheap second hand spec cars running fake stickers, leaving to endless moaning from P1s (and ACO fans)
Then you would have the Euro LMP2 teams, and maybe some of the IMSA teams buying into the spec rules in the actual LMP2 class, they would cry why some Americans can get higher in overall hierarchy than them, free of charge even, plus run some components of their own choosing. Even though those teams actually would fully nod to the ACO and not have the "we do whatever we want" attitude like the "DPis".
And lastly you would have, even if in very mild form, factory-supported P2s in your LMP classification, which has been for years what ACO has been attempting to prevent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maelochs
Basically, everyone has to make choices. people who want IMSA to be independent (and not put a field of identical cars out there in 2107) need to accept that this means they are not running ACO-compliant cars.
|
They may then also be ready to cut this timeframe, and the promises inside it in half
http://www.racer.com/wec-le-mans/ite...-for-six-years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maelochs
Further ... to me the biggest deal with a common platform is not that every car is eligible in every series everywhere in the world. Individual sanctioning bodies need to put on a show which suits the fans of that region. Blindly following France in North America didn’t work to well in the recent past, eh?
|
I thought it did for the most part
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maelochs
Actually of course, none of them will actually go broke because they all have multiple revenue streams ... which is real excellent, because it means they will still be around to manufacture spares and design upgrades for the life of the chassis.
|
Just because there's less chassis options to choose from doesn't mean automatic dollar signs. Especially in States where you will place fake body on top of it that hides the real car somewhere, and it's all performance balanced anyway, there's no specific reason to buy say Dallara over Oreca or whatever. It isn't quaranteed to sell half or even third of the amount of the French.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maelochs
Like DPi rules, new P2 rules are a compromise ... but a necessary compromise. The sport needs to survive as a business, and it needs to be lean enough to survive in the lean years so it is around to take advantage of the better times.
|
What necessary compromise? Nobody (in Europe) wanted this, except the certain involved parties cashing in of course.
Old LMP2 was doing just fine and you even had decade old open tops still running, and with almost no hatred as you had with DPs on the other side of the pond.