Gordon Kirby, The Way it is. The ALMS searches for a new direction

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Hmm, talking in circles. So then you disagree with it being a GT only series?



L.P.

I think he has been doing that since page one of the respective thread.

See here

[JAG]

A GT only series would be a last resort and I believe would implode within a couple of seasons as FIA GT did in the factory backed mid 90's.

Highcroft and Dyson are the backbone of the LMP field so if they commit a couple of cars apiece that tells me P1 has a future in the ALMS.

The P2 field is ready in waiting with LMPC cars that could potentially be upgraded. You also have a whole host of new cost-capped cars from Lola, ORECA etc. which is exactly what the ALMS has been asking for.

GTE Pro and Am can continue as is within the current class structure were costs are controlled to some degree as they aren't competing for overall wins. If those same cars were competing for overall wins the class would go down the homologation special route in no time at all.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by JAG

If GTE becomes the top ALMS class costs will soon reach P1 levels.

In the mid 90's BTCC teams had budgets of £5m-£10m and the likes of Williams running cars.

There's enough to build on with P1 and P2 and keep GTE costs under control with the Pro and Am categories.

Opening up GTC is an option but it would be preferable if Audi built a GTE version of their R8 LMS the same goes for Mercedes' SLS.

Based on what? Has the cost of racing a GT2 increased to such a degree it rivals running a competitive LMP1 car? Hardly.

Edit: Also FIA GT ('97-'99) imploded because Benz outspent everybody on a car that was already EXPENSIVE. That isn't the case for GT2. AF Corsa and Risi are about as close to a fully supported factory racing team(s). I doubt their budgets are higher than GM Racing and like I said the design of the car (the Vette) itself already with a ton of waivers will not run away with the Championship like so many feared. I think GM Racing was flat and lazy having spent the better part of the last 3 seasons largely racing themselves until Le Mans, and still lost to Prodrive more often then not in that space.

Prodrive beat them on a much reduced budget, not plucky Brit, but not gold plated bathroom fixtures either.

Are driver salaries that much out of control? If so how come so many drivers wanna run F1 when their chances of having a competitive car from day one like Lewis Hamilton are slim and none?

BTCC was different and not a fair comparison. Why? Because all the teams (like F1) built their own car. It was only based on the unibody the manufacture gave them. So whatever it took (using some F1 technology) to make the car you had competitive, did it. Especially if one of the manufacturers was writing a blank check like it did in those days.

As long as cost are kept under control (which is now in a OEM's best interest) there won't be an out of control culture around GT. Stop with the doom and gloom scenarios.

All teams have access to a 7 post shaker rig, if you don't you're going to find yourself behind. Most teams don't have the simulation software GM Racing has, so what? That's hasn't equaled dominance of victory lane, they just choose to physically test less (save money). Risi has a nearby track they use for testing, as does RLR and Flying Lizard is based at Sears Point. Falken Tire uses California Speedway and Willow Springs. As long as there's a reasonable testing limit, prices will remain within reason.

What you can't legislate against is Hospitality, Crew Talent and Driver Talent.

That's hardly super expensive unless you have no factory support. Then you're on your own. At that point you should be complaining at the series for better TV ratings so you can get better, higher paying sponsors.

[Speed-King]

BTCC was different and not a fair comparison. Why? Because all the teams (like F1) built their own car. It was only based on the unibody the manufacture gave them. So whatever it took (using some F1 technology) to make the car you had competitive, did it. Especially if one of the manufacturers was writing a blank check like it did in those days.

Is there realy that much of a difference between writing a blank cheque to a team or to the in-house developement department? In the end it doesn't really matter, if the developement happens at Sears Point or in Weissach... the money is spend either way.

Up until a point you can counter that by spreading the costs on your various customers, but then, customer car sales for Ferrari and Porsche aren't what they used to be five years ago and you have now a lot less shoulders to share the load of developement. Just a few years back Porsche produced 35 or so RSRs per year, I think they've built 2 for 2010.

But there comes a time when customers decide that they aren't getting enough bang for the buck and step down to GT3, where they can go about as fast for (so far) a little less money. Point in case: the various Porsche teams in VLN that used RSR's in years past but have now abandoned the series or switched to the GT3 R...

Having customer cars is a good way to slow down cost escalation, but it only has a chance to work as long as the customer programms fight amongst themselves. As soon as you get factory teams, whose prime objective isn't to make a profit things get ugly for the customer teams and programms.

Add a bit of hype and media attention and the situation deteriorates even faster, because outspending the oppossition becomes really really tempting.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

Is there realy that much of a difference between writing a blank cheque to a team or to the in-house developement department? In the end it doesn't really matter, if the developement happens at Sears Point or in Weissach... the money is spend either way.

Up until a point you can counter that by spreading the costs on your various customers, but then, customer car sales for Ferrari and Porsche aren't what they used to be five years ago and you have now a lot less shoulders to share the load of developement. Just a few years back Porsche produced 35 or so RSRs per year, I think they've built 2 for 2010.

But there comes a time when customers decide that they aren't getting enough bang for the buck and step down to GT3, where they can go about as fast for (so far) a little less money. Point in case: the various Porsche teams in VLN that used RSR's in years past but have now abandoned the series or switched to the GT3 R...

Having customer cars is a good way to slow down cost escalation, but it only has a chance to work as long as the customer programms fight amongst themselves. As soon as you get factory teams, whose prime objective isn't to make a profit things get ugly for the customer teams and programms.

Add a bit of hype and media attention and the situation deteriorates even faster, because outspending the oppossition becomes really really tempting.

But that's another "What If" doom scenario...

Yes VLN has teams that used to run GT2 (in European Championships) at one point or another.

But looking at this strictly from a North American perspective, we got 10 years out of GTP without a bunch of major changes, only the dominate car changed at the end but that's because Porsche stop building the 962 (nobody else build customer cars).

The Europeans (Ratel et-al + the FIA) allowed FIA GT (ver.1.0) to go belly up in 36 months. The WSC Championship lasted I think 24 months before it folded. Ratel was correct to bring it back to its basic elements - GT cars

Even GT1 (what used to be GT2, here we go again) lasted at Le Mans from 1996 to 2009 when AMR decided not to field a factory ran car vs GM Racing.

That's 14 years before it got so expensive that nobody wanted to spend the cubic coin to compete with GM who has always had the largest budget because that car was always so far removed from production car.

GT2 in its present form goes back to 1999, I believe the final year the GT2 Turbo Porsche was built. Since the Viper was considered a Supercar, not a Hypercar, the series was built around these types of cars a majority of them designed as GT2 machines. What would now be GT3 cars where called N-GT.

That lasted until 2009... N-GT became GT2 I think in 2004?

According to the Press Release by SRO, Ratel wants to give the GT2 cars a bit more power than currently to keep the GT3 cars I would believe from being able to win. I'm sure he was surprised to find GT3 cars qualified as high up as they were this year.

I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't adopted across the board by the ALMS and ACO. I'm sure there's some desire to make the current GT2 car a bit faster by all parties.

As long as there's an unofficial price cap for GT2 at $500,000US, $300-350,000US for GT3 and $150-200,000 for GT4 I think we'll be fine.

As I said I contacted Kinetic about a Kia Forte ST (Grand Am Cup) car, they said $150,000 to build a carbon-copy of the car currently running mid-pack that doesn't quite have the power yet.

So pricing is relative on these things, I would be paying for all the development work and R&D that's already taken place. Again I think that's what your largely paying for. As long as upgrades are available to everybody for a reasonable cost as the ACO as mandated twice a second, I think that will keep running budgets in check. You will likely buy a car every other year mostly because the "tightness" of the rollcage will loosen over time, making it harder to keep you suspension settings from year to year.

The Pro Am class will give a home to most of these cars, but to be honest a European GT3 or GT4 can buy one of these at half the cost, put the latest upgrades on it and be competitive. While the factory supported teams run the latest, greatest hardware, that's maybe a half a second faster when pushed by factory driver with thousands of test miles in the same car (vs the older car).

[porsche91722]

Originally Posted by dj4monie

But that's another "What If" doom scenario...

Yes VLN has teams that used to run GT2 (in European Championships) at one point or another.

But looking at this strictly from a North American perspective, we got 10 years out of GTP without a bunch of major changes, only the dominate car changed at the end but that's because Porsche stop building the 962 (nobody else build customer cars).

The Europeans (Ratel et-al + the FIA) allowed FIA GT (ver.1.0) to go belly up in 36 months. The WSC Championship lasted I think 24 months before it folded. Ratel was correct to bring it back to its basic elements - GT cars

Even GT1 (what used to be GT2, here we go again) lasted at Le Mans from 1996 to 2009 when AMR decided not to field a factory ran car vs GM Racing.

That's 14 years before it got so expensive that nobody wanted to spend the cubic coin to compete with GM who has always had the largest budget because that car was always so far removed from production car.

GT2 in its present form goes back to 1999, I believe the final year the GT2 Turbo Porsche was built. Since the Viper was considered a Supercar, not a Hypercar, the series was built around these types of cars a majority of them designed as GT2 machines. What would now be GT3 cars where called N-GT.

That lasted until 2009... N-GT became GT2 I think in 2004?

According to the Press Release by SRO, Ratel wants to give the GT2 cars a bit more power than currently to keep the GT3 cars I would believe from being able to win. I'm sure he was surprised to find GT3 cars qualified as high up as they were this year.

I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't adopted across the board by the ALMS and ACO. I'm sure there's some desire to make the current GT2 car a bit faster by all parties.

As long as there's an unofficial price cap for GT2 at $500,000US, $300-350,000US for GT3 and $150-200,000 for GT4 I think we'll be fine.

As I said I contacted Kinetic about a Kia Forte ST (Grand Am Cup) car, they said $150,000 to build a carbon-copy of the car currently running mid-pack that doesn't quite have the power yet.

So pricing is relative on these things, I would be paying for all the development work and R&D that's already taken place. Again I think that's what your largely paying for. As long as upgrades are available to everybody for a reasonable cost as the ACO as mandated twice a second, I think that will keep running budgets in check. You will likely buy a car every other year mostly because the "tightness" of the rollcage will loosen over time, making it harder to keep you suspension settings from year to year.

The Pro Am class will give a home to most of these cars, but to be honest a European GT3 or GT4 can buy one of these at half the cost, put the latest upgrades on it and be competitive. While the factory supported teams run the latest, greatest hardware, that's maybe a half a second faster when pushed by factory driver with thousands of test miles in the same car (vs the older car).

dj 'ol buddy, I've read and analysed your last post, and decided........
You gotta get out more often

[JAG]

If a manufactuer believes it's worth spending x amount on an LMP progam to win the ALMS overall they can justify spending the same on a GT program to go for the overall win.

Look how the Porsche 911 GT3 RSR has evolved over the years, that development would only accelerate if GTE was the top class. How long before the Porsche gained a long-tail, mid-engine, lower roofline etc.?

In no time at all the manufactuers would be fighting between themselves with ever more exotic GTE cars and customers would have gone elsewhere.

The only reason GTE has been floated as a possible top class was because the futture of P1 was uncertain in the ALMS.

Now Highcroft and Dyson have commited to the series with P1's the focus should be on building a series around these cars and leave GTE well alone.

[Speed-King]

As I said I contacted Kinetic about a Kia Forte ST (Grand Am Cup) car, they said $150,000 to build a carbon-copy of the car currently running mid-pack that doesn't quite have the power yet.

Yeah, but that's mostly because their is no performance parts cataloque for KIA's and they had to engineer everything themselves... You can get one Honda like Karl Thompson's for a cool 80k....

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by porsche91722

dj 'ol buddy, I've read and analysed your last post, and decided........
You gotta get out more often

Why do you say that, just curious. Besides I'm broke

I do get some sun every so often -

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

Yeah, but that's mostly because their is no performance parts cataloque for KIA's and they had to engineer everything themselves... You can get one Honda like Karl Thompson's for a cool 80k....

You mean the HPD/Real-Time Civic Si?

[Speed-King]

I heard the number in conjunction with Team Compass' cars, which existed before the HDP-car, but I guess there isn't much of a difference...

Anyway, I'm off to the 'Ring...so we'll have to resume that discussion later...

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

I heard the number in conjunction with Team Compass' cars, which existed before the HDP-car, but I guess there isn't much of a difference...

Anyway, I'm off to the 'Ring...so we'll have to resume that discussion later...

Have a good time man!

[TWK]

Originally Posted by JAG

Now Highcroft and Dyson have commited to the series with P1's the focus should be on building a series around these cars and leave GTE well alone.

Dyson has "commited to the series." You took that from Chris Dyson's response to the news of its Grand Am program?

Was there any time frame in that "commitment?" Plus, in general, such "commitments" have been subject to revision for "changed situations."

[JAG]

I took that from Rob Dysons words about the ALMS, the exotic machinery they run and his hopes for the future in the Kirby article.

Before I read this article I thought things were looking bleak for the ALMS and some radical changes to the format were required.

Now I see an opportunity for the series to build upon Highcroft and Dysons P1 entries and new reg P2's supplemented by upgraded LMPC's.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by JAG

I took that from Rob Dysons words about the ALMS, the exotic machinery they run and his hopes for the future in the Kirby article.

Before I read this article I thought things were looking bleak for the ALMS and some radical changes to the format were required.

Now I see an opportunity for the series to build upon Highcroft and Dysons P1 entries and new reg P2's supplemented by upgraded LMPC's.

Subject to change, sponorships, rules changes etc... Don't hold your breath.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Subject to change, sponorships, rules changes etc... Don't hold your breath.

Or subject to not, sponsorship, rules changes etc... could be right on!





L.P.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Or subject to not, sponsorship, rules changes etc... could be right on!

Why don't we wait a week or so, see what new information comes out, and then we can get back to being arguementative for the sake of it?

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Why don't we wait a week or so, see what new information comes out, and then we can get back to being arguementative for the sake of it?

L.P.

[JAG]

By accident or by design the best interests of the ALMS seems to be alligning themselves once more with the ACO P1 and P2 classes.

Things could change but the series is due an upswing just as there was a downturn after 2008.

[chernaudi]

If only teams like Audi and Acura/HPD commit to the series. 2008 for the ALMS was like 1990 for IMSA GTP and the WSC-it hit it's peak, and the economy stumbled and teams pulled out after season's end. History repeated itself due to IMSA(and at the time the FIA) cating too much to manufacturers, which though important, are in it partly for advertising and the money from said advertizing.

Audi hasn't run the ALMS full time since 2008, but even in the down economy has had sales as strong as 2008 overall since then. So obviously the ALMS, even if Audi says is second only to NASCAR's top three series in US and worldwide TV ratings, the ALMS's TV numbers were still a drop in the ocean compared to NASCAR and F1.

Still, though, you don't see Audi having any plans for F1 or NASCAR, do you? If Audi runs in the ALMS next year, I'll bet that the non-ILMC races will be with the R15, if it happens, unless Audi has a couple of R18s that they want to race as test mules. And what of Acura/HPD? Will Highcroft get new cars, or run 1-2 ARX-01s? The ARX-01 is a legal LMP1 next year.

Who knows until we get there, but we'll have to wait until Feb. to get any idea more than likely.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

If only teams like Audi and Acura/HPD commit to the series. 2008 for the ALMS was like 1990 for IMSA GTP and the WSC-it hit it's peak, and the economy stumbled and teams pulled out after season's end. History repeated itself due to IMSA(and at the time the FIA) cating too much to manufacturers, which though important, are in it partly for advertising and the money from said advertizing.

Audi hasn't run the ALMS full time since 2008, but even in the down economy has had sales as strong as 2008 overall since then. So obviously the ALMS, even if Audi says is second only to NASCAR's top three series in US and worldwide TV ratings, the ALMS's TV numbers were still a drop in the ocean compared to NASCAR and F1.

Still, though, you don't see Audi having any plans for F1 or NASCAR, do you? If Audi runs in the ALMS next year, I'll bet that the non-ILMC races will be with the R15, if it happens, unless Audi has a couple of R18s that they want to race as test mules. And what of Acura/HPD? Will Highcroft get new cars, or run 1-2 ARX-01s? The ARX-01 is a legal LMP1 next year.

Who knows until we get there, but we'll have to wait until Feb. to get any idea more than likely.

Audi is perfect example of large companies using the false specter of the economy to cutback or end programs that appeared successful.

The party would have continued only if the ALMS had picked the right partner, it picked the wrong one(s) (The ACO).

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by JAG

By accident or by design the best interests of the ALMS seems to be alligning themselves once more with the ACO P1 and P2 classes.

Things could change but the series is due an upswing just as there was a downturn after 2008.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by JAG

By accident or by design the best interests of the ALMS seems to be alligning themselves once more with the ACO P1 and P2 classes.

Things could change but the series is due an upswing just as there was a downturn after 2008.

+1

Based on what information?

You're still going to end up with largely a favorite and a couple of pretenders to the throne in LMP.

You will not return back to 2007/2008 levels (which is only a starting point I might add) without somebody proving they can beat the diesels without diesel technology.

I should also add, that demand will be heavy for the combination that accomplishes that task, if its made available to the public.

[chernaudi]

I was pointing out the fact that IMSA made the same mistakes that they made in 1990. In April of 1990, Twilight Saga actress Kristen Stewart was born, and Sportscar racing was at it's height. It started to fall apart before her first birthday.

In the fall of 2008, Kristen Stewart was 18, Twilight was released, and Audi cut back on the ALMS, Peugeot essentially pulled out of the LMS, Honda pulled out of F1(and eventually would cut most funding to the ALMS and other motorsports programs), Porsche killed the RS Spyder ALMS program and GM and Chrysler were on the virge of Chapter 11 bankruptcy, with Porsche headed that way months later until VAG bailed them out(and might I add that Porsche trying to buy controling interest in VW probably killed Audi's ALMS program and nearly also bankrupted Porsche in the process).

Either the economy shook Audi that badly, or they took a step back and looked at the ALMS' business plan(or lack there of as this article has pointed out), and said that we stuck witht he ALMS last time a similar collapse happened, and we either can't or won't do it again, as it didn't do anything for us due to that lack of a business plan. Porsche seemed to have reached a similar concluision, and Peugeot did the same for the LMS.

Either the econonmy was that shaky, or the manufacturers used it as an excuse to scale back until the latest excuse to blow money comes around. Either way, IMSA's business model was as biased to the big manufactures when Miss Stewart was/is an adult, as it was when she was a baby. Interesting parallel that her stock continues to rise(and is rapidly becoming one of the richest and most sought after young actresses in Hollywood), while the motorsports world is in trouble.

Maybe people would rather blow their money on a 20 year old foul-mouthed, no frills, socially awkward but extremely talented actress than auto racing.

To sum it up, IMSA's business model failed them in late 1990, and it failed them again in late 2008, and only now have been able to stop the bleeding, which is still better than what, say, NASCAR has been able to do.

[6157]

Originally Posted by dj4monie

Audi is perfect example of large companies using the false specter of the economy to cutback or end programs that appeared successful.

Yes, this whole "economy" thing is just a big conspiracy. It's not like stocks took a huge hit, there's a national debt, and even the largest companies nationwide are cutting back.

Seriously, you post BS like that and you wonder why I follow you through threads? It's like duck hunting in the bedroom, I can't miss.

Originally Posted by chernaudi

I was pointing out the fact that IMSA made the same mistakes that they made in 1990. In April of 1990, Twilight Saga actress Kristen Stewart was born, and Sportscar racing was at it's height. It started to fall apart before her first birthday.

So you're suggesting it's Kristen Stewart's fault IMSA is failing?

I knew I hated that ***** for a reason.