IMSA DPi Discussion

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Rcz

P2 would still be Pro am, making PC pointless

PC cars are considerably cheaper than P2 cars.

The entirety of your idea fails to consider the fact that IMSA needed to alienate as few of the teams as possible. The path they chose is the only option which could effectively do so.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

Fair points (though I struggle to think of why a design of car similar to Class One has to be far more expensive than an LMP2 car, considering its design and construction),

Honestly, I've never quite grasped this myself, but a lot of industry insiders have noted the cost difference. Whatever the reason -construction, some unique detail that's not obvious, price gouging- it's simply a bit too pricey.

And what is that, exactly?

It's really quite simple: Take a P2 safety cell, drop a GT3 engine in it, and if you REALLY want to, you can design your own bodywork within the height, width, and length regulations the original cars were designed off of. Or you can just run a P2 from one of the four factories.

Set them all to the same minimum weight and engine power, let the chops fall where they may.

Beyond that, how does a 'Super GT3' class work?

Figuring that out is what makes discussing the idea so appealing to so many. There are numerous different ways to do it, and some would be utter disasters while others could create the next big GT class if it was handled right. But nobody at this point really knows what would be a good or bad idea since there isn't serious research being done into it.

GTLM already has the BMW M6 which is effectively a souped-up GT3, so really we're already there.

Frankly, I wouldn't count that. GTLM is barely any quicker than GT3 is before BoP is applied - the big gap between GTLM and GTD in IMSA is artificially created via BoP. This is actually why converting a GT3 car to GTE isn't that big a deal for the factories.

Even if it was just Oreca, nothing changes the fact that the ACO and their friends are screwing IMSA.

IMSA is screwing themselves in more ways than I can count. The ACO isn't doing jack to them(the ACO is about ready to cut ties over the things IMSA keeps pushing with DPi).

I will vocally and happily say this - if it was me running IMSA, I would not only be killing the DPi now and sticking with the existing P2+DP+DeltaWing formula until the big-bore GT rules are developed, but I would also explicitly say that Oreca is not welcome in the next generation of IMSA top class cars, and that if Onroak and Dallara want to be involved, set up shop in Canada or the United States and make the cars here.

I'm glad you're not in charge of IMSA. Burning bridges like that is NOT the way to run a series.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

It's really quite simple: Take a P2 safety cell, drop a GT3 engine in it, and if you REALLY want to, you can design your own bodywork within the height, width, and length regulations the original cars were designed off of. Or you can just run a P2 from one of the four factories. Set them all to the same minimum weight and engine power, let the chops fall where they may.

I am also glad You are not running IMSA.

This is Not a simple situation. Politics, finance, and a wide range of players with Very different needs and capacities need to all feel they are getting a good deal ... from the privateer teams on tightish budgets to the factories spending way more than their boards of directors really like, to the chassis makers who have to build "cost-controlled" cars to compete with teams klike SMP, who only need to build a pair of cars and can finagle the finances to claim it isn't a multi-million-dollar effort, to the sponsors who want to put their names on cars that can win ....

"Let the chips fall where they may" is what fans want ... fit the car in this box, fit the engine in this box, take it out and race it. Yahoo! Thing is, as has been noted ... if Chevy can't win, it won't race. If only Chevy can win, fans and other teams say, "Screw this." if chassis builders cannot make a profit, they have to say "Screw this." Henri Pescarolo never wanted to quit, but one cannot build a car on credit forever. (Oh, and I wouldn't worry about Coyote----they are pretty much owned by NASCAR/IMSA.)

As Horndawg notes ... DPi is what will be ... and really, it isn't a terrible compromise, given the pretty execrable state of sports car racing in north America, and the limited funds of money and fans around the world. We could have gotten stuck with straight P2---spec engines, near-spec chassis. This way we at least get some different power plants.

What bothers me is Atherton's stated view that DPi should be basically a manufacturer's class when there really aren't enough manufacturers who are interested.

Not to say I don’t really like your plan. When I looka t GTP, I think fo the huge variety of chassis, but also the huge variety of Porsche 962s ... Dyson used to run 962s which hardly even resembled the original car. That’s the appeal of “design your own bodywork within the height, width, and length regulations the original cars were designed off of.”

Problem is ... Chevrolet. Chevy doesn’t want to pay to lose, and therefore it Really doesn’t want fair competition. Chevy wants a “level playing field” (basically every car’s engine And bodywork BoP’d flat) so its bigger budget can buy it wins. Chevrolet doesn’t want some small team with great engineers to build a sleeker body and win races.

I totally agree on this, though:

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

ACO isn't doing jack to them(the ACO is about ready to cut ties over the things IMSA keeps pushing with DPi.)

FIA-ACO is looking out for itself—as it should. IMSA is struggling with trying to balance what FIA-ACO wants, and what everybody else wants.

And of course, fans come first ... first into the meat grinder.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

The DPi and P2 chassis is what the near future will be, PERIOD! This hypothetical fantasy rehashing of something that has already been settled is beyond belief. This thread is about DPi which IS going to be built off of the same chassis as the 4 approved and agreed upon constructors for the P2 chassis.







L.P.

Resistance is futile. All opinions not corresponding with our collective ideology are irrelevant and will be assimilated. PERIOD.

[NaBUru38]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

Atherton's comments about not shoving factories into selling cars to privateers is a god-awful mess waiting to happen.

I agree.

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

Does he want a field of spec cars? Because that's what he's gonna get this way, along with one or two factory efforts who will go absolutely ape having to race the spec cars right up to the point either IMSA tilts the field in their favor (thus screwing the privateer racers) or they bail out (costing IMSA millions in financial support).

I disagree. IMSA seems not to want privateers are all in DPi. It will cause fields to drop to half a dozen.

IMSA should tell manufacturers that they must sell DPi cars to privateers for reasonable prices.

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

Honestly, I've never quite grasped this myself, but a lot of industry insiders have noted the cost difference. Whatever the reason -construction, some unique detail that's not obvious, price gouging- it's simply a bit too pricey.

Composite tooling is very expensive. Super GT cars with the same cell only need the manu specific front and rear subframes bonded to the safety cell. P2 cars are unique tooling for the entire chassis, more work, more money.

It's really quite simple: Take a P2 safety cell, drop a GT3 engine in it, and if you REALLY want to, you can design your own bodywork within the height, width, and length regulations the original cars were designed off of. Or you can just run a P2 from one of the four factories.

It's not that easy.

Set them all to the same minimum weight and engine power, let the chops fall where they may.

Also, not that easy.

Figuring that out is what makes discussing the idea so appealing to so many. There are numerous different ways to do it, and some would be utter disasters while others could create the next big GT class if it was handled right. But nobody at this point really knows what would be a good or bad idea since there isn't serious research being done into it.

No serious research being done? Says who? Or do you have another NDA on that?

Frankly, I wouldn't count that. GTLM is barely any quicker than GT3 is before BoP is applied - the big gap between GTLM and GTD in IMSA is artificially created via BoP. This is actually why converting a GT3 car to GTE isn't that big a deal for the factories.

Converting GT3 to GTE cannot be done with any sort of ease, It's actually very tough to make it cost effective. And when I say tough, it's impossible. The conversion cost alone would be half of a GTE car. Remove the BoP restricting the GTE and GT3 cars and GTE would obliterate a GT3 car.

IMSA is screwing themselves in more ways than I can count. The ACO isn't doing jack to them(the ACO is about ready to cut ties over the things IMSA keeps pushing with DPi).

I agree, but the ACO isn't going to cut ties, it's the other way around.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

I agree, but the ACO isn't going to cut ties, it's the other way around.

No it's not. It may get bumpy and a schism may develop at the prototype level, but, the OEMs are to important for both sanctioning bodies in GT for there to be a 'cutting of ties'.







L.P.

[TF110]

I give dpi 3 years max before it fails from lack of entries or the rules stifle competition from manufacturers that want to make their own car. Maybe I'm wrong. I think they'll come up with something else by 2019 for 2020 season, just my opinion.

[seanyb505]

Nah, look what DP was for the last eternity: buy an amalgamation of parts that is a race car, put a sticker on it, voila! It's a Chevrolet/Ford/Lexus/haha I can't keep going.

Future DP will end up being the same. Someone will pay more money for stickers (GM) and someone will pay less at the cost of race wins. Instead of tube frame cars, we now have the p2 chassis as a base. With the chosen 4/Gibson engine as your base car flavors, you can add whatever toppings (Mazda) you want.

I'm predicting instead of all these manufacturers building their own engine and body work, we'll see available P2 options straight from Oak/Riley/Multimatic/I can't remember the 4th factories, only with Mazda stickers. Maybe Ford Fusion tail lights crudely grafted on with paper mache.

I'll be genuinely surprised if the class does not look like this in 2.5 years. Maybe they'll have a greater shot at being international if all you need to do is cover up the sticker?

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by seanyb505

Nah, look what DP was for the last eternity: buy an amalgamation of parts that is a race car, put a sticker on it, voila! It's a Chevrolet/Ford/Lexus/haha I can't keep going.

Future DP will end up being the same. Someone will pay more money for stickers (GM) and someone will pay less at the cost of race wins. Instead of tube frame cars, we now have the p2 chassis as a base. With the chosen 4/Gibson engine as your base car flavors, you can add whatever toppings (Mazda) you want.

I'm predicting instead of all these manufacturers building their own engine and body work, we'll see available P2 options straight from Oak/Riley/Multimatic/I can't remember the 4th factories, only with Mazda stickers. Maybe Ford Fusion tail lights crudely grafted on with paper mache.

I'll be genuinely surprised if the class does not look like this in 2.5 years. Maybe they'll have a greater shot at being international if all you need to do is cover up the sticker?

Onroak Automotive (Ligier), Dallara, Oreca and Riley Tech/Multimatic are the constructors. I happen to think that the DPi-P2 chassis option will be around for some time.......a la DP.








L.P.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

Composite tooling is very expensive. Super GT cars with the same cell only need the manu specific front and rear subframes bonded to the safety cell. P2 cars are unique tooling for the entire chassis, more work, more money.

Umm... Youv'e got something reversed. The Class One tubs are the more expensive, not the P2.

No serious research being done? Says who? Or do you have another NDA on that?

It's an idea people are talking about as the result of a rumor that turned out to have no basis in reality. There's been no indication it's being seriously looked at by any entity.

Converting GT3 to GTE cannot be done with any sort of ease, It's actually very tough to make it cost effective. And when I say tough, it's impossible. The conversion cost alone would be half of a GTE car.

And yet it's been done...

Remove the BoP restricting the GTE and GT3 cars and GTE would obliterate a GT3 car.

False. The closeness of GT3/GTE performance was the primary reason there was an effort to combine the two a few years back.

I agree, but the ACO isn't going to cut ties, it's the other way around.

If either one drops the other, the ACO is the one that will drop IMSA. They're the ones who are sick of the other's crap.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

I am also glad You are not running IMSA.

This is Not a simple situation. Politics, finance, and a wide range of players with Very different needs and capacities need to all feel they are getting a good deal ... from the privateer teams on tightish budgets to the factories spending way more than their boards of directors really like, to the chassis makers who have to build "cost-controlled" cars to compete with teams klike SMP, who only need to build a pair of cars and can finagle the finances to claim it isn't a multi-million-dollar effort, to the sponsors who want to put their names on cars that can win ....

"Let the chips fall where they may" is what fans want ... fit the car in this box, fit the engine in this box, take it out and race it. Yahoo! Thing is, as has been noted ... if Chevy can't win, it won't race. If only Chevy can win, fans and other teams say, "Screw this." if chassis builders cannot make a profit, they have to say "Screw this." Henri Pescarolo never wanted to quit, but one cannot build a car on credit forever. (Oh, and I wouldn't worry about Coyote----they are pretty much owned by NASCAR/IMSA.)

It is actually a very simple situation because, guess what? What I've proposed is what the majority of the manufacturers want IMSA to do. GM, Honda, and Mazda included in that list. NONE OF THEM are happy with what IMSA's been trying to do with DPi.

[seanyb505]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Onroak Automotive (Ligier), Dallara, Oreca and Riley Tech/Multimatic are the constructors. I happen to think that the DPi-P2 chassis option will be around for some time.......a la DP.

L.P.

Thanks for that. Yeah I really don't see the structure disappearing for several, several years. It took ALMS/GA merger (something almost everyone would have put 10000:1 odds on happening in the late 2000s) to move away from current DP cars. So that's what, 13 years and hell freezing over?

A competing philosophy will have to rise against NASCAR, and become more popular with teams and fans to move away from the 4 in the foreseeable future.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

No it's not. It may get bumpy and a schism may develop at the prototype level, but, the OEMs are to important for both sanctioning bodies in GT for there to be a 'cutting of ties'.

I have to agree ... and I don't see either side totally walking away. IMSA cannot survive if it needs its own unique chassis ... which is why it is using LMP2 chassis. Race car manufacturers cannot build a safe, modern chassis in small enough numbers to be commercially viable ... Sure, a team funded by a Russian bank can build a few cars and forget the actual cost, but companies which want to make profits need to build more than two or three chassis after all the design and testing needed--they need to spread the costs over many more customers.

This is another reason DP1/P2 is not likely to change soon. The four manufacturers want to sell spares and copies, not do fresh designs every few years.

As Horndawg notes, both FIA and IMSA need the manufacturer dollars ... which means if nothing else, they both want to run the same GTE/GTLM class, because that's where the most manufacturer money comes from. The P2/DPi classes will likely remain the same simply because FIA doesn't care much about P2 and IMSA cannot afford its own completely independent class.

Ultimately, racing is an entertainment industry for the sanctioning bodies and a PR program for a few manufacturers, and money is what makes it all go 'round. IMSA might have to give up Le Mans, or accept getting stuffed in the P1-L, but that doesn't matter. Losing GTE/GTLM on the other hand would cripple either series ... so that won't happen.

[carbon_titanium]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

Converting GT3 to GTE cannot be done with any sort of ease, It's actually very tough to make it cost effective. And when I say tough, it's impossible. The conversion cost alone would be half of a GTE car. Remove the BoP restricting the GTE and GT3 cars and GTE would obliterate a GT3 car.

Don't you say?

reiter gallardo lp560 gt3 -> reiter gallardo gt2

bmw z4 gt3 -> bmw z4 GTE

bmw m6 gt3 -> bmw m6 GTLM

ferrari 488 gt3 = 488 GTLM with different aero and suspensions


GTLM, GT3 are just names... it's all about how you get the homologation by FIA, ACO, IMSA, whatelse... panoz abruzzi was homologated as GT2 too by IMSA

[carbon_titanium]

BTW, with a comparable 1250kg min.weight and same michelin tyres, surely gt3 would be a bit faster than GTE!

anyway, it's all about bop... in 2012 gt-open a pair of diffuserless and detuned corvette C6R GT1, an overpowered 458 GT2 and a very light vantage V12 GT3 were in the same performances range

[carbsmith]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Problem is ... Chevrolet. Chevy doesn’t want to pay to lose, and therefore it Really doesn’t want fair competition. Chevy wants a “level playing field” (basically every car’s engine And bodywork BoP’d flat) so its bigger budget can buy it wins. Chevrolet doesn’t want some small team with great engineers to build a sleeker body and win races.

Does any other GM racing program give you this impression? Everywhere but DP they're the ones being BoP'd back who would be out engineering everyone. Pratt & Miller has an aero team that embarrasses any other prospective DPi participant and is easily equal or superiour to any of the original chassis constructors.

What Chevrolet doesn't want to do is spend any real money on prototype racing because the return is non-existent.

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by TF110

I give dpi 3 years max before it fails from lack of entries or the rules stifle competition from manufacturers that want to make their own car. Maybe I'm wrong. I think they'll come up with something else by 2019 for 2020 season, just my opinion.

Short of substantial changes from the rules as they are now, I completely agree, and if IMSA can't figure out what form that's gonna be I suspect it may just be a case of "to heck with this, the prototype stuff isn't working no matter what we do" and the GTE cars rule IMSA, Daytona and Sebring included.

And I don't really want that, if I'm honest. I'd rather try to figure out the Class One or something similar to it.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by carbsmith

Does any other GM racing program give you this impression? Everywhere but DP they're the ones being BoP'd back who would be out engineering everyone. Pratt & Miller has an aero team that embarrasses any other prospective DPi participant and is easily equal or superiour to any of the original chassis constructors.

What Chevrolet doesn't want to do is spend any real money on prototype racing because the return is non-existent.

Which is why I believe that there will be GM DPis for sale to customers and no real 'Werks' team, just favored team(s). With a parallel brand activation program, car corrals etc...





L.P.

[Deleted]

http://sportscar365.com/lemans/elms/...rning-to-elms/

It’s understood a full-season 2017 ELMS LMP2 budget is somewhere close to 1/3rd the price to run a DPi entry in the WeatherTech Championship, with multiple sources quoting as little as $1.2 million for an ELMS LMP2 effort.

So glued-OEM-body-P2 in States will be around ~3,6 million?

[Matt]

Sounds about right, considering IMSA does a full season of ELMS racing just in it's first event.

[Deleted]

I don't think you can directly compare the costs of continuous 24 hours to 6 separate 4 hours with all the logistical needs and prep that go into them.

[Coach Ep]

A try to sum up the reasons for folks to go race in the ELMS:

- more budget friendly & less time consuming (because of only 6 4H races + pre season test)
- Pro-Am top class
- direct path and close proximity to LM24 ("lifetime dream by funding driver")
- less question marks over prototype classes

Maybe IMSA should split up their series into two separate championships: Endurance and Sprint (with 4-6 races each)?

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

Maybe IMSA should split up their series into two separate championships: Endurance and Sprint (with 4-6 races each)?

No!





L.P.

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by Chiana

I don't think you can directly compare the costs of continuous 24 hours to 6 separate 4 hours with all the logistical needs and prep that go into them.

Maybe not, but when your four longest events alone count for 52 Hours or racing, you're gonna end up being more expensive than a series that does less than half of that much in a whole season.

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

A try to sum up the reasons for folks to go race in the ELMS:

- more budget friendly & less time consuming (because of only 6 4H races + pre season test)
- Pro-Am top class
- direct path and close proximity to LM24 ("lifetime dream by funding driver")
- less question marks over prototype classes

The first point is unavoidable - IMSA is a big-time series and needs to act like it. The second point is unworkable because IMSA wants pro teams and pro drivers. The third one is unreachable by IMSA in most cases anyways (how many IMSA teams go to Le Mans these days?) and the fourth is only a problem because IMSA didn't have the smarts to tell the ACO to go to hell a year ago. Gee, what a surprise that is.

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

Maybe IMSA should split up their series into two separate championships: Endurance and Sprint (with 4-6 races each)?

Why? So that guys who don't have the commitment to do a full season (I can understand this, but this is IMSA here) can still win championships? They already get classes made for them and rules changed to accommodate them, now we want to restructure the series and screw fans at certain races out of seeing cars on the track because of it? To heck with that.