IMSA DPi Discussion

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

Because the Grand Am haters want it dead. They can't see past Jim France running it, even if its mostly ALMS guys running the day to day operations and is almost entirely ALMS-style cars. Some of the Grand Am diehards aren't terribly impressed at the cars either, which says a lot.

To be fair, many of the ALMS fans think that neither Grand Am management, nor ALMS management were a very competent group. Putting them together, just made for a confused incompetent group. The whole lot of them should be thrown overboard.

[Rcz]

If the whole marketing thing in the body work was to set aerodynamics back, then in that case I would be fine with that, as aero development has harm motorsports in general, and I don't mean in the looks department.

If they look like the GT1 cars back in the days would you really complain?

P1 can't comeback unless they do that idea of letting them in the NAEC every 2-3 year

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

To be fair, many of the ALMS fans think that neither Grand Am management, nor ALMS management were a very competent group. Putting them together, just made for a confused incompetent group. The whole lot of them should be thrown overboard.

But then there are those that do not think that.
Those management groups have merged 2 somewhat dissimilar series into one and have hammered out a single series, from that, which has the chance to become a well liked and proscribed series with the ability to survive.






L.P.

[ATLFalconsFAN]

Originally Posted by JHamilton

It doesn't matter what they set in front of you, you'll never be happy, will you? ALMS fans have gotten almost everything on their wish list and the series seems to be headed in a sensible and sustainable direction. How about we see what happens before we pronounce it dead?

Are you joking or being serious???

As a former ALMS mega fan, and a current mega WEC fan and on life support IMSA fan I can't think of much that I got on my wish list.

1. No LMP1
2. Spec tires in the top class.
3. No pit stop strategy (not having to turn the engine off, tires and fuel at the same time)

These are my top three reasons why this former ALMS fan is not happy and doesn't feel like he got "almost everything" from my wish list.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by ATLFalconsFAN

Are you joking or being serious???

As a former ALMS mega fan, and a current mega WEC fan and on life support IMSA fan I can't think of much that I got on my wish list.

1. No LMP1
2. Spec tires in the top class.
3. No pit stop strategy (not having to turn the engine off, tires and fuel at the same time)

These are my top three reasons why this former ALMS fan is not happy and doesn't feel like he got "almost everything" from my wish list.

1. Really, that is high expectations!
2. I would really like to see some tire changes also
3. We have not seen the 2017 rules / regulations yet









L.P.

[JHamilton]

Originally Posted by ATLFalconsFAN

Are you joking or being serious???

As a former ALMS mega fan, and a current mega WEC fan and on life support IMSA fan I can't think of much that I got on my wish list.

1. No LMP1
2. Spec tires in the top class.
3. No pit stop strategy (not having to turn the engine off, tires and fuel at the same time)

These are my top three reasons why this former ALMS fan is not happy and doesn't feel like he got "almost everything" from my wish list.

I'm dead serious. If I got to design my perfect series and could force manufacturers and owners to spend their money as I directed, of course I would have a different formula. If you look at things pragmatically and what is really feasible, the DPi formula makes a ton of sense.

To reply to your items:
1. No LMP1 - That was never going to happen. Even without the merger, there would be no LMP1 in the US (weren't we down to one?). I hope it is, but I'm not convinced it is a sustainable class in Europe.
2. Spec tires - For all intents and purposes, there are no "tire wars" left in motorsport. This isn't just an IMSA issue.
3. Pit stop strategy - There is still strategy, it's just changed. I'm not a fan of it either, but I don't think it is a big deal. I'm sure Mazda would disagree.

So I won't speak for anyone else anymore, only myself... I wanted the DP gone and that's happening. I wanted a LMP-based prototype as the top class and that's happening. I wanted a full GT3 spec GTD class and that's been great. Phase out PC? Check. I want RLM back! Got it. From my spot at the side of the track, there is way more to be enthused about than not.

[ATLFalconsFAN]

Fair enough. Apologies for being so negative.

Regarding LMP1. Audi always brought a car to Sebring (except that one year when Peugeot complained), I'd like to think they would have continued doing this. There were also rumors that Porsche NA would have paid for them to run at Sebring as well. I'd be willing to bet that Rebellion would have been over since the merger if they'd been allowed to. So my beef boils down to the fact that there isn't even the option of it.

You are right, it's great that we have GT3 cars instead of GTC. And yeah, we got RLM back, and I need to make a point to utilize them on race days instead of DVRing the races and listening to those awful announcers. That beef goes back to how terrible it is to watch the races on Fox Sports.

So here goes as to how this particular fan could give more love to our domestic series:

1. Allow LMP1 in the NAEC races. Who knows, maybe teams will show up.

2. Allow any brand of tire in any class.

3. ACO pit rules.

4. I for one would be willing to pay a subscription (as I do for the WEC app) to watch the races with no commercial interruptions. So please give us that option.

5. I wish there was a solution to the manufacturer fee so that we could see more variety in GTD. I want to see McLarens and Mercedes and Nissans and the like.

6. No more BOP changes!!! Limit them to two per season. Enough of this constant tinkering and attempting to control the outcome of races!

Those are my top five (six) wish list items.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by JHamilton

1. No LMP1 - That was never going to happen. Even without the merger, there would be no LMP1 in the US (weren't we down to one?).

Depends on whether or not you count the Delta Wing, and whether you're counting cars or teams. Three non-DW teams -Pickett and Dyson- with three cars between them, plus the Delta Wing. And of course I'm not counting guest entries at Sebring and PLM in that.

P2 wasn't in any better a shape, though - Four HPDs across two teams.

Merge the classes like in 2010 and that would have provided a decent field, but too light for singular classes.

I hope it is, but I'm not convinced it is a sustainable class in Europe.

Prior to the upcoming changes, that concern was actually part of the point of LMP2 - To be there to hold the flag if the rug ever fell out from under LMP1. The ACO wants LMP1 to be in a position where privateers can step up to it if the factories leave, but they're making things too complicated in their efforts. They should just have some specs for hybrid and non-hybrid entries to run on a reasonably level playing field(assuming similar investments of skill, design, etc between given entrants), let whoever wants to enter it do so, and keep P2 open enough to be a decent flag bearer if the manufacturer interest in P1 dies out.

[TF110]

I feel the same way regarding the drop of lmp1. They only did it because dp's couldn't be near as fast and that was grand am's 'baby'. They wanted them to be the top class. There were 3 maybe 4 lmp2's. The same amount of lmp1's. Porsche was rumored to be interested in running lmp, Audi always did Sebring at least and Rebellion ran numerous races the last year of alms.

That's the past though. Hopefully dpi opens up some. Tires and constructors especially!

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by TF110

I feel the same way regarding the drop of lmp1. They only did it because dp's couldn't be near as fast and that was grand am's 'baby'. They wanted them to be the top class. There were 3 maybe 4 lmp2's. The same amount of lmp1's. Porsche was rumored to be interested in running lmp, Audi always did Sebring at least and Rebellion ran numerous races the last year of alms.

That's the past though. Hopefully dpi opens up some. Tires and constructors especially!

P-1 was dead in the ALMS, remembering otherwise, is false.









L.P.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

P-1 was dead in the ALMS, remembering otherwise, is false.









L.P.

By your logic, so was p2. They kept that class though didn't they.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by ATLFalconsFAN

Fair enough. Apologies for being so negative.

Regarding LMP1. Audi always brought a car to Sebring (except that one year when Peugeot complained), I'd like to think they would have continued doing this. There were also rumors that Porsche NA would have paid for them to run at Sebring as well. I'd be willing to bet that Rebellion would have been over since the merger if they'd been allowed to. So my beef boils down to the fact that there isn't even the option of it.

You are right, it's great that we have GT3 cars instead of GTC. And yeah, we got RLM back, and I need to make a point to utilize them on race days instead of DVRing the races and listening to those awful announcers. That beef goes back to how terrible it is to watch the races on Fox Sports.

So here goes as to how this particular fan could give more love to our domestic series:

1. Allow LMP1 in the NAEC races. Who knows, maybe teams will show up.

2. Allow any brand of tire in any class.

3. ACO pit rules.

4. I for one would be willing to pay a subscription (as I do for the WEC app) to watch the races with no commercial interruptions. So please give us that option.

5. I wish there was a solution to the manufacturer fee so that we could see more variety in GTD. I want to see McLarens and Mercedes and Nissans and the like.

6. No more BOP changes!!! Limit them to two per season. Enough of this constant tinkering and attempting to control the outcome of races!

Those are my top five (six) wish list items.

1. No. Yes, lets take our marquee events away from our season long teams and let them have absolutely ZERO chance of trying to even compete for overall honors because our top class cars weren't designed to compete with them.

2. Nah. BTW, P1 is single supplier.

3. Nope. One small pit fire in IMSA competition since the merger, five in WEC just in the past year.

4. I do agree with this.

5. I also agree with this.

6. Meh.

Good to know that if someone were to ever enact the changes stated above, the series would be dead within three years.

That's what most of the people clamoring for all these "ideas" don't understand. Their ideas are the quickest way to kill a series.

[ATLFalconsFAN]

Originally Posted by Matt

1. No. Yes, lets take our marquee events away from our season long teams and let them have absolutely ZERO chance of trying to even compete for overall honors because our top class cars weren't designed to compete with them.

2. Nah. BTW, P1 is single supplier.

3. Nope. One small pit fire in IMSA competition since the merger, five in WEC just in the past year.

4. I do agree with this.

5. I also agree with this.

6. Meh.

Good to know that if someone were to ever enact the changes stated above, the series would be dead within three years.

That's what most of the people clamoring for all these "ideas" don't understand. Their ideas are the quickest way to kill a series.

1. GTLM teams seem to not mind not having a chance at overall victory (save PLM '15). For them it is exposure. Maybe the prototype teams in IMSA would appreciate the added exposure that the factory teams would bring.

2. Wrong, both Kolles and Rebellion run on Dunlop tires. Last I checked their cars say P1 on the side of them. And the factory teams run on Michelins because that's what they choose to run on, not because they are forced to like IMSA.

3. I guess I prefer strategy. Pit fires are why people in the pits wear fire suits.

6. If you don't think they're meddling too much with BOP then I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Maybe you prefer the rubbing is racing while I prefer allowing teams to push the rules and build a better mouse trap.

[chernaudi]

Wrong on the LMP1 being single tire, as Dunlop supplies Rebellion and Kolles. Granted, only the factory teams have any real chance at victory in LMP1, and they all run on Michelin.

Also, I do feel that ACO pit rules do encourage double stinting, though I think that's the main intent behind their continued existence at Le Mans (other than limiting how many people are close to the car, I don't think that refueling itself is any safer either way--same chance of fire if the right sequence of events adds up). In the WEC sprint races every season post LM in recent years, I've rarely seen any team double stint unless forced to by the technical regs or a desperate strategy call. And for the remaining races, the WEC only has a tire limit (6.5 sets vs 8.5 sets) that makes a requirement for double stinting only at COTA and Fuji, and that's only if the race is dry.

I'd like to see some incentive to double stint tires, but then again, I also think that the WEC's rule of one wheel gun used at a time is pretty useless because it doesn't cut down on the number of tire changers used. I think that the WEC should go back to two wheel guns at one time like IMSA has kept it though the last days of the ALMS, and in WTSC. That does make sense.

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

To be fair, many of the ALMS fans think that neither Grand Am management, nor ALMS management were a very competent group. Putting them together, just made for a confused incompetent group. The whole lot of them should be thrown overboard.

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

But then there are those that do not think that.
Those management groups have merged 2 somewhat dissimilar series into one and have hammered out a single series, from that, which has the chance to become a well liked and proscribed series with the ability to survive.

I'm much closer to Horndawg, and I think you are a bit harsh on their management. (It's mostly ex-ALMS guys, too.) They were way late on BoP settling before the merger and way behind the curve on GT3 cars, but that's minor stuff. Realistically, both series were stuck in ruts and the merger, as screwed up as it was, can still be made very good indeed.

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by ATLFalconsFAN

1. Allow LMP1 in the NAEC races. Who knows, maybe teams will show up.

This will result in an immediate exodus out of the prototype class right here. Make the guys who run the whole series absolute also-rans in the four biggest races on the schedule? You're willing to royally screw up the exposure for your series in the HOPE of getting factory entrants back for at most four races?

I wish people would think about this stuff from the perspective of the teams running full seasons. You go out and buy the cars for it, assemble the team and raise the budget for it, only to be told that at the four biggest events in a ten to twelve round series that you have absolutely no change at winning. What would you think? You really think John Pew funds the Shank team dreaming of winning at Detroit?

Originally Posted by ATLFalconsFAN

2. Allow any brand of tire in any class.

Well, I guess you don't care about Continental's sponsorship and promotion money then. (And this as people here constantly howl about spending more money on TV coverage and tossing the pay-to-play rules. Really guys, how do you expect IMSA to have the funds to operate the series, much less promote it?)

Besides that, what series hasn't got spec tires? Formula One? Spec Pirellis. Indycar? Spec Firestones. All GT3 series? All of them are spec tires, most of the time Pirelli. NASCAR? Spec Goodyears. Almost every touring car series is spec tires, and the WEC is overwhelmingly dominated by Michelin. So the demand for spec tires runs against the desires of modern tire makers.

Originally Posted by ATLFalconsFAN

3. ACO pit rules.

Which are arbitrary and foolish, and the task of starting the car tends to cause more fires than keeping the cars running, and keeping racing engines able to start causes more problems. I say keep it as it is.

Originally Posted by ATLFalconsFAN

4. I for one would be willing to pay a subscription (as I do for the WEC app) to watch the races with no commercial interruptions. So please give us that option.

I agree wholeheartedly on this one, but I suspect that Fox Sports wouldn't like that idea.

Originally Posted by ATLFalconsFAN

5. I wish there was a solution to the manufacturer fee so that we could see more variety in GTD. I want to see McLarens and Mercedes and Nissans and the like.

Figure out how you can get IMSA the money to finance and promote itself and we can toss this.

[joeb]

So about those dpi things.....

[TF110]

Basically all lmp2's run dunlop. As do Rebellion and Kolles. Then Aston Martin do in GTE. It's far from a spec tire series. Super GT and VLN also have open tires. Imsa commands that $1 million manufacturer fee. How do they not have money or funds to operate? I don't know. The choices they make are questionable imo.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by TF110

By your logic, so was p2. They kept that class though didn't they.

No, they are/were not the same, period!
P-1 at the end of 2013 had 1 U.S. car left, Dyson. Pickett sold his company to Nestle who could care less about sports car racing. Dyson the one remaining, refused to race against/with DPs. The 2014 P class had 4 full time U.S. P-2 type chassis in the class, not the same. The goal going forward, as proven by the advent of the 2017 P class, was to get to a CF chassis as the single type of chassis for prototypes in IMSA's top class. LOGIC! Hence the birth of DPi.






L.P.

[chernaudi]

Maybe the cynic in me should come out and just say that the rules makers generally don't give a damn about what the fans want. Yeah, we eventually get what we want a lot of the time, but that's just happenstance. Usually, we indirectly get pull because of what teams or carmakers or sponsors, who often get feed back from fans.

So, yeah, with DPI, most of us are getting what we want. Most of us wanted the DP cars to die off. Most of us saw them as mid-engined Trans Am cars adapted to have a mid-engined lay out, independent rear suspension, inboard pushrod suspension front and rear, and have a prototype body on them.

Or they just saw them as a continuation of the old Riley and Scott Mk III, a great car for it's time in the mid to late 1990s, but out of date by the turn of the millennium. Sportscar fans in general lashed out at the DP's as being old technology that was obsolete, ugly, slow, and in their early years, unreliable.

Well, with the DPI formula, we're getting cars based on modern construction principals, and those who've wanted IMSA to go their way with their own prototype rules are also sort of getting what they want, too.

Is what's going on with DPI perfect? Not by a long shot. We don't know anything about the rules or what exactly IMSA is aiming for outside of press pieces with little on specifics. All we know is that the cars will share tubs with ACO spec LMP2 cars from next season onwards.

This and many other threads that often skew down the ACO vs IMSA tangent show that sportscar fans are a tough crowd to please. Being born in 1986, I've been around for the fall of IMSA GTP and Group C, rise and fall of BPR/Original FIA GT1, rise and fall of ACO/FIA GT1, and the rise, fall, and merger/buyout of the ALMS and Grand Am. And that doesn't include everything that came and went before I was born.

I'd like to give DPI a chance, but when you have two groups of people who's own series flatlined and stagnated, plus the lack of a clear vision that we can see and so many people who we'd hope are working on this stuff being pretty mum and tight lipped, it's a bit of a cause for worry or skepticism.

I'd hope for some tangible news on DPI and such, sooner, rather than later.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

No, they are/were not the same, period!
P-1 at the end of 2013 had 1 U.S. car left, Dyson. Pickett sold his company to Nestle who could care less about sports car racing. Dyson the one remaining, refused to race against/with DPs. The 2014 P class had 4 full time U.S. P-2 type chassis in the class, not the same. The goal going forward, as proven by the advent of the 2017 P class, was to get to a CF chassis as the single type of chassis for prototypes in IMSA's top class. LOGIC! Hence the birth of DPi.






L.P.

You must have missed where I said alms? The teams from lmp1 were forced to buy an lmp2 or a dp. That's the only reason 2014 even had those cars. How you can defend them after giving the finger to at least 2 full time p1 teams maybe 4 or 5 potentially is ridiculous. Dpi is more of the same poor decision making. Limiting the participants to the 4 p2 constructors and requiring manufacturer bodywork is not helping. There's no announcements of participating manufacturers, questions about who is even going to be running, pc's dropped in '18 when none of them have stepped up to prototype class... The list goes on.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Maybe the cynic in me should come out and just say that the rules makers generally don't give a damn about what the fans want. Yeah, we eventually get what we want a lot of the time, but that's just happenstance. Usually, we indirectly get pull because of what teams or carmakers or sponsors, who often get feed back from fans.

So, yeah, with DPI, most of us are getting what we want. Most of us wanted the DP cars to die off. Most of us saw them as mid-engined Trans Am cars adapted to have a mid-engined lay out, independent rear suspension, inboard pushrod suspension front and rear, and have a prototype body on them.

Or they just saw them as a continuation of the old Riley and Scott Mk III, a great car for it's time in the mid to late 1990s, but out of date by the turn of the millennium. Sportscar fans in general lashed out at the DP's as being old technology that was obsolete, ugly, slow, and in their early years, unreliable.

Well, with the DPI formula, we're getting cars based on modern construction principals, and those who've wanted IMSA to go their way with their own prototype rules are also sort of getting what they want, too.

Is what's going on with DPI perfect? Not by a long shot. We don't know anything about the rules or what exactly IMSA is aiming for outside of press pieces with little on specifics. All we know is that the cars will share tubs with ACO spec LMP2 cars from next season onwards.

This and many other threads that often skew down the ACO vs IMSA tangent show that sportscar fans are a tough crowd to please. Being born in 1986, I've been around for the fall of IMSA GTP and Group C, rise and fall of BPR/Original FIA GT1, rise and fall of ACO/FIA GT1, and the rise, fall, and merger/buyout of the ALMS and Grand Am. And that doesn't include everything that came and went before I was born.

I'd like to give DPI a chance, but when you have two groups of people who's own series flatlined and stagnated, plus the lack of a clear vision that we can see and so many people who we'd hope are working on this stuff being pretty mum and tight lipped, it's a bit of a cause for worry or skepticism.

I'd hope for some tangible news on DPI and such, sooner, rather than later.

Dpi are being built! From the mouth of someone who will actually race one, or is he lying about Dpi also?

As for us needing to see the rules before they are seen to believe they are real ...... really?

http://scunleashed.com/2016/scushow81.mp3





L.P.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

No, they are/were not the same, period!
P-1 at the end of 2013 had 1 U.S. car left, Dyson. Pickett sold his company to Nestle who could care less about sports car racing. Dyson the one remaining, refused to race against/with DPs. The 2014 P class had 4 full time U.S. P-2 type chassis in the class, not the same.

Those 4 P2 cars in the 2014 season? One of them was from a team that had been in P1 the previous year, and one was from an entity that had been in neither series the year before. The only P2 cars from ALMS that came over were the ESM entries. Two P1 teams came over as well - Delta Wing and Pickett.

And the only one of those teams that was still running full time by 2015 was the Delta Wing. Yup - the ALMS P2 class was a LOT stronger than the LMP1 class.

LMP1 and 2 were on about the same level at the end of the ALMS.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by TF110

Limiting the participants to the 4 p2 constructors and requiring manufacturer bodywork is not helping.

Manufacturer bodywork is only required if a team wants a manufacturer alignment. ACO P2s are still allowed for teams that do not wish to align with an OEM or are simply unable to forge such an alignment.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by TF110

You must have missed where I said alms? The teams from lmp1 were forced to buy an lmp2 or a dp. That's the only reason 2014 even had those cars. How you can defend them after giving the finger to at least 2 full time p1 teams maybe 4 or 5 potentially is ridiculous. Dpi is more of the same poor decision making. Limiting the participants to the 4 p2 constructors and requiring manufacturer bodywork is not helping. There's no announcements of participating manufacturers, questions about who is even going to be running, pc's dropped in '18 when none of them have stepped up to prototype class... The list goes on.

First, this is the last I will revisit this. So.....
How could you think I did not know it was the ALMS? I talked about Pickett and Dyson, ALMS Teams. Pickett SOLD his company and retired from racing, running at Daytona and Sebring renting the third seat out in '14. Dyson did NOT buy a P2, in fact Dyson's cars could have easily been converted to P2 cars and run by Dyson. They were in fact converted and became the 2 Prospeed Mazda cars in '14. Those cars in '14 were ESM and Mazda, not anyone forced to buy P2s, FACT.


As to the DPi diatribe, .........









L.P.