|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
17 Sep 2016, 02:47 (Ref:3672943) | #1201 | |||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,488
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
17 Sep 2016, 02:55 (Ref:3672946) | #1202 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,864
|
|||
|
17 Sep 2016, 03:52 (Ref:3672953) | #1203 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,561
|
Maybe we'll just see a red Ligier with Nismo gtr lights and a big Nissan sticker on the fin.
|
|
|
17 Sep 2016, 05:39 (Ref:3672956) | #1204 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7,175
|
I think he's just referring all IMSA P cars as DPi's instead of splitting them to DPi and P2.
|
||
|
17 Sep 2016, 10:02 (Ref:3672991) | #1205 | |
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 276
|
Yeah, it's just the way the article is written. It's really a non-issue except for people who obsess over crapping on IMSA.
|
|
|
17 Sep 2016, 10:11 (Ref:3672993) | #1206 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,864
|
Quote:
Quote:
The article as written implies that it's engine only, which goes against IMSA's stated plan: Either engine AND bodywork, or you run the Gibson V8. It's not at all strange to want more information to clear up this matter, and it's certainly not "crapping on" anybody to point out the reasons it doesn't make sense. |
||||
|
17 Sep 2016, 11:03 (Ref:3673001) | #1207 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,190
|
That's my understanding as well. I tend to call the members of the DPi platform which opt for the former a "DPi" and the latter a (ACO) P2. So I'm surprised to see someone announcing (maybe) running with a different engine without mention of bodywork from said engine manufacturer as well. It is my understanding that IMSA will not accept such a "DPi". Mentions that I've seen so far say that going for a P2 is a good thing, as it can be "easily" converted into a DPi, but that does require installation of a different (non-ACO-spec Gibson) engine as well as custom bodywork that is "recognizably" different (I seem to remember a statement from within IMSA saying that just minor aesthetic rebrushes aren't good enough for qualifying for manufacturer-cued styling). So I end up confused by the ESM story.
|
||
__________________
Q: How to play religious roulette? A: Stand around in a circle and blaspheme and see who gets struck by lightning first |
17 Sep 2016, 11:24 (Ref:3673005) | #1208 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,434
|
On another hand, if any team was going to get a rules break, I could see it being the team which is funding the North American Endurance Cup ....
It was my understanding that the "custom bodywork" had to come from a manufacturer, thus a company which had paid the "partner's fee." I didn't think just anyone could create some custom bodywork and call the result a "DPi." It would get pretty hard for IMSA of aero-BoP all the bodywork if any shop could produce "custom" DPi panels. Also, I think the whole point of the rule was to force factories to pay to play---so if Nissan wanted to brag about winning and IMSA race with its Nissan V8-Ligier or Nissan-Oreca, it would have to pay the fees and submit the bodywork Like all the other manufacturers in DPi. What a storm it would set off if Nissan could claim victories with its independently built "Nissan-Ligier" while GM had to pay big bucks to enter its "Cadillac DPi." Sadly we will have to wait not just for the details of this rumor, but also to see if this rumor is even true, or if it is a rumor based on an exploration which will not pan out. I've got to say, 2018 is looking to be a really big year for IMSA .... |
|
|
17 Sep 2016, 11:37 (Ref:3673010) | #1209 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,190
|
Quote:
And can we agree that "the year after" will be a really big year for IMSA as we keep updating the actual number for some years now already |
|||
__________________
Q: How to play religious roulette? A: Stand around in a circle and blaspheme and see who gets struck by lightning first |
17 Sep 2016, 12:13 (Ref:3673015) | #1210 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,470
|
Quote:
I mean, thats a pretty cheap way to get around the manu specific aero kit. |
|||
__________________
“We’re trying to close the doors without embarrassing ourselves, the France family and embarrassing (the) Grand American Series,” he said in the deposition. “There is no money. There is no purse. There’s nothing.” |
17 Sep 2016, 12:58 (Ref:3673019) | #1211 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,087
|
Quote:
|
||
|
17 Sep 2016, 13:21 (Ref:3673022) | #1212 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,190
|
|||
__________________
Q: How to play religious roulette? A: Stand around in a circle and blaspheme and see who gets struck by lightning first |
17 Sep 2016, 14:11 (Ref:3673029) | #1213 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,434
|
I am pretty sure the manufacturers (read: GM) who pushed for "styling cues" bodywork are not going to be pleased if any other factory gets to play for less pay.
This could mean a couple things, though; Maybe if Nissan ponied up the "Partner" fee GM would be okay with minimal mods ("Hey, it's their lost potential ad impact") or might demand a more sizable investment---but I have no clue what the fine details of the rules actually specify, so this is all "Ten/Tenths Fact"--that is, wild speculation. I also don't know how long GM's lobbying arm reaches, nor how committed Nissan might be, if at all. I am pretty sure GM doesn't want to be giving up wins to Nissan (a well-proven power plant) unless Nissan jumps through every rule book hoop GM can imagine or interpret (same thing, really.) |
|
|
17 Sep 2016, 15:32 (Ref:3673056) | #1214 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,179
|
This is a very interesting situation, and I think it's a key point. If you ask me, I think the idea to force teams to use a bodywork with the shape of a manufacturer's brand isn't a good idea, because it close the door for projects like this (the ESM) because it's a lot more expensive to build a bodywork, than just to install an engine with their cooling needs on a chassis.
When all this of the DPi started, I thought that just manufacturers should be forced to use manufacturer's bodywork, letting the teams use the standard bodywork of the chassises with they prefered engine on the back, because it's a lot more simple, and we could see several different engines. Now, what I have read some days ago, is that some manufacturers could start 2017 with the standard chassis bodywork, because time schedule issues. So, IMSA could allow teams (for some time) to use standard bodywork and DPi engines even for Mazda or GM at least for Daytona. |
||
|
17 Sep 2016, 15:34 (Ref:3673057) | #1215 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 12,042
|
From sportscar365 this morning:
*Honda is unlikely to enter the DPi ranks next year, with the focus primarily on the Acura NSX GT3 development and factory race program. “Our focus is on getting this thing launched,” HPD VP/COO Steve Eriksen told Sportscar365. “That’s the key thing. The NSX is such an exciting vehicle that we want to make sure we get it right.” Makes sense as to why ESM have a Nissan package, no word on how they could though. |
|
|
17 Sep 2016, 15:40 (Ref:3673061) | #1216 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,470
|
I've texted a few friends in the journalism world, hoping for clarification. I'd imagine you won't be able to get away with running the pure stock bodywork and adding a sticker. But, how different it needs to be? That's the question.
|
||
__________________
“We’re trying to close the doors without embarrassing ourselves, the France family and embarrassing (the) Grand American Series,” he said in the deposition. “There is no money. There is no purse. There’s nothing.” |
17 Sep 2016, 16:10 (Ref:3673070) | #1217 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,488
|
I believe the series has the right to review and approve/disapprove any manufacturer suggested edits. So of the series doesn't think the changes are enough they can send you back to the drawing board.
|
||
|
17 Sep 2016, 16:20 (Ref:3673077) | #1218 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
Quote:
L.P. |
|||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
17 Sep 2016, 16:31 (Ref:3673080) | #1219 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
|||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
17 Sep 2016, 16:32 (Ref:3673082) | #1220 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,470
|
|||
__________________
“We’re trying to close the doors without embarrassing ourselves, the France family and embarrassing (the) Grand American Series,” he said in the deposition. “There is no money. There is no purse. There’s nothing.” |
17 Sep 2016, 16:35 (Ref:3673083) | #1221 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,470
|
Quote:
How does one clarify "what is enough"... It's an easy argument to say. Well, Manufactuer A did XYZ to make their bodywork have "cues" We here at Manufactuer B think we have met our "cues" through this XYZ. |
|||
__________________
“We’re trying to close the doors without embarrassing ourselves, the France family and embarrassing (the) Grand American Series,” he said in the deposition. “There is no money. There is no purse. There’s nothing.” |
17 Sep 2016, 16:46 (Ref:3673084) | #1222 | |||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,488
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
17 Sep 2016, 16:48 (Ref:3673086) | #1223 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,190
|
Quote:
[/sarcasm] |
|||
__________________
Q: How to play religious roulette? A: Stand around in a circle and blaspheme and see who gets struck by lightning first |
17 Sep 2016, 16:52 (Ref:3673089) | #1224 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
|||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
17 Sep 2016, 16:53 (Ref:3673090) | #1225 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,488
|
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
IMSA DPi/P2 vs WEC LMP1-L | Danathar | Sportscar & GT Racing | 7 | 5 Nov 2015 17:55 |
New Rules - Discussion | DKGandBH | Formula One | 28 | 19 Jan 2005 01:40 |