USCC (leave your axe outside)

[BullMan]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

Uh yes.

Most GT3 cars aren't particularly sophisticated and any technological progress is negated by BoP... The Aston Vantage and the Merc haven't had an update since they were released and they are still very competitive cars.

The very reason why GT3 is a diverse as it is is because every car has a shot at winning, though by no means all of them through sheer technologically superiority, but through balance of performance.

If the cars actually mattered, we wouldn't see a dozen different makes, all of them roughly competitive.

That's untrue. There's a BUNCH of technology in the McLaren, in the Aston, in the Ferrari. It's the small one-off cars that aren't sophisticated, and they don't have to be because they just BoP the cars. That is why they're all competitive. The organizers BoP the cars. That's it.

[Speed-King]

What technology specifically?

And does any of that technology make a difference?

[BullMan]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

What technology specifically?

And does any of that technology make a difference?

ABS, TCS, engine fuel mapping. The engine itself. It's not some Chevy pushrod V8. Of course it matters. The technology that goes into the McLaren GT3 car has applications in their street cars as well.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by BullMan

ABS, TCS

Grand Am had that until 2007. Only outlawed it when they switched to the Bosch-ECU.

GTE actually doesn't have much in the way of ABS either, and nobody would think about complaining about that.

engine fuel mapping.

DPs still have that.

The engine itself. It's not some Chevy pushrod V8.

Neither are the Ford and BMW-DP-blocks.

Of course it matters. The technology that goes into the McLaren GT3 car has applications in their street cars as well.

We're talking about racing here, not about street cars...

My point that GT3 is not a technology or engineering driven formula still stands.

[FordCosworthPanoz]

TCS and ABS, yep because Electronic driver aids have done so much for motorsport.

Witness the marvels of F1 2001-2007 when 80% of the overtaking was done in the pits and traction control meant even Zsolt Baumgartner could drive a race without spinning it. Or how it nearly blanked out the incredible engine sound coming off corners.

Watching the 1992 F1 season was thrilling and definitely what motorsport needs more of.

Or of course CART's introduction of electronic driver aids and traction control to the 2002 season when nobody could overtake or do anything even at Road America and on ovals where essentially you were stuck in formation until the next pitstop. Really exciting stuff. Definitely saved CART, thanks Chris Pook.

If it wasn't for traffic, I promise you Prototype Racing with electronic aids ect would be just as boring. Just watch even the DP only races prior to 2007.


TCS and ABS are so great that F1 the pinnacle of motorsport doesn't use it anymore I wonder why. I guess F1 fans aren't 'motorsport fans' and are 'NASCAR fans'

[FordCosworthPanoz]

Originally Posted by BullMan

engine fuel mapping

For somebody who rambles on about how terrible DPs and Grand Am is you don't seem to know much about it. Even though I don't watch much grand am but just about every race you hear "set engine mix to" on team radio. Engine Fuel Mapping is basic technology and the only one of the three technologies that is remotely useful in it's contribution to motorsport.

[TRspitfirefan]

Originally Posted by FordCosworthPanoz

TCS and ABS, yep because Electronic driver aids have done so much for motorsport.

Pretty much all modern cars have ABS and traction control. A big part of what makes sports car racing interesting, (IMHO) is the crossover of technology between the racing cars and the vehicles on the street. Road racing has the potential to refine new or existing systems, making them more efficient, easier to diagnose and repair, and more able to withstand extreme conditions.
Also "drivers aids" make the cars go faster around twisty corners. Isn't that what sports cars are all about?

If it wasn't for traffic, I promise you Prototype Racing with electronic aids ect would be just as boring.

Perhaps this is true, that is why we love multi class racing.

[gregtummer]

Originally Posted by FordCosworthPanoz

If it wasn't for traffic, I promise you Prototype Racing with electronic aids ect would be just as boring. Just watch even the DP only races prior to 2007.

When the cars aren't built/performance balanced to run equal, the prototypes don't need traffic to be exciting.

Audi and Toyota didn't need any traffic to have their great battle for the lead 5 hours into the 24 Hours of Le Mans last year (without any cautions by the way).

[Dodge_Swinger]

DP is a cost-containment formula, period. Anything that violates the "prime directive" of cost-containment is prohibited. If the cars turn out to be exciting, it's by accident.

I want to see exciting cars. I don't perceive DPs as exciting and I'm not alone. Instead of trying to change the perception by actually doing something, USCR/Grand-Am/NASCAR just tells you DPs are exciting and you're supposed to believe it. There's not one mention of having to earn fan support. It seems like we're just expected to support USCR just as passionately as ALMS without one race being run or even any idea of the rules for next year. You're supposed to be a fan because Ed says so!

If Grand-Am/NASCAR/USCR racing is as amazing as USCR has already declared, then they won't need a single ALMS fan. And if USCR expects its money to come from entry fees and TV, then stop posting fan surveys. Get it over with and tell us how it's going to be, then let the people decide and move on.

Based on the interviews and insider info floating around, I suspect that contrary to USCR propaganda, LMGT will be slowed down to protect the holy DPs. It might only be a little ballast or a smaller restrictor, (nothing that can't be taken off for Le Mans), but I'm beginning to hear folks dance around the subject.

[Mechanic Z]

Originally Posted by TRspitfirefan

Pretty much all modern cars have ABS and traction control. A big part of what makes sports car racing interesting, (IMHO) is the crossover of technology between the racing cars and the vehicles on the street. Road racing has the potential to refine new or existing systems, making them more efficient, easier to diagnose and repair, and more able to withstand extreme conditions.
Also "drivers aids" make the cars go faster around twisty corners. Isn't that what sports cars are all about?

+1

[Mechanic Z]

Originally Posted by Dodge_Swinger

Based on the interviews and insider info floating around, I suspect that contrary to USCR propaganda, LMGT will be slowed down to protect the holy DPs. It might only be a little ballast or a smaller restrictor, (nothing that can't be taken off for Le Mans), but I'm beginning to hear folks dance around the subject.

Hopefully Chevrolet keeps that from happening.

[dxk1]

Originally Posted by Dodge_Swinger

DP is a cost-containment formula, period. Anything that violates the "prime directive" of cost-containment is prohibited. If the cars turn out to be exciting, it's by accident.

I find it hard to believe that cost containment was the goal Grand Am had in mind and exciting cars was an after thought. If cost containment was the only goal, then why bother racing? It would be cheaper to just stay home, wouldn't it? That would be the ultimate cost containment.

DK

[gregtummer]

Originally Posted by dxk1

I find it hard to believe that cost containment was the goal Grand Am had in mind and exciting cars was an after thought. If cost containment was the only goal, then why bother racing? It would be cheaper to just stay home, wouldn't it? That would be the ultimate cost containment.

DK

They need their monopoly.

[BullMan]

Originally Posted by dxk1

I find it hard to believe that cost containment was the goal Grand Am had in mind and exciting cars was an after thought. If cost containment was the only goal, then why bother racing? It would be cheaper to just stay home, wouldn't it? That would be the ultimate cost containment.

DK

That's the reason Grand-Am was created. To race cheap cars and not those dastardly LMPs.

[supermario21]

Originally Posted by BullMan

That's the reason Grand-Am was created. To race cheap cars and not those dastardly LMPs.

Yeah but USCR is now the only show in town. These aren't the days of the early 2000s where if you wanted to do prototype racing on the cheap you went SRP racing instead of ALMS/LMP (though some did both).

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by Dodge_Swinger

LMP2 is a cost-containment formula, period. Anything that violates the "prime directive" of cost-containment is prohibited. If the cars turn out to be exciting, it's by accident.

FIFY

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

FIFY

LMP2 has cost limits but variety. No, you didn't fix it. Its actually a formula with cost limits that is somewhat appealing and current.

[Accident]

Originally Posted by jeast

Didn't say that but not caring about the cars and only about having high car counts with low tech/development and only one or two cars that can actually win the race sounds like NASCAR to me.

...and caring too much about the cars and the high-tech stuff and therefore high development costs have brought us low car counts and only one or two cars that can win races.

Both formulas have their faults. DPs may not be the "right" answer, but LMP1 obviously isn't either, or we would have more than 3 cars running in the US... if you count the Dyson Mazola as "running" anyway.



Not directed at jeast or anyone else in particular: I'm starting to see shades of the same thing starting around here that we had on the ALMS fans forums... a group that ***** about DPs and take shots at Grand Am every single chance they get, and then when someone doesn't agree or tries to point out that they are being unfair/inaccurate/childish it turns into an argument and people (usually the Grand Am haters) acting like the others are choosing opposing sides and are now enemies. Hopefully it doesn't end up that bad over here.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by TF110

LMP2 has cost limits but variety. No, you didn't fix it. Its actually a formula with cost limits that is somewhat appealing and current.

So a DP with a carbonfibre tub (which is the only real technological advancement a P2 has over a DP) would be okay to you? You might get lucky, then - that's most probably what will be in store for 2016.

As for the variety: What good is it that 6 different chassis are available if everyone and their Grand Ma ends up running an Oreca-Nissan? Oh wait, you can rebrand that as an Alpine right now!

[TF110]

Lotus, hpd, oreca, oak etc. all look different, have their unique shapes and traits. DP has a fake Corvette and a Riley. Yea, even if lmp2 isn't my favorite, its still more diverse and different than seeing two different cars with colors differentiating them. DP's with carbon tubs? They don't even want upgrades to their current cars to improve their pace. Seems like cheapskate team owners to me, maybe GA will buy them a carbon tub.

[MagVanisher]

Originally Posted by TF110

Seems like cheapskate team owners to me, maybe GA will buy them a carbon tub.

I hope so... It would be stupid if the teams decline to "upgrade" their DPs!

[Maelochs]

"...and caring too much about the cars and the high-tech stuff and therefore high development costs have brought us low car counts and only one or two cars that can win races."

Not every ALMS fan was/is a DP hater.

However, every sports cart racing fan who can count can count the people at the fence at a race.

People who have been to both Rolex and ALMS races know the real reason why DPs shouldn't continue any longer than absolutely necessary to soothe owners' egos and wallets----Fans don't like them.

Fans, who vote with their wallets and TV remotes, have been voting against DPs since what, 2004?

If you want to tell sports car fans everywhere that they are stupid to like exciting cars, and are killing racing thereby, okay.

ALMS failed, not because of the cars but because of the management. Rolex on the other hand had good management and good promotion but had cars no one wanted.

If caring about the cars is wrong then fans are wrong, because the Vast majority of sports car fans care a Lot about the cars. And everyone knows that the best business advice one can get is to ignore what the customers want, right?

Seems to me the new series needs to take what the fans want and make it work, not tell the fans to buy the product offered even when it is one they have been rejecting for a decade.

Seems pretty clear, USCR should take the cars the fans want and use the promo and management of Rolex to make the series profitable.

Only one or two cars that can win races? Telmex only runs two cars at Daytona and Indy.

[Speed-King]

Nobody is going to argue that the 2003 to 2011 DPs weren't exactly beauty queens, but the Gen 3 cars are a marked improvement over that, and the verdict on how those would be accepted by the fans is still out. Sure, somebody is going to post a photo of the empty grandstands at Indy last year in reply to this, but truth is, we can never know how popular Gen 3 DPs would have been, had Grand Am not put themselves in a huge hole popularity-wise since its inception, first by running 2nd rate LMPs and then the less than eye pleasing Gen1 and Gen2 cars.

There are plenty of rellatively ow-tech racing formulas out there that are really popular (by no means all of ,them related to NASCAR) and I think if given a chance the Gen3 DPs could have become so as well...

[Baigu]

But why bother wasting money & time trying to force the fans to like it when you could have P2. Mostly every endurance fan around the world likes it and its also recognised all over the world.

Grand Am/Nascar should start a exchange program for DP's against P2 or PC cars, like Indycar did for Champcar.

[gregtummer]

22 P2s starting for Le Mans.