ALMS 2011 Discussion

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Somehow, I find it hard to equate the factory supported HPD and Ford engines as being simple crate motors.

Well most of us would find that hard to do. They all provide an engine program to customers. We all know that, trying to equate that with a 'crate motor' is beyond ....




L.P.

[fiend540]

This whole new rules package is pretty awful imo, I can't be the only one who finds that Ford's lmp1 engine is a turbo 4cyl and their lmp2 engine is a turbo 6cyl as just sad and backwards no matter what they do with restrictions to make the lmp1 a higher output engine. Atleast they haven't found a way to muck up things in gt2

[tlongman]

ALMS has scheduled a press conference for 10 am presumably local time tomorrow. Schedule announcement perhaps?

[HORNDAWG]

Miller gone. Laguna back to the penultimate round. July 3rd TBD. September 3rd TBA. So expanded to 10 rounds for 2011.

ALMS







L.P.

[NightStalk3r]

Scratch that, just realized they released a preliminary schedule and Lime Rock is included.

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by NightStalk3r

So with miller gone does this mean they might still keep lime rock?

Lime Rock - July 9th.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by NightStalk3r

So with miller gone does this mean they might still keep lime rock?

Yes, Lime Rock is still on the schedule. A little date shuffling in the schedule also.

2011 AMERICAN LE MANS SERIES PRESENTED BY TEQUILA PATRÓN
February 9-10, Sebring International Raceway – Sebring, Fla.
Winter Test (Wednesday-Thursday)
March 19, Sebring International Raceway – Sebring, Fla. (Saturday)
April 16, Long Beach Street Circuit – Long Beach, Calif. (Saturday)
July 3, TBD (Sunday)
July 9, Lime Rock Park – Lakeville, Conn. (Saturday)
July 31, Mosport International Raceway – Bowmanville, Ontario (Sunday)
August 6, Mid-Ohio Sports Car Course – Lexington, Ohio (Saturday)
August 21, Road America – Elkhart Lake, Wis. (Sunday)
September 3, TBA (Saturday)
September 17, Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca – Monterey, Calif. (Saturday)
October 15, Road Atlanta – Braselton, Ga. (Saturday)


L.P.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by fiend540

This whole new rules package is pretty awful imo, I can't be the only one who finds that Ford's lmp1 engine is a turbo 4cyl and their lmp2 engine is a turbo 6cyl as just sad and backwards no matter what they do with restrictions to make the lmp1 a higher output engine. Atleast they haven't found a way to muck up things in gt2

How is this messing up LMP?

The current LMPC cars are legal for 2011 LMP2 rules. So two things will happen

1. Teams will either buy an upgrade kit, one of the new engines available and move up.
2. LMPC will continue as planned for 2011 and 2012 finishing its 3 years plan (stability freaks will like this)

All current LMP2 and LMP1 cars are 2011 legal.

So what's the worst that can happen -

Series makes changes without consulting the key team members, makes sweeping changes, everybody freaks and the series crashes under its own weight of blunders.

What's likely to happen -

LMP2 is likely to expand "SLIGHTLY". Somebody is going to buy a Lola with either a Ford LMP2 or HPD LMP2 engine. Somebody MIGHT buy a Lola with Ford's P1 engine.

How is this confusing???

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Miller gone. Laguna back to the penultimate round. July 3rd TBD. September 3rd TBA. So expanded to 10 rounds for 2011.

ALMS

L.P.

Thoughts/Fallout -

• Laguna was unseassonably cold in May, makes sense to move it back I suppose.
• Utah off the schedule, not shocking, not a fan or team favorite.
• No return of St. Pete, I assuming that has something to do with scheduling again.
• Likely No Sears Point Unless.....

Who or What's Missing, Fill In The Blanks -

July 3rd has to be Oklahoma unless Sears Point date is moving and I thought the Oklahoma race was also a Indy Car event or am I missing something?

Sept 3rd is Baltimore, track layout is approved, dates set, why not put it on the schedule?

Parting Shot -

Deleted One, Add Two. I guess that's progress. The details around GTC and LMPC are to be hammered out (still?) and announced at the annual "State of The Series" address at Petit.

Doesn't change much but the May/June gap is ridiculous! When NASCAR is jumping into high gear and Baseball is getting warmed up, they want put the series in a deep freeze until Summer. This has much more to do with the ACO's reinstatement of testing before Le Mans. Since no date has been announced, even they don't know when its going to be.

For the series that's bad news since it only affects 1/3 of the field (4-5 teams make the annual trip).

I call this about the safest thing they could do under the circumstances, I guess this calls for a golf clap.

[fiend540]

Originally Posted by dj4monie

How is this messing up LMP?

The current LMPC cars are legal for 2011 LMP2 rules. So two things will happen

1. Teams will either buy an upgrade kit, one of the new engines available and move up.
2. LMPC will continue as planned for 2011 and 2012 finishing its 3 years plan (stability freaks will like this)

All current LMP2 and LMP1 cars are 2011 legal.

So what's the worst that can happen -

Series makes changes without consulting the key team members, makes sweeping changes, everybody freaks and the series crashes under its own weight of blunders.

What's likely to happen -

LMP2 is likely to expand "SLIGHTLY". Somebody is going to buy a Lola with either a Ford LMP2 or HPD LMP2 engine. Somebody MIGHT buy a Lola with Ford's P1 engine.

How is this confusing???

I don't think you ever read what people write, as you always come back with something from left field that has nothing to do with the post you quote. I never said it was confusing, in fact I understand the intentions of the new rules pretty well. That said, I still don't have to like them or even agree with them. It's sad to me that the ford lmp1 engine is a turbo 4cyl, and the lmp2 engine is a turbo 6 and I don't care how they go about equalizing it to make the 4cyl out compete the 6cyl, it's just backwards to me. Your top class should field the high hp big motors, your lower class should be running the 4 cylinders and such. That's just my opinion and I'm sure you will have a long winded response about production based this and restrictions that and blah blah, in the end it doesn't matter.

[chernaudi]

Now that the LMP1/2/C deal is confusing enough unless one has followed the debate in depth, lets move on to something more easy to guess how IMSA will respond: the TBA dates.

If MMP and one of the street courses isn't included, what are IMSA's other options if they can't nail down one of those dates? Drop it or add a date at an established ALMS track?

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by fiend540

I don't think you ever read what people write, as you always come back with something from left field that has nothing to do with the post you quote. I never said it was confusing, in fact I understand the intentions of the new rules pretty well. That said, I still don't have to like them or even agree with them. It's sad to me that the ford lmp1 engine is a turbo 4cyl, and the lmp2 engine is a turbo 6 and I don't care how they go about equalizing it to make the 4cyl out compete the 6cyl, it's just backwards to me. Your top class should field the high hp big motors, your lower class should be running the 4 cylinders and such. That's just my opinion and I'm sure you will have a long winded response about production based this and restrictions that and blah blah, in the end it doesn't matter.

I do read what it written by others.

Production DOES matter, look what Indy Car did? There ICONIC panel said "Bespoke Engines". Who's stepped up to the plate? Only Honda.

It can be equalized is not hard, it only seems that way, especially to a bunch of people brought up on "run what you brung (and hope you brought enough)".

Is that short enough for you and you are also entitled to your own opinion and I'm entitled to my long winded posting, unless my blog gets of the ground anyway.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Now that the LMP1/2/C deal is confusing enough unless one has followed the debate in depth, lets move on to something more easy to guess how IMSA will respond: the TBA dates.

If MMP and one of the street courses isn't included, what are IMSA's other options if they can't nail down one of those dates? Drop it or add a date at an established ALMS track?

I think there's some major league shuffling in the background.

More dates changed than didn't. I think its also positioning for the future.

[JAG]

Small capacity engines are the future for road and race cars.

P1 is a manufactuer proving ground so this is the direction the class is moving in, it's also happening in F1, WRC and WTCC.

Just as Porsche and Honda built bulletproof 3.4 V8's manufactuer's will do the same with a 4 cylinder turbo.

P2's reason for being is privateers and budget racing so less stressed larger engines are the better option.

[Purist]

It's counterintuitive and just seems wrong. You can explain the racing versus production engine thing all you want; it just doesn't sit or seem quite right, and I don't know that it ever will.

The P1 class ought to have the bigger engines with more cylinders, and for me and many others, it's just that simple.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Purist

It's counterintuitive and just seems wrong. You can explain the racing versus production engine thing all you want; it just doesn't sit or seem quite right, and I don't know that it ever will.

The P1 class ought to have the bigger engines with more cylinders, and for me and many others, it's just that simple.

What seems wrong to me is having a 6l V12 putting out little more than 650bhp due to restrictors when 25 years ago 4 cylinder turbo Group B rally cars were running 500bhp+ on five day rallies.

I want to see sportscar technology push the limits not run motors that have their origins in the 60's and 70's.

I also want to see that technology transfered to the road so more people can afford to run performance cars.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

2010 P-2s will run in P-1 with the grandfathered 2010 P-1s in 2011, LMPC will be left alone. Back to the original rub, what the he_l to do with 2011 P-2s?!





L.P.

IMO IMSA has to open up the series to 2011 P2's as that is one of the potential growth areas for the sport in these economic times, even more so with Roush and HPD onboard.

As for LMPC IMSA will have to talk to the teams.

Personally I'd run P1 and P2 and make LMPC a subclass of the latter.

If there's a consensus IMSA can boost the performance of these cars to make them competitive with P2's, if not continue as is.

[fiend540]

Originally Posted by Purist

It's counterintuitive and just seems wrong. You can explain the racing versus production engine thing all you want; it just doesn't sit or seem quite right, and I don't know that it ever will.

The P1 class ought to have the bigger engines with more cylinders, and for me and many others, it's just that simple.

Yep, this pretty much sums up my feelings on it. I don't care about trickle down technology into street cars and all that crap, I want to see loud and fast race cars battling tooth and nails. I guess we are in the minority with this feeling, we shall see what the future holds but it's hard for me to get excited. Oh well as I said before at least they haven't messed up the GT class, for now

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by JAG

IMO IMSA has to open up the series to 2011 P2's as that is one of the potential growth areas for the sport in these economic times, even more so with Roush and HPD onboard.

As for LMPC IMSA will have to talk to the teams.

Personally I'd run P1 and P2 and make LMPC a subclass of the latter.

If there's a consensus IMSA can boost the performance of these cars to make them competitive with P2's, if not continue as is.

As it stands LMPC is faster than 2011 'rule compliant' P-2!!! And to slow GT to slot everything behind the 2011 P-2 will not, NOT, be acceptable to the teams running in it, nor the ones in GTE I would venture. Something needs sorting in 2011 P-2.



L.P.

[Purist]

JAG, your argument is critically flawed.

How long did an engine in a Group B rally car have to last? How long does an endurance racing engine have to last? BTW, the current WRC cars make 200hp LESS than the Group B cars, so aren't they crap, by your logic at least?

The bar for what is a "performance car" is ALWAYS moving, and always moving UP. The Jaguar XK120 (126mph/166hp) and Ferrari 166 MM (135mph/150hp) were the McLaren F1s of 1948. A performance car will ALWAYS be exclusive and expensive because it costs to be in that top echelon, and it ALWAYS will. In fact, if anything, the performance of the typical, day-to-day car is now dropping. It's only the big sedans, trucks, SUV, etc that are still seeing improving stats. The big sedans now have 250-350hp, which can't be made reliably with a little, turbo engine. And on the supercar end of things, now the benchmark isn't 150-175hp, but 800-1000hp. Simply because of what a "performance car" is, it will NEVER be "affordable" to have one. Not even a Corvette is precisely "affordable"; it's just moreso than a Ferrari or Aston Martin.

As I implied, the top "performance cars" have bigger engines. What you're talking about is technology for econoboxes, which is NOT the point of sportscar racing. And your argument is flawed anyway because this is NOT providing technology FOR the road, it is putting technology ALREADY FROM the road into race cars. So, it's NOT accomplishing the goal you're looking for anyway, because the econoboxes already have those mechanicals. So, what's the point exactly then?

[HORNDAWG]

You think we can stay on the 2011 ALMS and not down these tangents!!!!!




L.P.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Purist

JAG, your argument is critically flawed.

How long did an engine in a Group B rally car have to last? How long does an endurance racing engine have to last? BTW, the current WRC cars make 200hp LESS than the Group B cars, so aren't they crap, by your logic at least?

The bar for what is a "performance car" is ALWAYS moving, and always moving UP. The Jaguar XK120 (126mph/166hp) and Ferrari 166 MM (135mph/150hp) were the McLaren F1s of 1948. A performance car will ALWAYS be exclusive and expensive because it costs to be in that top echelon, and it ALWAYS will. In fact, if anything, the performance of the typical, day-to-day car is now dropping. It's only the big sedans, trucks, SUV, etc that are still seeing improving stats. The big sedans now have 250-350hp, which can't be made reliably with a little, turbo engine. And on the supercar end of things, now the benchmark isn't 150-175hp, but 800-1000hp. Simply because of what a "performance car" is, it will NEVER be "affordable" to have one. Not even a Corvette is precisely "affordable"; it's just moreso than a Ferrari or Aston Martin.

As I implied, the top "performance cars" have bigger engines. What you're talking about is technology for econoboxes, which is NOT the point of sportscar racing. And your argument is flawed anyway because this is NOT providing technology FOR the road, it is putting technology ALREADY FROM the road into race cars. So, it's NOT accomplishing the goal you're looking for anyway, because the econoboxes already have those mechanicals. So, what's the point exactly then?

Future BMW M division, AMG and Audi road cars will use smaller turbo and super charged engines with lighter chassis.

The trend was ever larger engines to compensate for heavier road cars which ruined dynamics and increased running costs.

The ALMS was ahead of the curve with performance diesels and will be ahead once again with smaller capacity engines and hybrid systems.

Being at the head of industry trends is why major manufactures and technical partners want to be involved in the ALMS, it's why HPD and Roush are building new engines for the series and Corvette are pushing green technology.

In future years manufactuers and fans alike want there to be a market for the C7, C9, C10............

[JAG]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

As it stands LMPC is faster than 2011 'rule compliant' P-2!!! And to slow GT to slot everything behind the 2011 P-2 will not, NOT, be acceptable to the teams running in it, nor the ones in GTE I would venture. Something needs sorting in 2011 P-2.



L.P.

2011 P2's will be signifcantly quicker than LMPC and GT2.

The Libra car hasn't been quick in any of it's guises so there's no reason to suggest the team is getting the most out of the current package.

You have to consider what a new 900kg Lola chassis with a 450bhp+ HPD engine driven by, for example, the Fields could accomplish.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by JAG

2011 P2's will be signifcantly quicker than LMPC and GT2.

If this is true there is no problem!
But trying to say that the Libra entry is off the mark because of the malady of the previous diesel effort, is incorrect, IMO. And I am not alone in that.





L.P.

[JAG]

I'm sure it's a solid car but so was the NASAMAX P1 when they were first out of the gate with a new reg car.

The Radical is a good few years old, the engine is new, how good are the drivers, and how many testing miles have they put in?

I'll suggest at least a second can be gained in each of those four areas.