|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
1 Jun 2013, 00:22 (Ref:3256222) | #201 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,648
|
Quote:
But anyways, be glad you got to see that, because you will never see anything close to that ever again in an American series. First 5 cars shattered the track mph record set by Davy Jones in the 1992 Jaguar, and when the IMSA GTPs race there, they didn't have the chicane at the end of the back-straight that slows the cars down roughly 5 seconds a lap! |
||
|
1 Jun 2013, 08:38 (Ref:3256301) | #202 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,592
|
Tires have come a long way. I wonder what those GTP cars could do with modern Michelins?
|
|
|
1 Jun 2013, 11:10 (Ref:3256358) | #203 | |
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 147
|
||
|
1 Jun 2013, 14:29 (Ref:3256423) | #204 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,664
|
|||
__________________
"Those were the days my friends. We thought they'd never end..." jimclark |
1 Jun 2013, 14:37 (Ref:3256425) | #205 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,648
|
||
|
7 Jun 2013, 14:04 (Ref:3258966) | #206 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1
|
Hello all.....another stepchild from ALMSfans.com.
Dave |
||
|
7 Jun 2013, 15:02 (Ref:3258984) | #207 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,591
|
|||
|
8 Jun 2013, 02:53 (Ref:3259193) | #208 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 770
|
|||
__________________
RacefastsafecaR |
8 Jun 2013, 07:34 (Ref:3259234) | #209 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,592
|
||
|
8 Jun 2013, 12:01 (Ref:3259319) | #210 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,434
|
Rather a more accurate summation: Rolex 2.0 = Bad, ALMS Improved = Good.
|
|
|
8 Jun 2013, 15:37 (Ref:3259383) | #211 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,664
|
|||
__________________
"Those were the days my friends. We thought they'd never end..." jimclark |
8 Jun 2013, 16:09 (Ref:3259394) | #212 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,434
|
Always looking for a fight ... these young kids, I tell ya ...
Seems to me there are two routes forward for USCR: "Rolex 2.0," with "Gen4" DPs, no development, rigid engine rules, spec chassis and bodywork, or "ALMS Improved," with interesting ACO-compliant cars, some openess to allow teams to modify and develop, free engine rules (as in tuning for greater power is not a crime,) but weiht the promo and wise management the lack of which sank ALMS. Rolex 2.0 will probably work about as well as the original. ALMS Improved could be exactly that---everything good about ALMS plus income for the teams and TV ratings to attract sponsors. We will know when the 2016 regs are announced (probably February 2016, the way the USCR management has been going so far) but then we will for sure know if North American Sports car racing is finally returning to health, or will have to go through another death/rebirth before it will be worth watching. Clear enough? |
|
|
8 Jun 2013, 16:34 (Ref:3259407) | #213 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,664
|
The previous post was clear enuff. My question was regarding the basis for your theory that there will be an "ALMS Improved". With NASCAR behind the whole thang (yadda-yadda re: whethter or not it is "NASCAR"...the mindset is...) I see no return to the high tech and freedom that some/many of us desire in sportscar racing...
|
||
__________________
"Those were the days my friends. We thought they'd never end..." jimclark |
8 Jun 2013, 17:11 (Ref:3259411) | #214 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,494
|
Quote:
And then there’s the whole issue of the impact of the WEC and the future of P1 and P2. Lots of unknown there, starting with how many privateer P1 cars besides Rebellion/Oraca will be in the WEC, what direction ACO/FIA choose to go with P2 attract gentlemen and how many companies will be around to make a next-generatio P2 car. It’s entirely possible that 2016 USCR Ps cars will be ACO compliant in the sense that they can race at Le Mans but be different from P1s and P2s for the simple reason that USCR's needs and resources are different from ACO/FIA's needs and resources. |
|||
__________________
“Sometimes there’s no poison like a dream.” — Tanya Donelly |
8 Jun 2013, 17:29 (Ref:3259415) | #215 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,434
|
I covered that too.
If NASCAR serves up Rolex 2.o---dull, spec cars, no competition except between "On-Track Personalities", with lots of World-Wide Wrestling drama and no real racing ... then USuCkR will die as would be proper. NASCAR fans aren't going to devote another three hours per weekend for some other set of personalities---that's why Camping World Trucks is so small. Rolex 2.0, with all those foreign cars and drivers, would do worse. The WWE format of bump-and-grind on the track and fist-fighting in the pits, which is what NASCAR fans really want, won't work with sports cars, sports car drivers, or sports car fans. Even if NASCAR continues to back it to the hilt and promote it until viewers' eyes bleed, Rolex 2.0 won't make them any money. I cannot be sure NASCAR will not keep running the series at a loss (I can't imagine they make any money with AMA road-racing) but I assume NASCAR will shut it down---or it will simply be replaced by some new series---say when someone like Zak Brown decides to put together a real racing series. |
|
|
9 Jun 2013, 05:47 (Ref:3259575) | #216 | |||||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 317
|
Well, this one is always up for a scrap, though a physical fight might not end well against a 6'5", 280-lb guy like me....
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
|
9 Jun 2013, 12:07 (Ref:3259704) | #217 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,434
|
If USCR ignores ACO classes, I am pretty sure it will Have to go low-tech, because construction costs will need to be low for cars that can only race in an unpopular and unprofitable series.
I assume (as you pointned out, Jim France has been cultiviating ACO/FIA ties for a while) that the 2105 P2 (and 2016 GT) regs will include a P2 and GT class which work on both sides of the pond, because sports car fans are Not insular. We follow what is going on around the world, and want the good stuff that is out there, not some lame second-tier imitation (GaGT, for instance.) I expect P1 will remain a de facto factory class with a few privateers, which is pretty normal for sports cars, while the second class will be more affordable. If USCR has its own top class, in no way based on cars which race everywhere else around the world ... who is going to design and build cars for a small, unpopular series? The cost to design and build a very small run of modern cars is pretty steep. If the car is not largely based on existing chassis, then it will likely Have to be another tube-framed dinosaur like the current DP, simply because so few small constructors will be able to afford to build a modern car cheaply enough. Much simpler to keep USCR's top class close enough to international P2 (or even P1, if it proves affordable which I think is unlikely) and attract those fans which have already made it clear that they won't watch DPs. |
|
|
10 Jun 2013, 21:25 (Ref:3260630) | #218 | |
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 209
|
The "new thing" will have to be low tech. High tech failed on this side of the Atlantic. Not enough factories. For now we'll have: big GT field, plus P2s and DPs. No other options.
|
|
|
10 Jun 2013, 23:43 (Ref:3260680) | #219 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,434
|
I hate to argue (you all know that ) but I feel compelled ...
High-tech didn't fail in North America, it was trampled down, kicked and choked until it collapsed. P1 is beyond what USCR can afford I think, and I have long said so, but Low-Tech? Not if you mean DP-low-tech---that stuff is a non-starter. P2 isn't cutting edge, but as you note, only factories can afford that. But even if you look at the privateer P1 class as described in the draft 2014 regs, these are lighter cars, about the size and tire width of current P2s, with much freer engine regs (so stock-based or GTE motors could work) and no ERS. Nothing there which need drive the cost of competition ridiculously high for privateer teams. Maybe USCR could fold P1 and P2 (future) into a single class as in 2009, 0r before with LMP 900 and 675? But overweight, tube-framed, spec-motor clones? I don't see that succeeding. My hope is, small manufacturers will produce a crop of new P2s and USCR will keep some kind of five-year grandfathering rule, so teams can afford to run them or buy new ones, which will create a stock of older chassis for new teams ... or whatever. No more kit-cars, though. They weren't cheap, weren't fast, and weren't exciting to anyone except the drivers who were getting punted into the walls by them. |
|
|
11 Jun 2013, 01:40 (Ref:3260700) | #220 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 740
|
Another former ALMS fan forum member here.
Just wanted to stop by and say hello. See you on the track! |
||
|
12 Jun 2013, 04:21 (Ref:3261253) | #221 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,664
|
|||
__________________
"Those were the days my friends. We thought they'd never end..." jimclark |
21 Jun 2013, 03:16 (Ref:3265874) | #222 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 550
|
I hadn't logged into almsfans.com in quite a few months after changing jobs back in the spring. I pointed my browser back to the old forum today to catch up on the latest from LM only to find that it the site has been closed.
I am not going to lie, I'm disappointed that it was shut down. Regardless, I've been around 10 Tenths for quite a long time... it's good to be back and active over here once again. Also happy to see Aysedasi still around keeping up shop! |
||
|
4 Oct 2013, 02:23 (Ref:3312587) | #223 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6
|
Hey guys.. I have looked all over but can't seem to find. Any idea where to locate the ALMS scanner frequencies that used to be over at AmericanLeMans fans website??
|
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Castle Combe............closure !! | lescombes | Marshals Forum | 5 | 2 Dec 2007 11:13 |