2010 Le Mans Intercontinental Cup

[HORNDAWG]

I do not see GTC being opened up to All or most Marques from GT-3. I think we will see selective inclusion in the short term, while charting GTs short term future before any more are allowed in.






L.P.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by Purist

DJ, which stock block did Ford want? i can tell you that nobody would be impressed or turned on by the gloried hairdryer sound of a mere touring car engine, which is precisely what the GRE is. And a big V8 just makes Indy Cars sound more like NASCAR machines, which diminishes their identity, and didn't work to save the IRL in its original form. People have a series with those V8s, so why would they want or need to watch another just to get the same thing all over again?

Hmm, am I still in the "Sportscar and GT" forum? I'd almost forgotten.

I'm sure Ford would like something it could attach its EcoBoost branding on. So I would believe a Twin Turbo V6 much like what HPD is doing for LMP2.

It could be destroked and sleeved down to the 2.4L limit (3.5L currently)

I'm sure that's why they want a bespoke or specialized engine to keep that familiar "shriek" most fans like. At least that's what they are hoping for.

But is risking the health of the series worth that?

I think fans were ready to give up the sound track, since so many were excited about the addition of new engine suppliers and 4 cylinder turbo engines.

Done right it would sound no worst than the old turbo era F1 cars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-KtVqcuyN4

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by Purist

Well, if you did go with the Trofeo sort of route with GTC going forward, hopefully you could also have the Maserati GranTurismo race cars included as eligible alongside the Gallardos, F430s, 911s, and whatnot.

How much would it cost to convert those Cup/Single Make series cars to GTC spec? Also if more Viper Club Racers wanted to run a Professional series the cars are legal for WC. I don't think we would get many Vipers anyway. You would also have to built a series of "one-off" Gallardos for GTC, not sure if that's economically viable for Reiter.

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

I do not see GTC being opened up to All or most Marques from GT-3. I think we will see selective inclusion in the short term, while charting GTs short term future before any more are allowed in.

Why not? Look up all the prices, the only unknown is the Benz SLS GT3, which is rumored to hit the shelf at $500,000US. All the other currently available cars are $350K-370K at current exchange rates.

As I said sell you're current car (legal for Patron GT3, SCCA World Challenge, Grand Am GT and Porsche Club Events) and buy one of the new GT3 cars for about what a new Cup car would run ($193K). This is assuming you buy a new car every 1-2 years.

Keeping all your same kit (Pit Box, Transporter, etc) and just moving up to GT(2) would cost another $150,000US on top of what a GT3 cost.

Plus if you use the FIA Driver Rating System, you can't have two Gold rated drivers in the car, you can only have any other combination with two Silver rated drivers much like Graf, Callaway, Chad Racing and Need For Speed have and you see what happens.

You could keep the amateur/young professional/semi-retired professional dynamic currently in the European GT3 series and forget adding a separate Gentlemen's Championship in GT(2).

Sounds like a win-win to me and I know your a competitor L.P and not one of the more affluent ones, so I understand your position but all the people in GTC and Patron GT3 come from small business or wealthy families its just not that expensive to them in the grand scheme of things.








L.P.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by dj4monie

Why not?

Pragmatism and stability!





L.P.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Pragmatism and stability!





L.P.

Keeping the structure the same is stability.

Being Pragmatic is being selective about what changes you make.

Do you really think there would be a collective groan from the paddock if after one year of GTC, we would move to GT3 cars instead of a Cup cars? Are you saying the majority of the teams running GTC are Porsche Fanatics?

Besides GMG who's shop is across the street from Porsche Motorsport NA in Orange County California, (and has run 911's in WC previously and in Time Attack) 911 Werks and some other team with Porsche or 911 in its title, I think most would be happy to change if given the chance.

Most people run Patron GT3 because its a semi-affordable way to go racing with a reliable, almost bullet-proof car. IMSA changed some things around to allow GT3 teams to go Endurance Racing (I'm sure there was just some polling of teams in the main series and GT3). One of Hindy's first questions about GTC was if other cars were allowed. Mr. Atherton said, let's go with Cup cars first and then we'll evaluate, but the intention is to make it a permanent fixture. I don't think he meant "permanently Porsche Cup cars".

During the RML broadcast from this year's 2010 Le Mans race, Atherton was again questioned on if GT3 cars would be allowed in GTC. He said that it was likely and they would announce something soon.

This is not being taken lightly and I'm sure there will be a vote, poll or some sort of meeting.

The series needs to make bold moves and frankly I don't think moving to GT3's and leaving the Cup cars in the Patron Cup is that risky. It also avoids the Gentlemen's GT Championship which I think is a bad idea, all you have to do is look at the European reaction too it when Ratel announced basically the same thing.

[Speed-King]

I know most of the amateurs (like Henri) likely own their cars in GTC currently. If you got what, $170,000 (TRG is selling its 2009 Cup for $169,000) for a refreshed Cup car and bought a new Cup-R which at current exchange is $360,000, you would only be spending about half that to upgrade. Audi R8 LMS is $385,000US. In fact since the value of the Euro is down ($1.29E vs $1.00US) NOW would be the time to announce your plans and put in your order.

I don't think it cost that much to actually move up to GT3.

TRG is trying to sell that car since Daytona

And if more of those cars get thrown into the market, prices will deteriorate further. We just can't assume that every current GTC-owner would be able to sell their cars for that price.

And then, a huge part of why GT3 has become so expensive over here is not outright buying price for these cars but the costs to keep them going. The Scuderia 430 has the same maintenance cycles and similar rebuilt costs as the GTC/E.

The problem is, that GT3 is really not far behind GT2 in terms of costs and do they really need two GT2-classes?

The number that's out there for a complete Grand Am season with a Cup-Porsche is somewhere around 1.5 million $ (and that includes the 24hours), and I think we can assume that GTC is somewhere in the same bal park, perhaps even a little cheaper (less races, less track time) whereas a full season GT2 campaign in ALMS costs about a million more. If I am correct and GT3 is closer to GT2 than to GTC, that's an additional million $ owners and drivers have to come up with...

Adding Ferrari Challenge Cars could be useful. In other words take cars normally in single make series and add them to GTC.

The funny thing is that this is what GT3 was originally intended to be back in 2006. The SRO's cardinal sin was to let the Cup-Porsche fall behind in the first place. IMSA actually has a chance here to do the right thing where Ratel failed.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by dj4monie

Keeping the structure the same is stability.

Being Pragmatic is being selective about what changes you make.

Do you really think there would be a collective groan from the paddock if after one year of GTC, we would move to GT3 cars instead of a Cup cars? Are you saying the majority of the teams running GTC are Porsche Fanatics?

Besides GMG who's shop is across the street from Porsche Motorsport NA in Orange County California, (and has run 911's in WC previously and in Time Attack) 911 Werks and some other team with Porsche or 911 in its title, I think most would be happy to change if given the chance.

Most people run Patron GT3 because its a semi-affordable way to go racing with a reliable, almost bullet-proof car. IMSA changed some things around to allow GT3 teams to go Endurance Racing (I'm sure there was just some polling of teams in the main series and GT3). One of Hindy's first questions about GTC was if other cars were allowed. Mr. Atherton said, let's go with Cup cars first and then we'll evaluate, but the intention is to make it a permanent fixture. I don't think he meant "permanently Porsche Cup cars".

During the RML broadcast from this year's 2010 Le Mans race, Atherton was again questioned on if GT3 cars would be allowed in GTC. He said that it was likely and they would announce something soon.

This is not being taken lightly and I'm sure there will be a vote, poll or some sort of meeting.

The series needs to make bold moves and frankly I don't think moving to GT3's and leaving the Cup cars in the Patron Cup and avoiding the Gentlemen's GT Championship which I think is a bad idea, all you have to do is look at the European reaction too it when Ratel announced basically the same thing.

Huh? What?
The GTC experiment is a 3yr deal,at least. The ACO have announced thier idea for GTE. The last thing needed at the moment, IMO, is bold, sweeping, reactionary, or any other major changes, where GT is concerned!!! As to LMP and LMPC/P-2, I think the ALMS is ahead of the curve with concern to the ACO. With several mfg now in the mix for producing the new ACO cost capped P-2 it looks as if we have gotten past all the nay saying on that subject as well!




L.P.

[6157]

Originally Posted by JHamilton

This isn't the first time IMSA has done this. Was "Sparky" classified? The MC-12 wasn't (sort of). What about the Corsa hybrid? Or Dysons butynol car? I'm glad I got to see all of these experiments I otherwise wouldn't have had it been purely up to the ACO.

And they were all wrong in those instances as well. There's no excuse to let a car, that does not conform to the rulebook, run in an official event. Well unless you have waivers.

Originally Posted by dj4monie

Massive overtaking? Hardly, these dyno's run 24/7 over at Hendrick and Yates. F1 can make a change, DONE next season, even in a few races. Stop and don't make excuses for people with money.

So you're going to compare a series where each team has more than 30 engines per team at their disposal and a budget, while still big, does not even begin to touch a Formula 1 team's budget and all Formula 1 teams probably use more than half of the number of engines Sprint Cup teams do in a season?

Okay, this discussion is over. So much for intelligent debate.

Formula 1 is a completely different scale from equipment numbers to budget numbers and it's not even logical to compare the two.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Huh? What?
The GTC experiment is a 3yr deal,at least.

As is LMPC

As to LMP and LMPC/P-2, I think the ALMS is ahead of the curve with concern to the ACO. With several mfg now in the mix for producing the new ACO cost capped P-2 it looks as if we have gotten past all the nay saying on that subject as well!

The problem will be integrating LMPC into LMP2(new) while keeping everyone happy. Braselton has guaranteed the LMPC teams three years of elegibility and that most likely implied actually being competitive during those three years. So if they want to merge LMPC, which is outside the new LMP2 rules, into LMP2 (new) they set themselves up for two years of complaining and whining and rules instability.
Of course they could simply run three prototype classes, but I don't think that's really the answer they are looking for.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Huh? What?
The GTC experiment is a 3yr deal,at least. The ACO have announced thier idea for GTE. The last thing needed at the moment, IMO, is bold, sweeping, reactionary, or any other major changes, where GT is concerned!!! As to LMP and LMPC/P-2, I think the ALMS is ahead of the curve with concern to the ACO. With several mfg now in the mix for producing the new ACO cost capped P-2 it looks as if we have gotten past all the nay saying on that subject as well!




L.P.

Keeping Porsche Cup cars for 3 years?

What's reactionary in what I said? I said the professional teams reacted bad to what Ratel was going to do, which is what the ACO just did, force gentlemen drivers into GT cars. Again dumbing down GT to allow gentlemen not so fast to be semi-competitive.

Are you saying you want Jean Todt to return to the wheel?

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

As is LMPC



The problem will be integrating LMPC into LMP2(new) while keeping everyone happy. Braselton has guaranteed the LMPC teams three years of elegibility and that most likely implied actually being competitive during those three years. So if they want to merge LMPC, which is outside the new LMP2 rules, into LMP2 (new) they set themselves up for two years of complaining and whining and rules instability.
Of course they could simply run three prototype classes, but I don't think that's really the answer they are looking for.

I agree that there will be work to do. But, using the current LMP as an example, the ALMS has seemed to have done a good job of integrating 2 classes into 1. So.....





L.P.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by dj4monie

Keeping Porsche Cup cars for 3 years? YES

What's reactionary in what I said? I said the professional teams reacted bad to what Ratel was going to do, which is what the ACO just did, force gentlemen drivers into GT cars. Again dumbing down GT to allow gentlemen not so fast to be semi-competitive.

Are you saying you want Jean Todt to return to the wheel?

Are we or are we not talking about GTC??

As to the ACO forcing gentleman drivers into GTE, where the frack were they racing before? Oh, thats right, GT-2! GTE-Pro and Am is no different than a GT-1/GT-2 scenario.





L.P.

[JAG]

Autosport report there are plans to ditch factory teams from non ILMC counting LMS rounds.

Peter also wants teams to commit to a full season to avoid the Algarve situation.

There appears to be wide ranging support for the former idea at least.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by 6157

And they were all wrong in those instances as well. There's no excuse to let a car, that does not conform to the rulebook, run in an official event. Well unless you have waivers.


So you're going to compare a series where each team has more than 30 engines per team at their disposal and a budget, while still big, does not even begin to touch a Formula 1 team's budget and all Formula 1 teams probably use more than half of the number of engines Sprint Cup teams do in a season?

Okay, this discussion is over. So much for intelligent debate.

Formula 1 is a completely different scale from equipment numbers to budget numbers and it's not even logical to compare the two.

Are you calling me stupid?

Not logical?

Seems to me F1 is expensive for many more reasons than just being.

Engine Operations in Cup is largely provided by a few outlets. NASCAR let's teams get away with having 30 different engines per team, does Robby Gordon have this?

Why is that, when everybody else has proven they can run thousands of miles on a racing engine before it gets a rebuild?

What happens is Ford, Dodge, Toyota and GM are constantly re-engineering a 50 year old design (and spending millions), looking for the tiny of the tiny advantage.

So go the spoils of a purely "Spec Series".

Just one of many issues in Sprint Cup, its ridiculously expensive and for sure not for building one car or fewer cars (which was the intention of the COT) is the cause of the constant escalation of cost.

Roush/Yates' Doug Yates was on Wind Tunnel and expressed that they were doing F.I testing. He didn't say for which series in NASCAR, he just said they were deep into the testing phase.

NASCAR could have made the move to F.I roughly 5-10 years ago.

It could have stop dusting off a Ford engine design from the mid 60's, a GM design from the late 50's and asking Dodge and Toyota to spend millions of dollars to build engines they had long since abandoned or never made in the first place.

And NASCAR was concerned about the Cubic Dollars (as witnessed by the Toyota F1 program) Toyota was willing to spend on NASCAR? (All about being the Japanese version of General Motors, see Peter De Lorenzo's Book) they should have voiced that much concern over Chrysler who was less likely to be able to afford it.

So while you say the intelligences has left the room, I would argue that it hasn't that NASCAR has some serious problems, but as long as the sponsorship dollars keep rolling in, they put their heads in the sand (or arse).

[chernaudi]

If that's the case, it seems that the ACO is willing to sacrifice the LMS in favor of the ILMC.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by JAG

Autosport report there are plans to ditch factory teams from non ILMC counting LMS rounds.

Peter also wants teams to commit to a full season to avoid the Algarve situation.

There appears to be wide ranging support for the former idea at least.

Incentives!

I would agree with the last point as well, OEM's shouldn't allowed to Cherry Pick.

This is where the GRE can be embraced. Lola produces a solid car, with some strategy, solid drivers and luck can win races. As long as the power plant is reliable, powerful and affordable.

This is not Judd, Zytek or AER going forward. Private teams should be allowed to run at that reduced weight as well (775kg vs 900kg).

ACO/LMS can do more. Like putting it on TV or the Internet, instead of these 30 mins at the start and an hour at the finish.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

If that's the case, it seems that the ACO is willing to sacrifice the LMS in favor of the ILMC.

I was wondering if an LMS would survive an Intercontinental Cup. If they can make the correct calls, they'll be just fine.

Where are all these OEM's going to go? Formula One?

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Are we or are we not talking about GTC??

As to the ACO forcing gentleman drivers into GTE, where the frack were they racing before? Oh, thats right, GT-2! GTE-Pro and Am is no different than a GT-1/GT-2 scenario.

L.P.

This is either the U.S Open or the Pebble Beach Pro-Am, which one do you want?

And please spare me the "Gentlemen Drivers and Teams" are the lifeblood of the sport. No it ain't they can always drive in Porsche Club, BMW Club and Viper Club events. There is also Patron GT3, Ferrari Challenge, Grand Am Cup, even World Challenge, even Grand Am if you must.

The plan is to put one Pro (Gold) and one Bronze (limited experience/gentlemen) rated driver in cars one or two evolutions from the current offerings. This not GT1/GT2, the cars are just faster because they have a bit more aero, a bit more power and better drivers.

GT2 became popular because GT1 became so expensive and nobody did anything until it was too late.

[HORNDAWG]

Well, I can see we will have to agree to disagree on many subjects!!







L.P.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

TRG is trying to sell that car since Daytona

And if more of those cars get thrown into the market, prices will deteriorate further. We just can't assume that every current GTC-owner would be able to sell their cars for that price.

And then, a huge part of why GT3 has become so expensive over here is not outright buying price for these cars but the costs to keep them going. The Scuderia 430 has the same maintenance cycles and similar rebuilt costs as the GTC/E.

The problem is, that GT3 is really not far behind GT2 in terms of costs and do they really need two GT2-classes?

The number that's out there for a complete Grand Am season with a Cup-Porsche is somewhere around 1.5 million $ (and that includes the 24hours), and I think we can assume that GTC is somewhere in the same bal park, perhaps even a little cheaper (less races, less track time) whereas a full season GT2 campaign in ALMS costs about a million more. If I am correct and GT3 is closer to GT2 than to GTC, that's an additional million $ owners and drivers have to come up with...



The funny thing is that this is what GT3 was originally intended to be back in 2006. The SRO's cardinal sin was to let the Cup-Porsche fall behind in the first place. IMSA actually has a chance here to do the right thing where Ratel failed.

You bring up excellent points and I largely agree that Ratel mis-calculated a bit. They just didn't let the Cup car fall behind, they let everybody else move the goal post forward.

I would also agree that GT3 is dangerously too close in cost GT2 in price. So it doesn't make sense that ACO bans Anti-Lock Brakes in GT2, yet its legal in GT3.

GT3 got expensive because the cars grew wings, splitters and diffusers. Meaning time needed to be spent in the wind tunnel, something smaller tuner operations like Alpina have a hard time battling against. But as I said with GT3 you're largely getting a pre-engineered race car built off "body in white" pulled from the production line.

This is something Porsche is masters at and I am not sure why it took so long for others to notice this.

But what's preventing from having deja-vu, all over again?

GT1 became the premiere class, GT2 became the "GT" class. (BPR, first FIA GT Championship) I forgot who was the B, but P was for Peter and R was for Ratel.

They couldn't reel in the OEM's (specifically Benz) so it fell flat on its face.

Ratel started over (like Noah) with GT2 and something below that, N-GT.

GT2 then morphed into what was GT1 and N-GT morphed GT2 currently.

ACO boots out GT1 because Ratel has started his own "World Championship", but succeeds in reducing cost.

Why not increase the technology again in GT2 and add GT3 cars?

I think I know why. It ain't about cost, its about EGO. Since GT3 wasn't an ACO creation, they don't like the idea. Since reducing cost in GT1 wasn't there idea either, they don't allow that. Poor Sports?

ACO also didn't come up with the idea of a separate series under their control, that was some American's idea.

The ACO can not be put into the same position that Tony George was put in because he held the biggest carrot (Indy 500), look what happen.

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Well, I can see we will have to agree to disagree on many subjects!!

L.P.

Like? we gave historically agreed on much more than we disagree. Are you saying your perfectly happy with a Pro Am series? I thought that was the Grand Am intention and that worked out well didn't?

[Speed-King]

I forgot who was the B, but P was for Peter and R was for Ratel.

Jürgen Barth. He's now the organizer of the ADAC GT-Masters series here in Germany.

But what's preventing from having deja-vu, all over again?

You probably can't prevent it, it's just the way things go.
BUT: you can delay it, and that's why I think it would be better to start two rungs below current GT3 (i.e. proper one make series cars), as this would give the class another five years or so to live before the inevitable occurs.

And then, GTC must now be groomed into something that can replace GT2 when it's time for that one to die. And when it replaces GT2 it better be not just for two years or so, but for at least half a decade - which again speaks against using full blown GT3 as that one is headed for oblivion at about the same speed as GT2, only with a little delay of two or so years.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by dj4monie

Like? we gave historically agreed on much more than we disagree. Are you saying your perfectly happy with a Pro Am series? I thought that was the Grand Am intention and that worked out well didn't?

Just some food for thought: 1970s and first half of the 80s IMSA GT was pro-am as well... actually more like Pro-Am at the top and Am-Am down the order...

[JAG]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

If that's the case, it seems that the ACO is willing to sacrifice the LMS in favor of the ILMC.

Ultimately I see three or more LMS rounds counting for the ILMC.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by dj4monie

Like? we gave historically agreed on much more than we disagree. Are you saying your perfectly happy with a Pro Am series? I thought that was the Grand Am intention and that worked out well didn't?

The only restriction is in the AM class, not in the Pro class! You can still have gentelmam drivers in the pro class!

The GT Endurance category will be for one type of car but divided into two classes from 2011:
GT Endurance PRO: a professional category, cars and drivers free.
GT Endurance AM: cars over one year old and with a minimum of two drivers classified in the bronze or silver categories (defined under LM P2 LMS 2010 regulations).

This (AM) is no different than the GT-3 you described back when, per se. And Pro is GT-2. The only difference is that it is called GTE Pro and AM, with the caveat of no full pros in AM!



L.P.