IMSA Race 2017 12 Hours of Sebring

[Starfish Primer]

Now about the race.

Good

Clean race, good driving standards. Except LMPC in all the classes had close finishes, no fireworks but good competition.
Cadillacs, they are on a different level to the other prototype teams. In reliability, speed and crew work.
Antonio GarcÃ*a last stint was fantastic and gave the number #3 the victory. Corvette racing team again was perfect in the pitstops.
Mercedes AMG GT3 performance, good car.

Neutral

LMPC, nobody noticed they were there for the good and for the bad.
Acura, they have a decent package and good drivers. Now is time to speed up those beautiful NSXs.

Bad

The non Cadillac prototype teams, they need to improve a lot, especially the Mazdas.
BMW in GT3 and GTLM
GT3 Porsches didn´t had their best day.

Additionally, Jordan Taylor´s CV is looking really good. Overall victory in Daytona, Sebring, Grand Am champion, Petit and class win in Le Mans.

[Starfish Primer]

Originally Posted by veeten

If it's the engine that the Chevy/Caddy needs a nemesis, then there is only one...

6.1 L Chrysler/Dodge HEMI V8, Dallara chassis using the 2016/17 Dodge Charger styling cues.

I like it, there are a few brutes to consider too. The BMW 4.4 and Bentley 4.0 twin turbo V8s, the Aston Martin 6 liter V12 and the Mercedes 6.3 V8.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by CyberMotor

Jeff Gordon wins Sebring 12 Hours in a Cadillac and beats the world's Global Cars!

What incredible headlines.

Quite incredible. When'd they move Sebring to Arizona?

[CyberMotor]

I'm working from memory here which I recognize can be dangerous. It seems I remember that between the Roar and the 24 there was an adjustment for a wing on the Caddies. I recall that the original specs had been classified as a 'typo'. After the typo in the specs was "corrected", it seems the Caddies starting kicking butt.

What was this 'typo' and what was its effects?

It seems a typo in BOP can have dramatic effects.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by CyberMotor

I'm working from memory here which I recognize can be dangerous. It seems I remember that between the Roar and the 24 there was an adjustment for a wing on the Caddies. I recall that the original specs had been classified as a 'typo'. After the typo in the specs was "corrected", it seems the Caddies starting kicking butt.

What was this 'typo' and what was its effects?

It seems a typo in BOP can have dramatic effects.

I recall it being something about the minimum wing angle as well. But exactly what and by how much I never saw any information about. I don't think IMSA ever made it public, which I find extremely suspect.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by canamman

10 hrs of rain got tedious but:
You may have missed the closing stages of the 24 then.
P- 1-2 nose to tail
GTLM - 1,2,3 nose to tail
GTD - 1,2,3 (and I think 4) nose to tail

A close finish does not make a good race. No, I didn't miss the 24, watched probably 20 hours of it and definitely all of the last 3 or 4. GTLM is never a point of contention. The P class is, guess you didn't catch that from my post.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

Originally Posted by CyberMotor

I'm working from memory here which I recognize can be dangerous. It seems I remember that between the Roar and the 24 there was an adjustment for a wing on the Caddies. I recall that the original specs had been classified as a 'typo'. After the typo in the specs was "corrected", it seems the Caddies starting kicking butt.

What was this 'typo' and what was its effects?

It seems a typo in BOP can have dramatic effects.

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

I recall it being something about the minimum wing angle as well. But exactly what and by how much I never saw any information about. I don't think IMSA ever made it public, which I find extremely suspect.

I just went back and checked sportscar 365,after the roar there was a bop adjustments to the Cadillacs wing angle to slow them down because they were getting to close to daytona's insurance speed limit.once they got to Daytona I think Imsa slowed them down to much and realized and corrected it.

Cadillacs have been kicking butt from the beginning.Wtr and axr are well sorted and funded teams with good drivers that have had their cars for almost half a year.it will take A pro team of same caliber with a sorted car to go up against them,Am teams with unreliable cars and slow drivers will be no match.

I was reading sportscar365 post race notebook today,and looks like rebellion had three alternator failures before retirement.which also happend to be the issues they had at Daytona.how is that allowed to happen so many Times? Its unacceptable at this level,hopefully it allows rebellion to be unbeatable in wec.

[canamman]

Originally Posted by TF110

A close finish does not make a good race. No, I didn't miss the 24, watched probably 20 hours of it and definitely all of the last 3 or 4. GTLM is never a point of contention. The P class is, guess you didn't catch that from my post.

I was basically commenting on the first sentence of your prior comment.
There is so much eschew with this comment above, I think I'll pass and move on.

[Rcz]

As much as i would love to see it happen, FCA wouldn't allow Dodge hemi engines, they would probale green light Alfa Romeo instead.

I hope Bentley and Mercedes join in soon

[Lagunaseca_4life]

I don't see why not,cadillac nor dodge are direct competition to Alfa.plus what does Alfa has to offer in North America besides a sedan?id imagine if fca wanted to get Alfa involved in racing here in North America, it would more likely look to put the giulia in Conti series or PWC.


Why not Audi or Porsche,Penske and joest are rumored to be looking for manufacturer programs.the relationships are there,also what's to happen to Michael shank after the nsx program is over? Hpd to dpi would be nice,he has the relationship.

[TzeiTzei]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

I recall it being something about the minimum wing angle as well. But exactly what and by how much I never saw any information about. I don't think IMSA ever made it public, which I find extremely suspect.

They're all here: http://competitors.imsa.com/102016/2...ical-bulletins

[Rcz]

Isnt Alfa position in the luxery segment? I know FCA is pushing Alfa to be the next big thing and has been look at some racing programs like DPi cars or Indycars. Dodge target audience is the Nascar crowd.

Audi is might not want to anymore after diesalgate.

Honda and Penske are just rumors for now
Porsche with Joest would be the biggest coup if it ever happed
Ford might come back, after Chip wins everything, maybe rebrand the V6 Ecoboost as a Lincoln lol.

[gustavobamba]

My bet for a new DPI, is... Hyundai.

[knighty]

Originally Posted by Makaze

A 6.2L Chevy engine shouldn't of been allowed.You cannot beat big displacement engines even with BOP because first they do not have to push the engine hard to perform and if you take away some top HP,it still makes a ton of torque.

The Max Liter of that engine should of been only 5.0 or IMSA should of made them stick with the 3.6L V6tt.

I bet that IMSA will outlaw the 6.2L V8 next year.

I dont want to take anything away from Dallara-Caddillac, they started 2 years ago and and rightfully reaping the rewards, ESM and Mazda are shambolic in comparison. But the fact is it was hardly a race and not very entertaining, hence BOP is required.

For sure IMSA are now realizing the FUBAR scenario they have put themselves in by allowing such a big displacement engine (6.2L) compete with a standard engine (Gibson V8) which has approx 50% less capacity.......banning the 6.2L V8 is out of the question for me , IMSA just need to chip away at reeling it in with BOP, the options are:

1) Additional weight
2) Smaller restrictions
3) Torque sensors on the axles
4) fuel flow restrictions
5) RPM limit.

I'm not a fan of 2) smaller restrictors as this will not limit the low down torque......I feel supported by yesterdays result.........I originally favored the 5) rpm limit, but in hindsight I think the 3) torque limit versus axle speed, via axle based torque sensors will do the job, I believe this is already done in some forms of GT racing......it would be a low-cost fix and avoid a political and public bomb-shell from IMSA which would risk losing a valuable manufacturer........crucially IMSA need to agree an axle torque curve limit from low speed to high speed........not just a peak torque limit, as this would subsequently limit the low-down torque characteristic which the 6.2L has in abundance. Cadillac could just fix the issue with engine mapping.

[canaglia]

you can add ballast, you can cut power, but you can't cut Nm from the engine!

anyway during first stint caddys weren't fast enough to catch neel jani on oreca/gibson... guess that if gibson engine will improve reliability, it would be a balanced competition afterall.

The real deal should be the entry of ford and/or HPD with their turbo V6

[jimclark]

Aaaahhhh...BoP, Shmee-o-pee. (Boogity, boogity, boogity. Let's race IROC boys!)

'Don't have to worry about equality of cars; just put x amount of numbered balls in a hat and the number you draw is your finishing position.

Just think of it...same luck and you don't have to spend all that money on building and non-developing a silly racing car. Good for green, more land for shopping centers, condos, whatever. More contests can be conducted per hour.

A win-win-win.

No wonder Roger has his reservations...he desires to prove who's best but your penalized if you do. Wonderful auto racing allright....

[knighty]

Originally Posted by canaglia

you can add ballast, you can cut power, but you can't cut Nm from the engine!

anyway during first stint caddys weren't fast enough to catch neel jani on oreca/gibson... guess that if gibson engine will improve reliability, it would be a balanced competition afterall.

The real deal should be the entry of ford and/or HPD with their turbo V6

you are quite obviously out of your depth on this conversation.......this quite easily done on the dyno or in the vehicle via ECU mapping, principally via ignition and fuel cutting techniques........in the vehicle the torque sensor on the axle would just cut down the spark and fuelling in order to limit the engines torque at a given rpm.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by knighty

you are quite obviously out of your depth on this conversation.......this quite easily done on the dyno or in the vehicle via ECU mapping, principally via ignition and fuel cutting techniques........in the vehicle the torque sensor on the axle would just cut down the spark and fuelling in order to limit the engines torque at a given rpm.

I'm not out of my depth. I repeat, 'may as well go IROC. At least that way, you're all running closer (<key word) vehicles and the luck of the car you draw each race.
Manufacturers that pay a fee can slap some stickers on "their" cars so they look like their brand.

In BoP racing the best still find ways of improving their vehicles (as they should), only to be "BoPed". The racing is not controlled by the efforts of the entrants, it is controlled by those that do the "balancing".

[RWill2073]

I feel like people are just forgetting what they saw at the start of the race. Rebellion led, the caddys weren't getting by him easily, and right behind the caddys the Nissan were lingering close by. The top 8 or so were hanging close until reliability bit them. That looks about right to me. Caddy is the most reliable. Yes, the fastest too. So what? The others showed they could compete. Pressure the caddy guys and maybe a mistake will be made. Stop screwing up every pit stop or blowing engines or having boost problems or putting amateur drivers in. You know, develop......

Limiting torque sounds like an incredibidly bad idea. Even with bop, you don't want exactly the same performance characteristics. Let caddy have a torque advantage but let turbos have a top speed advantage or something if you must. But it the big 6.2 liter torquey v8 can't have a torque advantage that it is built to have then we might as well run spec p2 engines. It's not imsas or caddys fault that the other teams and engines aren't reliable enough.

I just can't see how anyone who saw the racing in the first hour or so before they started dropping like flies could possibly think more "balancing" should be done. A professional team with a professional driver was leading. A lesser professional team with professional drivers were right behind the caddy. It was pretty Damn even.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by RWill2073

I feel like people are just forgetting what they saw at the start of the race. Rebellion led, the caddys weren't getting by him easily, and right behind the caddys the Nissan were lingering close by. The top 8 or so were hanging close until reliability bit them. That looks about right to me. Caddy is the most reliable. Yes, the fastest too. So what? The others showed they could compete. Pressure the caddy guys and maybe a mistake will be made. Stop screwing up every pit stop or blowing engines or having boost problems or putting amateur drivers in. You know, develop......

Limiting torque sounds like an incredibidly bad idea. Even with bop, you don't want exactly the same performance characteristics. Let caddy have a torque advantage but let turbos have a top speed advantage or something if you must. But it the big 6.2 liter torquey v8 can't have a torque advantage that it is built to have then we might as well run spec p2 engines. It's not imsas or caddys fault that the other teams and engines aren't reliable enough.

I just can't see how anyone who saw the racing in the first hour or so before they started dropping like flies could possibly think more "balancing" should be done. A professional team with a professional driver was leading. A lesser professional team with professional drivers were right behind the caddy. It was pretty Damn even.

Hell, even the JDC Banana Boat passed one of the Cadillacs into 17 around the outside.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

All the DPis are incredibly cool and great to see in person. The Gibson motors sound terrific, the ESMs have a terrific backfire when up shifting that rattles off the Chateau and the Caddys are so much quicker and more controlled than the others out of the hairpin. They sound good too.

Throw in the GT categories and each session having little to no break between cars coming by, I'll let y'all "dicuss" BoP in every thread and a race thread. This is as good as it's been in quite sometime.

Damned optimist. leave here and go where you are welcome.

I agree that the BoP was actually Right for this race. The Cadillacs were the better cars and they showed it. And yes, the torque advantage couldn't be overcome ... but every team made its choices, and had to perfect what they chose.

Cadillac did the most testing, did the best development, and possibly picked the best of all options for power plants ... no reason to punish them.

As for the race.... I thought it was excellent. The cars look good, they sound good, they race well, and from trackside are as good as anything I have seen except maybe Sebring and Petit when Peugeot and Audi were involved.

I am sorry for everyone who didn't enjoy Sebring this your ... but I admire your work ethic. it must have taken great dedication to keep hating after 12 great hours of action.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by RWill2073

I feel like people are just forgetting what they saw at the start of the race. Rebellion led, the caddys weren't getting by him easily, and right behind the caddys the Nissan were lingering close by. The top 8 or so were hanging close until reliability bit them. That looks about right to me. Caddy is the most reliable. Yes, the fastest too. So what? The others showed they could compete. Pressure the caddy guys and maybe a mistake will be made. Stop screwing up every pit stop or blowing engines or having boost problems or putting amateur drivers in. You know, develop......

Limiting torque sounds like an incredibidly bad idea. Even with bop, you don't want exactly the same performance characteristics. Let caddy have a torque advantage but let turbos have a top speed advantage or something if you must. But it the big 6.2 liter torquey v8 can't have a torque advantage that it is built to have then we might as well run spec p2 engines. It's not imsas or caddys fault that the other teams and engines aren't reliable enough.

I just can't see how anyone who saw the racing in the first hour or so before they started dropping like flies could possibly think more "balancing" should be done. A professional team with a professional driver was leading. A lesser professional team with professional drivers were right behind the caddy. It was pretty Damn even.

Not a bad race at all. Neither was Le Mans last year. 'Lead change in the last 5 minutes of a 24 hour race? Not bad. They can't all be '69 Le Mans' and that's part of the anticipation of endurance racing. But, what do I know? I'm out of my "depth".

Bring on the BoPs and let striving to achieve and be the best remain a place in history.

[Damian Baldi]

I was one of those arguing about the BoP at Daytona, but for this race I think the BoP was ok. If there was an advantage for the Cadillcas it was a well deserved one and not an ocean of advantage as we saw at Daytona.

However, I don't see the point about discussing BoP until the non Cadillac cars will be able to run for more than two hours without breakdown. The level of malfunctions makes the teams looks like amateurs. They have to address that serious problem of electronics soon. By the other side Gibson have to revise the starter issues.

[RWill2073]

Originally Posted by Damian Baldi

I was one of those arguing about the BoP at Daytona, but for this race I think the BoP was ok. If there was an advantage for the Cadillcas it was a well deserved one and not an ocean of advantage as we saw at Daytona.

However, I don't see the point about discussing BoP until the non Cadillac cars will be able to run for more than two hours without breakdown. The level of malfunctions makes the teams looks like amateurs. They have to address that serious problem of electronics soon.

To me your second paragraph made any complaining about Daytona bop moot. Its a lack of development that is the reason these cars aren't lasting. Its the same lack of development in relation to the caddys that is why they were so off at Daytona.

I mean, I get it, we have to bop I guess. But what we had at Sebring is just about right. It just so happens the fastest car is the most reliable this time, rather than intersport or Dyson scooting off at the start just to blow up. Its what makes Mazda so comical. They detune it and run a slower pace to last till the halfway point lol. If you're gonna blow, at least tune it up and lead early and go out in a blaze of glory lol.

[RWill2073]

Originally Posted by Matt

Hell, even the JDC Banana Boat passed one of the Cadillacs into 17 around the outside.

Something about that yellow livery looks beautiful. It looks simultaneously classic and modern or something. I was enjoying it competing. I hope it can some more, at least until a pay driver drops them out of contention. (they do have one, don't they?)