Which upcoming P2 prospect sucks LESS?

[Deleted]

[DistortedSmile]

IMSA P2 is slightly better but has less going for it, as a headline category I doubt they'll make me interested in TUSCC again, aside from possible future all GT races, I may watch part of a race if I happen to catch it on TV much like I currently do.
Atleast P2 will be an afterthought in WEC.

[pirenzo]

They're both pretty dire aren't they, but IMSA edges it.

The only parts of either class which don't concern me particularly are IMSA's spec tire and ACO's Pro-Am driver stipulation. These are both justified moves IMO given the position the categories hold in their respective championships.

The spec engine doesn't bother me too much either but it would be much better if it were periodically opened to tender and allowed a manufacturer name to provide engines and effectively sponsor the category for say three years.

The four chassis manufacturers really sucks though. I can't quite believe this is happening. I appreciate the supplier needs to make money, but who's going to buy into it if the whole competition is devalued as a result? And who really believes the best suppliers for the job will be chosen anyway?

[Deleted]

It's gonna be painful to judge the performances of P2s in the States, because you have the underlying chassis of 4 that's gonna get the NASCAR bodywork on top, with engine X, and probably other snippets too, and then IMSA will performance balance the whole thing against other variations in the wind tunnel. Then they will bop them further and further in season with RPM and boost and restrictors and weight and wings and and. So you have no idea how the cars actually perform. OEMs will also rebrand them "Chevrolet Corvette P2s" and such and only the diehard nerds will know who's actually running what under the fake titles, just like in DP. And they cannot even run the thing outside North America without tearing everything apart (unless in vanilla ACO spec), for the first time since ALMS was invented. It's backwards engineering!

While the ACO version is made of same material Dr Sattler digged her hands in 22 years ago, at least you do honestly know from the race results that it's the Oreca or whoemever that's the best chassis out of the pitiful four $$$ chosen ones.

Also I like open tires. Because there's now like five series in the world without mandated spec tire crap, and this camp is up there.

So I will choose ACO. But it still sucks.

[J Jay]

Which is best - a turd sandwich or some faeces mixed into a cup of tea...

I thought I'd pick ACO for the tyre options, but honestly at this point I am losing interest so yeah, IMSA P2. Full pro lineups. Woohoo.

[Deleted]

Had I added option 'kill both with fire' everybody likely would have gone there

[TzeiTzei]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Had I added option 'kill both with fire' everybody likely would have gone there

Probably

Right now neither class excites me much.

[tux]

At least with the IMSA P2 rules you get some sort of variety.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Had I added option 'kill both with fire' everybody likely would have gone there

About where I fall. One overly spec formula, vs. one BoP'd to death formula.

Meh.... I think I have a greater distaste for overly managed "racing/entertainment", where the sanction has a greater say in who wins, than the teams/drivers.

[Badlands99]

Still cannot get my head around why they are trying to fix something that essentially isn't broken?

One of the reasons that I have got back into sports car racing over the last couple of years is the diversity of the technology and cars. I really don't want to see fifteen pretty much identical cars racing each other - F1 gives you that now. I would rather have ten cars with different solutions to the issue presented and lets see which one works the best.

I understand the implications of spiralling costs but there has to be a better way of policing the whole thing than saying that you have to pick one chassis from four and, by the way, you have to use the engine that we give you and you can't modify anything and you can't improve the package if you do happen to find something different that might work!

The best racing comes from producing a set of rules and then saying to people who want to race 'these are the parameters, now it's your job to go out and buy or design, build and then race your chosen ideas and may the best man win!

As has been shown many times over the last three decades, too much meddling from rule makers and people who have vested interests in things other than the sport, always manage to ruin any series. You only have to look at the history of endurance racing & F1 to see just how many times it is possible to f*** it up - fortunately the best teams and racers usually resurface somewhere - lets hope that at some point someone sees sense and rescues LMP2 before it implodes.

[joeb]

Both options leave something to be desired in a major way. If IMSA would have actually allowed for manufacturers to engineer a better car, I would have to choose IMSA.

But for me now I think I'll pick wec and not because of the cars but because of the rules while the cars are on track. Penalties, pit procedures, and the rest of the on track product make wec more appealing to watch muted p2's in.

[bckf]

As someone who doesn't hate DP much, I find the IMSA P2 rules a good replacement for DP. I mean, "DP built on modern P2 chassis" doesn't sound that bad, especially if these rules will be met with enthusiasm by manufacturers.
I'd kinda like a "Corvette P2" with the usual Chevrolet V8 engine.
If they manage to make it work, it will probably be more fun than the all spec ACO P2, even with heavy BOP. But it might just be me, as I tend to value variety a lot.
The 4 chassis manufacturer limit still is the biggest issue with these new rules, and it affects both P2 flavors.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by joeb

Both options leave something to be desired in a major way. If IMSA would have actually allowed for manufacturers to engineer a better car, I would have to choose IMSA.

But for me now I think I'll pick wec and not because of the cars but because of the rules while the cars are on track. Penalties, pit procedures, and the rest of the on track product make wec more appealing to watch muted p2's in.

Good and sensible view.

Same with Fogel

[Pontlieue]

I went for IMSA, as they don't have a spec engine.

The whole new P2 regulations saga is an utter farce. Not only has the idea of a global P2 car been ditched, with IMSA and ACO going increasingly seperate ways with their planned regs, but also, they seem to have managed the worst parts of the DP and the current LMP2 for the next generation of second-level prototypes.

Also, I honestly have no idea who benefits from the new regulations. OAK and Oreca already have huge shares in the P2 market, so I don't think they'll sell significantly more cars. The smaller manufacturers have to fear being forced out by the selection process. The fans lose variety. The teams lose the option to build their own car.

Really, the only benefit of these regulations could be a boost to privateer, non-hybrid LMP1 numbers.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by Badlands99

Still cannot get my head around why they are trying to fix something that essentially isn't broken?

The rationale has been while everything looks good now it isn't sustainable for the constructors to sell just 1-2 cars. I'd just like to know how much lobbying there has been about this from the couple of bigger constructors that almost certainly are going to be among the selected 4.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by bckf

The 4 chassis manufacturer limit still is the biggest issue with these new rules, and it affects both P2 flavors.

Just how many different DP chassis are on the IMSA/TUSC grid? How many are currently on the IMSA/GA/TUSC authorized constructors list (yes there is one of those, and yes it is limited)?






L.P.

[Deleted]

What has that have to do with anything? NASCAR wanting to limit DPs to Coyote-Dallara-Riley with optional fake bodywork on top hasn't affected LMP2 before.

If they were still running current LMP2 rules by then, there could have been infinite number of potential P2 chassis makers, just like now.

But now there's going to be just the four globally.

[FLGTFAN]

When was the last time a new DP was built?

[ModelT]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

About where I fall. One overly spec formula, vs. one BoP'd to death formula.

Meh.... I think I have a greater distaste for overly managed "racing/entertainment", where the sanction has a greater say in who wins, than the teams/drivers.

This the Nascar business model and you cant say it hasn't made the Frances extremely rich! It does SUCK though, along the same lines of the WWW. wrestling. I often wonder how much the drivers know/understand/accept of the Nascar way of rigging races to sponsor A's benefit, sponsor B gets his turn next race?

If one wanted to step back at a distance at look very hard at America, one could almost think most people do believe what they see from Hollywood is real, even believe they voted in the President.........oh, and the easter bunny & santa claus

[MagVanisher]

I was going to vote for IMSA P2, but the constant balancing and having spec tires turned me off.

Also, what's the point of having Balance of Performance when IMSA will rig that class in favor of a Chevrolet win? Honestly, if the TUSC wanted balance on their prototype class, why not do it ala Blancpain GT Series level of balancing!

[CyberMotor]

I had made up my mind that I could tolerate a year or two of lackluster racing until 2016-17 came back with the good stuff. Now, you guys have convinced me that 2016-17 is just going to be a continuation of lackluster. Of course, it is going to be affordable lackluster it sounds like.

[YZFrider]

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. I remember back in 2003 when it was the stage for the new Daytona Prototype class. You had to be on the approval list, but there was no chassis limit. Fast forward several years and they closed the approval list to a select number of constructors (sound familiar???). I also remember the original DP class wanted heavy styling cues from a production road car such as headlights/taillights, grills, mirrors, etc. Many of those requirements were dropped in the first year simply because parts developed for road cars could be a detriment on cars meant to race on a track. The stock mirrors were a safety issue hence they used generic racing mirrors, possible lighting issues with stock headlight covers too??? And production styled body work has different requirements than the purposeful styled racing lines of a generic Oak or Oreca bodywork. For sure you have the potential to have a BOP mess or one style, one combination will be the standard. The ACO has no worry as there is LMP1 class, but for TUSC this is our flagship class *sigh*

[Matt]

The original DP was intended to look much different in the greenhouse as well...then came the fatal Archangel wreck at Homestead in March of '02 and they got spooked and made sure it was really large.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by YZFrider

The ACO has no worry as there is LMP1 class, but for TUSC this is our flagship class *sigh*

It will suck in the ELMS though.

Not that more than 57 people care about that though

[Pontlieue]

I care about ELMS, but more importantly, Simon Dolan does. And he has made clear that he is not a fan of the new LMP2 regulations. Considering that Jota is one of the leading LMP2 teams, it will be interesting to see what they do next.

I think I've read somewhere though that Dolan prefers ELMS because he likes the tracks more than those in WEC.