IMSA USCC in 2016 and 2017

[GriffM3]

Originally Posted by BSchneiderFan

Ford vs Chevy vs Ferrari vs Aston vs Porsche. GTE/GTLM is really shaping up nicely.

Aston is not running in GTLM this year...maybe you mistake them for BMW?

[nasportscar]

Mazda prototype engine specs: http://nasportscar.com/mazda-prototy...z-2-0t-engine/

[Deleted]

“We gained immense knowledge from three years of racing a stock-block diesel engine. That knowledge will improve the next generation of Mazda diesel engines. But, with the impending rules changes in 2017 [which will not allow a diesel-fueled option], a purpose-built racing engine was our best choice to reach our long-term goals and contend for race wins and championships."

Ahahahahah as if diesel was legal in LMP2 even when you were running it...

Yes, the horrid performance of the diesel had nothing to do with the switch to the "new" petrol

[Matt]

It was legal in 2014. Or 2013.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Matt

It was legal in 2014. Or 2013.

In 2012, briefly, only for as long as Dempsey was signed for it. So basically the whole Speedsource era it's been illegal

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Chiana

In 2012, briefly, only for as long as Dempsey was signed for it. So basically the whole Speedsource era it's been illegal

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/2014LMP2.pdf

2014 LMP2 regulations allow for diesel engines.

[chernaudi]

It was legal until Lola went bust and Mazda killed an actual ACO-spec LMP2 program. At which point the ACO said screw diesel for LMP2, since the only car maker that wanted such a program no longer showed interest outside of GA/IMSA.

Notice that there's currently no regs for rotory engines in either LMP1 or LMP2? That could change if Mazda sold the concept to the ACO. But that won't happen as their racing program lacks the money for such an effort on such a scale.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Matt

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/2014LMP2.pdf

2014 LMP2 regulations allow for diesel engines.

No they don't, that is an outdated version you presumably just googled.

Here is the correct one REVISED, Check ART 5 + 6 + 17

http://www.fia.com/sites/default/fil...%202014-dc.pdf

[Matt]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

It was legal until Lola went bust and Mazda killed an actual ACO-spec LMP2 program. At which point the ACO said screw diesel for LMP2, since the only car maker that wanted such a program no longer showed interest outside of GA/IMSA.

Notice that there's currently no regs for rotory engines in either LMP1 or LMP2? That could change if Mazda sold the concept to the ACO. But that won't happen as their racing program lacks the money for such an effort on such a scale.

rotary yes pls

[BullMan]

Originally Posted by Chiana

In 2012, briefly, only for as long as Dempsey was signed for it. So basically the whole Speedsource era it's been illegal

Yep, they legalized it so Dempsey and Mazda could come to Le Mans, and when they bailed on that plan, ACO made it illegal again.

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Notice that there's currently no regs for rotory engines in LMP1

Yes there are. Banning them. Only 4-stroke reciprocating piston engines are explicitly allowed.

Originally Posted by FIA LMP1 Technical Regulations, article 5.1.1

Engine is free except following restrictions:
• Only Petrol or Diesel 4 stroke engines with reciprocating
pistons are permitted.

[chernaudi]

And again, why are they banned? Because no one's throwing money and positive press at the ACO over their inclusion. Why do we have diesel engines? Audi pushed for both diesel and ethanol engines in talks with the ACO in 2002, and the ACO saw an opportunity to get either Renault or Peugeot back to LM. Renault didn't bite, but Peugeot did in 2005 (though they didn't race until 2007). And we still have diesel engines because of Audi Sport pumping money and press into diesel engines in racing.

I'll bet that if Audi go back to running a gasoline engine in 2018, the ACO might give up on diesels just like they did when Mazda backed out of LMP2.

In short, the ACO will probably allow anyone to run any engine concept they want at LM and other series where ACO tech rules apply. But only if they're either a car manufacturer or OEM, or someone else who want to put their money and press where their mouth is.

[fieldodreams79]

Originally Posted by Matt

rotary yes pls

X2
If the on track product is subpar, supplement it with extreme noise and fire from exhaust pipes!

[joeb]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

X2
If the on track product is subpar, supplement it with extreme noise and fire from exhaust pipes!

Amen. Maybe throw in some free drinks as well!

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

And again, why are they banned? Because no one's throwing money and positive press at the ACO over their inclusion. Why do we have diesel engines? Audi pushed for both diesel and ethanol engines in talks with the ACO in 2002, and the ACO saw an opportunity to get either Renault or Peugeot back to LM. Renault didn't bite, but Peugeot did in 2005 (though they didn't race until 2007). And we still have diesel engines because of Audi Sport pumping money and press into diesel engines in racing.

I'll bet that if Audi go back to running a gasoline engine in 2018, the ACO might give up on diesels just like they did when Mazda backed out of LMP2.

In short, the ACO will probably allow anyone to run any engine concept they want at LM and other series where ACO tech rules apply. But only if they're either a car manufacturer or OEM, or someone else who want to put their money and press where their mouth is.

Exactly. They weren't banned, just written out of the available types. If Mazda wants to bring a 10 rotor, hydrogen fueled rotary to LM in 2022, I bet the ACO would bend and allow it back in.

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by hondafan37

Maybe they should admit the chassis of Class 1 cars (DTM, Super GT)

This is just my view, but I think IMSA ought to go with the Class One cars INSTEAD of the DPi and tell the ACO where to shove it. IMSA P2s already don't fit ACO rules (both the Mazda and the Shank Ligier both don't fit for engine rule reasons) and the 2017 P2 rules are a disaster in the making. IMO, they'll have far better odds of getting out of the skid they find themselves in by realizing the ACO doesn't give a toss about them.

[hondafan37]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

This is just my view, but I think IMSA ought to go with the Class One cars INSTEAD of the DPi and tell the ACO where to shove it. IMSA P2s already don't fit ACO rules (both the Mazda and the Shank Ligier both don't fit for engine rule reasons) and the 2017 P2 rules are a disaster in the making. IMO, they'll have far better odds of getting out of the skid they find themselves in by realizing the ACO doesn't give a toss about them.

Class 1 cars, current and future LMP2 chassis and Gt3 engines with 700 or 750 hp should be admitted. The variety is the best in sports car racing, that should not be missed.

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by hondafan37

Class 1 cars, current and future LMP2 chassis and Gt3 engines with 700 or 750 hp should be admitted. The variety is the best in sports car racing, that should not be missed.

The problem with that is that the Class One cars are rather heavier than the LMP2s, which means without the sort of crazy tires that Super GT uses you end up with the LMP2s being better in the corners and the Class Ones being rather better in a straight line to get a similar lap time, and that results in more of the BoP troubles that have been the bane of IMSA's existence for the last two seasons.

My view of the state of IMSA is that the series' exposure doesn't come close to justifying the cost of competing in it, and that needs to change. LMP2s, by their very nature and design, cannot do this. As the Class One is meant by both the ITR and JAF to be a top-class rocketship, it stands a far better chance of being that special style of car. My IMSA-rules Class One would allow the DTM/Super GT two-liter turbocharged engine, but would be focused on production-based engines of roughly 650-700 horsepower. As the ACO doesn't give a toss about privateer racers unless they want to bankrupt themselves in LMP1 or saddle themselves with rich amateurs and psuedo-spec cars, IMSA needs to walk on them and go their own way.

[TF110]

Class 1 (gt500) cars are ballasted to 1020kg. They're not that much heavier.

[MagVanisher]

@BrentJackson
Yes that I want Class One to be included in the IMSA series, but my problem is that both the IMSA nor ITR are procrastinating on promoting and implementing it.

Only the JAF/GTA are the ones who are promoting the rule unification other than putting their cars to Le Mans.

[TF110]

It's like Super GT got sold on a grand idea they're new 'dtm like' cars could race in Japan, Germany (Europe) and America. But it's yet to happen. At this rate it won't happen because of the unwillingness of the two other series'. It's almost a perfect alternative to lmp in semi-spec racing because it's relatively cheap but still open enough. Plus it benefits manufacturers where the cars can resemble their street counterpart but still do prototype lap times. It sounds like a dream now.

[MagVanisher]

@TF110
Agreed to that. Let's face it, both IMSA and ITR are busy dealing their respective national series that there's no time for something called "rule unification".

And speaking of IMSA's United Sportscar Championship, they should act fast on their prototype class or drop it altogether in favor of GTs. I mean, GTE (or GTLM) are becoming like GT1 lately.

[Rcz]

Yes, Class 1 is going to save everything! I can't wait for GM to built the world beating Chevy Cruze for C1! Personally I don't think IMSA would bring the Japanese interpretation of C1 to the states but rather the cost saving German one.

I always thought C1 could be a good sprint series similar to trans-am and contrast to IMSA other longer running series.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Rcz

Yes, Class 1 is going to save everything! I can't wait for GM to built the world beating Chevy Cruze for C1! Personally I don't think IMSA would bring the Japanese interpretation of C1 to the states but rather the cost saving German one.

I always thought C1 could be a good sprint series similar to trans-am and contrast to IMSA other longer running series.

GM would use something like the Cadillac ATS-V as it's a good counter to the M4, C63, RC F, Audi RS5 etc. It's not that class 1 is a savior of racing, but the proposals of it being viable to run basically worldwide seemingly (partially) convinced SGT to adopt the ruleset. I think we were all fine with the 2013 style cars. So without the possibility of racing in DTM and the U.S. it's kinda sad the cars are what they are. That's my opinion at least.

[carbsmith]

The problem is Class 1 is not very cheap at all and for how well they do with them in GT500 the cars are ultimately fairly flawed. If you could have had an open wheel series buy into the engine formula like Japan it might work but it would basically bring most of the problems of the current DPs plus a few new ones on its own.

The immediate benefit was having 5 manufacturers already involved in the series with cars (Audi, BMW, Honda, Nissan, Lexus) but one of them has basically bailed on sports car racing and you're left with 2 DTM, 2 GT500 and rule unification nowhere particularly in sight. If the US class has to stand on its own it just isn't going to work.

Maybe the answer is to look at what made the 80s work. Back then the WSC was as now, an endurance racing championship consisting almost entirely of ~6 hour races while IMSA was primarily a sprint racing series with 2-3 hour races, so while Group C and GTP were similar in technology and speed they both had their own reasons you might enter a top class car in one, the other, or both. Just throwing your hands up and assuming WEC has killed your ability to attract those kinds of cars isn't something that history says has to happen. You'd need to work out what the heck is going on with LMP-1L though.


GM would obviously want to have an ATS Class 1 car considering it is a rear driver that comes with a turbo 4 and directly competes against 4 out of 6 of the cars currently run in the class. That is the one US Class 1 car that makes any sense.