IMSA: USCR 2018

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by MaskedRacer

GTLM is not a "lower" class by any means.

Yes, it is. If it is not the top class, in IMSA it is the P class, then it is a lower class.





L.P.

[Akrapovic]

The only time GTLM wasn't a lower class was when it won Petit Le Mans.

Lower is not a derogatory term. It's just how they're structured.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by JLGarcia

Compared to a museum-piece Radical with a truck engine that looked like it was mated to the rest of the car by a 9th Grade shop class, it's a significant step up.

Hey, don't insult 9th grade shop classes like that! :P

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

The only time GTLM wasn't a lower class was when it won Petit Le Mans.

Lower is not a derogatory term. It's just how they're structured.

Seconded. "Lower" is just an acknowledgement of how the class alignment shakes out. "Lesser" would be the derogatory term, and GTLM is most definitely NOT a "lesser" class.

[joeb]

That was a close GT qualifying session. Really looking forward to the Protos

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by joeb

That was a close GT qualifying session. Really looking forward to the Protos

Which thread is this?








L.P.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Which thread is this?








L.P.

Hahahha, which ever one I'm posting in!

[Dyson Mazda]

Are some of you seriously ranking GTLM below PC because the cars are slower?

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Dyson Mazda

Are some of you seriously ranking GTLM below PC because the cars are slower?

That isn't the point, we are just taking about what Jenson said. And he doesn't want to race in a class that isn't the fastest.

[AoB Special Stage]

*sigh*

[broadrun96]

Confirmation of what Dagys and MP had reported last week, NO manufacturer fee will be required of teams running the Calloway Corvette. It is STILL a GM product, Calloway is the builder exactly the same as Pratt and Miller are for the GTLM car.

From S365:

Atherton: Callaway Falls Under GM Agreement

IMSA President Scott Atherton says the Callaway Corvette will be eligible to compete in the GT Daytona class without an additional manufacturer agreement, as the car would fall under the sanctioning body’s existing partnership with GM.

“They would be recognized as a GM product,” Atherton told Sportscar365. “An existing relationship is already there.

“The car would have to go through the same process of all cars competing in the WeatherTech Championship; it’d have to go to the wind tunnel. We’d have to dyno the engine; we’d have to know what we’re entering.”

[MaskedRacer]

We laugh/complain about LMPC cars causing full course yellows. Well in 2018 all of the LMPC teams accept for Starworks (in GTD) will be in the prototype category.

I do expect lots of yellows in DPI/LMP2 in 2018. The racing will be intense and like we saw that those pro-am traditional teams like PR1 Matheson are quite capable of crashing and heavy too..

Of course we should expect two exceptions to this: Lime Rock and VIR :-)....unless the full season car count is so high that IMSA will have to rearrange the class structure at some races like CTMP, Laguna and/or Mid Ohio.

DPI/LMP2 looks like it could be at least 16 FULL season cars. Maybe it will go up to 18. GTLM maybe the same 9 from this year. GTD I think its looking good for 16-18 with some turnover. We are looking at 43-45 full season cars. The tracks I mentioned might not be able to handle that.

[Akrapovic]

The Prototype category has a working Traction Control system though doesn't it?

The PC TC system is worthless. It's not a functioning TC system because it has no yaw sensor. So all it does is give a false sense of security to drivers who might need that assitance.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

The Prototype category has a working Traction Control system though doesn't it?

The PC TC system is worthless. It's not a functioning TC system because it has no yaw sensor. So all it does is give a false sense of security to drivers who might need that assitance.

Traction control devices in general don't use yaw sensors. TC only detects loss of traction in the wheels and adapts by either cutting engine power or applying brakes on the slipping wheels(I believe the latter is banned in the TC system of any ACO-sanctioned class).

Yaw sensors are part of STABILITY control systems, which are a distinct system from TC. While the LMP2 cars have yaw sensors as part of their telemetry, they do NOT have stability control.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

Traction control devices in general don't use yaw sensors. TC only detects loss of traction in the wheels and adapts by either cutting engine power or applying brakes on the slipping wheels(I believe the latter is banned in the TC system of any ACO-sanctioned class).

Yaw sensors are part of STABILITY control systems, which are a distinct system from TC. While the LMP2 cars have yaw sensors as part of their telemetry, they do NOT have stability control.

That's not strictly true, you can have yaw sensors as part of a traction control system. That's why the PC system is considered useless. To quote Johnny Mowlem - the PC TC system is "worthless as a TC system" because it has no yaw sensor. It plays into his hands as it just lengthens the gap between the pro and the am drivers.

Best example was Daytona. A TC system should be useful in the wet, and every other class was fine and PC was not. It was pretty clear the system wasn't helping them even a little bit. Putting them in cars with properly developed systems, rather than third party addons for an out of date car, should improve the number of yellows.

[AoB Special Stage]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Putting them in cars with properly developed systems, rather than third party addons for an out of date car, should improve the number of yellows.

Are we sure IMSA shares our view on which way is 'improving' the number of yellows?

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

That's not strictly true, you can have yaw sensors as part of a traction control system. That's why the PC system is considered useless. To quote Johnny Mowlem - the PC TC system is "worthless as a TC system" because it has no yaw sensor. It plays into his hands as it just lengthens the gap between the pro and the am drivers.

Best example was Daytona. A TC system should be useful in the wet, and every other class was fine and PC was not. It was pretty clear the system wasn't helping them even a little bit. Putting them in cars with properly developed systems, rather than third party addons for an out of date car, should improve the number of yellows.

Mowlem clearly has a differing opinion on what constitutes TC from the automotive industry at large, as industry standard has no yaw sensors in simple TC. Traction control is only supposed to prevent wheelspin during acceleration, just like ABS is only supposed to prevent wheels from locking under braking. Stability control is the system that ensures traction is maintained specifically when cornering in order to prevent a vehicle from understeering or oversteering(ESPECIALLY the latter since it can lead to a spin) - while TC and ABS do both contribute to this on their own, they are not explicitly designed for it.

The proper (generic) term for any system that is designed to alleviate loss of traction(and the effects thereof) specifically while cornering is "stability control." Any system that uses a yaw sensor to help the ABS or TC manage wheelspin during cornering falls under this description.

And unless I missed a rule change(somebody please point me to the clarification if I have) stability control is not allowed in LMP2 or 1.

EDIT: While looking for any specific clarification on yaw sensors for stability control in LMP2, I can find only this entry from the LMP2 technical regulations:

"Unless specified in these regulations and apart from engine monitoring systems, any active system or function is forbidden:
chassis control, automatic transmissions, final drive differential system, shock absorbers, suspension or ride height adjustment, four wheel steering, etc.

A traction control system operating exclusively on the engine, is authorised."

No explicit mention of yaw sensors is made anywhere in the regulations. A yaw sensor meant to assist traction in any way would, in my mind, constitute active assistance. So Mowlem's opinion on the importance of a yaw sensor to the equation is, frankly, irrelevant as the rules do appear to forbid their usage outside of telemetry functions, as I had been assuming.

(again, though, if anyone has some info indicating otherwise please provide it)

[chernaudi]

ASR=anti-wheel spin. ASR is what's legal per the ACO. Whether or not it includes yaw control, I don't know, I don't know the technicalities of what the ACO or IMSA think is legal or not.

But then again, I've seen the TC on the Porsche RS Spyder be of marginal effectiveness and I've been watching races back before the ACO allowed traction control on LMP cars and even when it was legal, most LMP1s (Audi R8 and R10, Pescarolo (?) and Dyson) didn't run TC until well into 2006 or '07.

[carbsmith]

It's not really stability control as we know it if all it can control is engine power. Those systems have some ability to control individual wheel speeds either through torque shifting or braking to change the yaw of the car, even with a yaw sensor all an LMP can do is lift the throttle or cut the spark.

I can't figure out where on Earth the FIA defines this, all the class regulations ever say is traction control is allowed and everything else besides gearbox assist isn't.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by carbsmith

It's not really stability control as we know it if all it can control is engine power. Those systems have some ability to control individual wheel speeds either through torque shifting or braking to change the yaw of the car, even with a yaw sensor all an LMP can do is lift the throttle or cut the spark.

Even just by reducing the engine power, a yaw sensor could be a big help in maintaining cornering traction by being more effectively able to discern when the car is reaching corner adhesion limit for the speed it's going. It's nowhere near as effective as a full stability control system that can apply braking and cut power to tires selectively, but if the appropriate data is programmed into the system correctly it would be a big help.

In the same vein, it would be a massive hindrance it was NOT programmed correctly.

I can't figure out where on Earth the FIA defines this, all the class regulations ever say is traction control is allowed and everything else besides gearbox assist isn't.

The lack of any direct comment is actually why I come to my conclusion - in the case of LMP2 the regulations say that anything that's active assistance isn't allowed unless explicitly stated. TC on the engine is the only thing that is explicitly stated, and since a yaw sensor that did more than provide telemetry data would SEEM to count as active assistance, I'd say it's a no go in the absence of a direct statement.

These kinds of details are rather deliberately kept vague, though. Leaving some wiggle room is supposed to be part of the design process, after all.

Though I don't quite get why they still specify this for LMP2. TC on the engine means that everyone would have to have the same TC system, so why does it need to be codified in the regulations? It's not something the teams could change under the current rules. (I suspect it's either an overlooked leftover or it's to help keep some commonality with DPi, which the ACO knew would be a thing while they were crafting the new regs)

[rich07]

SC365 confirms Cooper MacNeil moving to Scuderia Corsa with the Weathertech money. I think the surprise out of that is Balzan is staying, I was under the impression that both him and Nielsen were out of a drive.

Sucks to see those two broken up as a driver pairing, they work really well together. Nielsen is looking for a drive and Balzans efforts get wasted with MacNeil.

Heres hoping Nielsen picks up a good drive possibly with Shank or the WTR Lamborghini effort. Shes too talented to sit on the sidelines.

[AoB Special Stage]

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by rich07

SC365 confirms Cooper MacNeil moving to Scuderia Corsa with the Weathertech money. I think the surprise out of that is Balzan is staying, I was under the impression that both him and Nielsen were out of a drive.

Sucks to see those two broken up as a driver pairing, they work really well together. Nielsen is looking for a drive and Balzans efforts get wasted with MacNeil.

Heres hoping Nielsen picks up a good drive possibly with Shank or the WTR Lamborghini effort. Shes too talented to sit on the sidelines.

My money is on Shank, she can team with Andy Lally and instantly have a reasonable chance to repeat as champs. MSR knows what they're doing, Lally can teach anyone (well maybe not Cooper) to improve their GT game and Christina is not far off a good pro pace much of the time. Outside chance of WTR if the Lamborghini deal comes through but I'm thinking MSR will push hard to sign her.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

My money is on Shank, she can team with Andy Lally and instantly have a reasonable chance to repeat as champs. MSR knows what they're doing, Lally can teach anyone (well maybe not Cooper) to improve their GT game and Christina is not far off a good pro pace much of the time. Outside chance of WTR if the Lamborghini deal comes through but I'm thinking MSR will push hard to sign her.

Who says Lally is staying? With the way this silly season is going, anything is possible.

[Victor_RO]

So Penske's full line-ups are Castroneves-Ricky Taylor-Graham Rahal and JPM-Cameron-Pagenaud (with the third drivers joining for the enduros). http://www.teampenske.com/news/index...TE_IMSA_LINEUP