IMSA DPi Discussion - Page 15

Deleted · 2 Apr 2016, 19:59 (Ref:3629625)

Correct.

The overseas results for the Panoz LMP, GT1 and obviously most of all the Le Mans winning GT2 also prove that they weren't total flukes.

wdave0 · 3 Apr 2016, 12:49 (Ref:3629850)

The DW works well in a showbiz way and is very attractive to non-hardcore racing fans. It adds viewers whether we like it or not. Much like Danica Patrick, the entertainment factor is independent of the racing factor (although she at least fits the rules). Until IMSA has a decent field of prototypes I would expect them to be happy to have the DW as a sideshow.

Maelochs · 3 Apr 2016, 14:32 (Ref:3629878)

Even if we accept that the DWing was fine for what it was (a repurposed oval racer put on track to attract non-racing fans to the series) at what point does it become a real part of the series.

Are we to think that if some other guy showed up with a way underweight conventional car with an understroked AER turbo in the back, that would be fine too? There was never a “class” for the DWing—it was always a one-off. The only way the DWing was a legitimate entry was that other teams could buy them ... what a joke, considering the team couldn’t keep its own car on track, and only had a couple non-embarrassing results in three seasons.

If the series needs the DWing as a sideshow, it is probably not viable anyway.

I don’t expect to see it in 2017, and if it is on the grid, it will still be irrelevant.

If by some miracle the team gets the car to work and run competitively for entire races for an entire season, it still has no relevance to the rest of the race in terms of rules ... Dr. Panoz could have fielded a team of race-winning P2s or DPs for what it has cost him to fail repeatedly.

Since IMSA is no longer his property, I see no reason why the car should be on the grid. Fine if it is but all it proves is that Dr. Don has made a lot of money.

Deleted · 3 Apr 2016, 14:43 (Ref:3629886)

It was probably written in the legal documents involving sales of ALMS assets and Don's tracks that as further compensation mr Panoz has the legacy-right to field vehicles of his own choosing for as long as he sees fit.

BrentJackson · 3 Apr 2016, 16:18 (Ref:3629918)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

But this does not fit the narrative of the series being corrupt with clandestine teams RULING the roost!

L.P.

Some people here will never NOT think that, HD. It comes with the territory.

**joeb** · 3 Apr 2016, 17:07 (Ref:3629926)

So those DPi's......

Ephaeton · 3 Apr 2016, 17:47 (Ref:3629944)

So HPD went to Dallara and wanted to coop a DPi with them, right? And Dallara said, uhm, we're busy already, right? There is no rule that one constructor can only cooperate with a single manufacturer, though I wonder about the incentive for a constructor to cooperate with a second manufacturer?

Or put another way, I would expect the manufacturer to foot the bill and determine how the car will look, not the constructor. AFAICT the constructor's expertise is used WRT how to put the specific engine into the given frame and how to fix the new bodywork onto it. The base car (P2 body) is not modified (by the constructor), right? So .. there are no capacity issues to be expected for a constructor, are there?

I mean .. obviously I'm wrong, as Dallara opted not to work with a second manufacturer, but why? Is Dallara that short on man power? Is the process more involved than my pleb mind imagines? Has the other manufacturer achieved (voluntary) exclusivity from Dallara?

Maelochs · 3 Apr 2016, 21:58 (Ref:3630024)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ephaeton

Is Dallara that short on man power? Is the process more involved than my pleb mind imagines? Has the other manufacturer achieved (voluntary) exclusivity from Dallara?

Or did HPD not offer enough money, considering Dallara already had one manufacturer partner.

Ephaeton · 3 Apr 2016, 22:37 (Ref:3630032)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Or did HPD not offer enough money, considering Dallara already had one manufacturer partner.

Or I was reading too much into the racer article? I had the impression that they had been turned down by Dallara, but rereading the racer article, it never said that. The article "only" said

Quote:

"I met with Dallara at St. Pete and talked to them, asked them about how the [DPi] sports car stuff is coming along for IMSA," Eriksen told RACER. "They wouldn't mention, naturally, who they were working for, but they did mention they were getting the cars together. So we know that there will be some Dallaras out there at least in 2017."

So let's not assume Dallara wasn't ready / willing to cooperate with HPD (now), sorry for that implication.

Coach Ep · 4 Apr 2016, 13:02 (Ref:3630221)

There's always a lot of talk/chat going on between the various folks in the business during race/test events, a HPD guy talking with a Dallara peep (for example) doesn't mean they're sleeping together.

But they might...!

MoMedic9019 · 4 Apr 2016, 17:44 (Ref:3630313)

Part of what some of you are forgetting, or ignoring is that many of these constructors, say HPD for example, don't build their own chassis.

Many have it farmed it out to someone else even if it's not openly acknowledged. There aren't many places with significant experience to build, and mold a tub.

So if Dallara are "working" with someone.... it's because they have the expertise to get it done with expediency, and accuracy.

FormulaFox · 4 Apr 2016, 18:53 (Ref:3630323)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

So if Dallara are "working" with someone.... it's because they have the expertise to get it done with expediency, and accuracy.

Or because, as the case is here, the rules require it.

FLGTFAN · 4 Apr 2016, 19:52 (Ref:3630341)

Does HAAS F1 even build tubs in the US?

Richard C · 5 Apr 2016, 02:26 (Ref:3630410)

Quote:

Originally Posted by FLGTFAN

Does HAAS F1 even build tubs in the US?

I am not sure how this fits into the discussion other than that Haas contracted Dallara to create the 2016 F1 chassis. To your question, the Haas monocoque was constructed by Dallara in Italy. I expect Haas plans to build their own in the future, but doubt they are setup to do it today even if they have the equipment.

Richard

**Adam43** · 5 Apr 2016, 20:12 (Ref:3630590)

The F1 HAAS thread is here: http://tentenths.com/forum/showthread.php?t=140584

Makaze · 5 Apr 2016, 23:19 (Ref:3630612)

HPD is working with Onroak.

Dyson Mazda · 6 Apr 2016, 00:04 (Ref:3630615)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaze

HPD is working with Onroak.

Is there a source that goes with that?

HORNDAWG · 6 Apr 2016, 01:44 (Ref:3630623)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dyson Mazda

Is there a source that goes with that?

I think it could be a rather linear assumption, as they are currently working together on the MSR and ESM (IWSC) cars. It would seem to be the easiest transition for a DPi if they have chosen to go DPi. That is the only way at the moment for them to be on the IWSC grid in '18 unless the NSX joins, but I think HPD wishes to be in the P class and the NSX does not allow that unless it is stylized as a DPi.

L.P.

TF110 · 6 Apr 2016, 02:08 (Ref:3630629)

Makaze was right about the NSX GT3... just sayin'.

MoMedic9019 · 6 Apr 2016, 02:51 (Ref:3630633)

Quote:

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

Or because, as the case is here, the rules require it.

What's your point? That's well known.

Coach Ep · 6 Apr 2016, 13:26 (Ref:3630718)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaze

HPD is working with Onroak.

I have no doubt HPD made an 'official' inquiry with Onroak who, by now, have given them an 'official' quote for the desired project. HPD is looking for clearance from Honda/Acura and/or budget to go ahead with it. So far their commitment is pretty marginal.

Nothing really new here imo.

But let's hope all comes together.

Bob Baldwin · 7 Apr 2016, 05:06 (Ref:3630857)

Official Quote for the desired Project ? LOL

Alric8 · 7 Apr 2016, 10:49 (Ref:3630900)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

I think it could be a rather linear assumption, as they are currently working together on the MSR and ESM (IWSC) cars. It would seem to be the easiest transition for a DPi if they have chosen to go DPi. That is the only way at the moment for them to be on the IWSC grid in '18 unless the NSX joins, but I think HPD wishes to be in the P class and the NSX does not allow that unless it is stylized as a DPi.

L.P.

Yes but on the other hand ESM have moved away from HPD power to Nissan, despite the fact that HPD are far more likely to be involved in IMSA competition than Nissan. I know it's the WEC, not WTSCC, but it's still ESM.

HORNDAWG · 7 Apr 2016, 16:53 (Ref:3630967)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alric8

Yes but on the other hand ESM have moved away from HPD power to Nissan, despite the fact that HPD are far more likely to be involved in IMSA competition than Nissan. I know it's the WEC, not WTSCC, but it's still ESM.

It is for WEC, which favors the Nissan by rule. Then there is the support required at very distant venues and the fact that Nissan already has support personnel/package at those venues. But ESM does plan on running the HPD in the IWSC.

L.P.

Deleted · 7 Apr 2016, 18:45 (Ref:3631012)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

It is for WEC, which favors the Nissan by rule.

Meaning what?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
IMSA DPi/P2 vs WEC LMP1-L	Danathar	Sportscar & GT Racing	7	5 Nov 2015 17:55
New Rules - Discussion	DKGandBH	Formula One	28	19 Jan 2005 01:40