LMP 3 Status in North America

[Bob Baldwin]

Having attended Sebring I was hoping to see a P-3 on display if it was there I missed it .
Seems like the people I did talk to Officials , A few media people were totally lost on the topic.
Not withstanding all the Gibberish going on with P-2 and DPI . Where are we at with the Potential for P-3's running in North America ?:
What is the latest news with the Riley P-3 ?
Also are the P-3's going to be Dead in Europe ?
Any imput "FACTS " would be appreciated

[Deleted]

There's already a LMP3 thread where this could be slotted in. But to clarify:

LMP3 Eligibility 2016

Europe
ELMS
French GT
vdev
Road to Le Mans LM Support Race
Dutch Supercar Challenge
Dunlop Prototype Series (maybe)
Probably some misc other endurance races

Asia
ASLMS
ASLMS Sprint
Abu Dhabi 12 Hours

North America
Thunderhill 25 Hours

Grids in Europe are full, I mean huge fields but unfortunately only packed with spec Onroak/"Ligier" cars with some odd Riley in the mix. There might be more Rileys later when they get the supply going (even the sole Murphy entry in ELMS is getting delayed) but the IMSA idiots not daring to ditch LMPC probably doomed them in the long run. Ginetta is dying but still entered for something this year by single team. ADESS status is unknown after the lackluster performances in Asia and withdrawn entries. Dome doesn't exist yet.

As said not coming to IMSA because they are stubborn. But last year ACO speculated on possible future independent LMP3 sprint series in North America, probably like the new Sepang sprint series.

[MaskedRacer]

I agree IMSA has done too much to cater to these LMPC teams. And they have been the same teams running since the ALMS days with the except of JDC/Miller who showed up in 2014, so they are not new kids on the block either now. There is ZERO growth there. Lets look at the teams: Starworks is going to DPI. Core runs LMPC on the side from their main GTLM effort. What you got left is PR1 Matheson, JDC Miller, BAR1, and whatever the name of the team that runs the #38 car is. Are they so important that you have to keep a dinosaur category around?

Imagine if there was no LMPC. First less off courses and yellows. Less of cars getting in the GT cars way. Less of a eye soar of an old open topped looking car running around. And most importantly with just P, GTLM, GTD you can get easier BoP between the categories. LMPC upsets the apple card. You don't have to artificially hold down GTLM which I think IMSA might be doing so far this year.

You don't need a pro-am prototype category anymore. Yes LMP3 is popular in Europe now but WEC does not feel the need to have them. Why should IMSA? Especially if they want maxmize the chance to get DPI entries. If you want to run a prototype run DPI, if you want to be pro-am. Got GT3. They are naturally built for that.

[Bob Baldwin]

Chiana : Beside Thunderhill . I think that they can also be run with NASA ? and a southern Florida Group called FARA ? I think basicly either of these groups would find a class to fit it into .

Masked Racer : Totally agree with IMSA " Catering to the "PC TEAMS "

I guess if you are really into the Prototypes a Trip to Europe would be in order

Not sure what the PC CAR count was at Daytona or Sebring . Which would have been the 2 biggest events of the year for them

I did not get a chance to talk with Bill Riely so have no clue what is going on with his P-3 project

[MaskedRacer]

Originally Posted by Bob Baldwin

Chiana : Beside Thunderhill . I think that they can also be run with NASA ? and a southern Florida Group called FARA ? I think basicly either of these groups would find a class to fit it into .

Masked Racer : Totally agree with IMSA " Catering to the "PC TEAMS "

I guess if you are really into the Prototypes a Trip to Europe would be in order

Not sure what the PC CAR count was at Daytona or Sebring . Which would have been the 2 biggest events of the year for them

I did not get a chance to talk with Bill Riely so have no clue what is going on with his P-3 project

Thank you Mr. Baldwin. Yeah the LMPC teams have almost gotten everything that they have asked for from IMSA in the last few years. Amazing considering they bring nothing to the series at all. No ratings, no marketing, no sexy car appeal. Just some gentleman driver cash.

But you get gentleman driver cash in GTD too but at least there you get the appeal of having another manufacturer car like Ferrari, Audi, Porsche, Lambo, etc. You cant say that for LMPC and I think that will be the case for a proposed LMP3 too. Like I said before WEC did not see the need for it. IMSA should think the same way too. DPI, GTLM, and GT3 should be the class structure going forward.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by MaskedRacer

Thank you Mr. Baldwin. Yeah the LMPC teams have almost gotten everything that they have asked for from IMSA in the last few years. Amazing considering they bring nothing to the series at all. No ratings, no marketing, no sexy car appeal. Just some gentleman driver cash.

But you get gentleman driver cash in GTD too but at least there you get the appeal of having another manufacturer car like Ferrari, Audi, Porsche, Lambo, etc. You cant say that for LMPC and I think that will be the case for a proposed LMP3 too. Like I said before WEC did not see the need for it. IMSA should think the same way too. DPI, GTLM, and GT3 should be the class structure going forward.

Never heard of Jon Bennett, lets see, a team in PC and a team in GTLM, no the class never does anything for the series. No, it does not provide 6 to 10 prototype race cars to the grid and the associated revenue from them. Nor does it provide a place for up and coming drivers to pair with those gentlemen drivers to give us experienced pros of the future. Some of those actually paying to get a car to the grid choose to do so in a PC. So.....




L.P.

[Deleted]

WEC couldn't have them even if they wanted because of the self-imposed 35 car full season limit.

[Hawker]

Hmmm . . . IIRC, the LMP3 test at the Glen certainly did not help those cars. IIRC, they were 9 seconds (per lap) slower than the PC cars (and slower than even GTD). That would seem to mean that it would be the slowest class - slower than both GT classes.

Yah think the guys that are writing the checks for the PC class might object to that? I certainly would . . . at least until the get the the LMP3 cars figured out (and faster). But then, unless one has actually written checks (funded a race team), that might be hard to understand.

[Deleted]

The reasons for that failed Ginetta test have already been gone through multiple times. And even if things HAD gone all smoothly to the point of actual consideration, IMSA A) shouldn't leave everything to hang on just one test and one make B) shouldn't care of the shown performances when they are all gonna be bopped to target pace anyway C) shouldn't ever listen to the LMPC team owners as from their perspective there is never reason to move up from their existing cheap spec rent cars. I've said it before but when it comes to spec categories, you do not listen to the people running the cars, because they are the most biased imaginable.

[Rcz]

Just put American crate engines in and throw them in the PC class.

[Bob Baldwin]

WHY arne't they running as a series SUPPORT event ?

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Bob Baldwin

WHY arne't they running as a series SUPPORT event ?

Rumor has it they were looked at for use in IMSA Lites but dismissed as too expensive for that level.

[Deleted]

And by giving spec single supplier Lites rights to Elan (Panoz) they please Don...

[Accident]

Not sure more downforce is the way to go for amateurs...

Downforce requires speed to work, which requires pushing harder... Can all of the amateurs we have push hard enough reliably to really take full advantage of more aero? We have heard that some of the amateurs have difficulty warming up the tires quick enough because they don't push hard enough. More significantly though I think, it would make them more sensitive to traffic disrupting their aero which is definitely not good for amateurs.

More aero from adding winglets and stuff means more bits of carbon fiber that can break, and broken bits off the car have a big influence on how it handles, either making it more difficult to drive or meaning the team needs come in to replace the nose or whatever. That either means that the on-track performance and action gets worse, or that the teams need more spares which means money. The current PCs are pretty tough, how many times have we seen them off the track and into tires or making light contact with the wall and be able to keep going with no noticeable performance loss? I'm not sure we need to make them more fragile.

Developing 3 new engines to put in the cars requires someone to spend money, and while it's easy to make any of those motors put out 550hp reliably on the street, making them into endurance racing motors is another matter and wouldn't necessarily be so easy... Particularly if they wanted to try to match the excellent service life the Katech units used to have (not sure if they still do after being bumped up).

While I know you were only mentioning it in passing, opening it up to other P2 open top chassis would get the class away from being spec, which means more money to buy what is perceived as the best package. Adding in new engines and different chassis means that teams either need to spend the money to buy what is best, or leaves it down to BoP, both things that all of the current teams do not have to/want to deal with.

If you are going to push faster, non-spec cars on them where they will have to spend more money to upgrade/buy the best and start relying on BoP, why not push them towards GTD where amateur drivers wouldn't be overstepping their limits and where they can put something on the grid that people might actually care about?

If they are going to do away with the class (and I think they should) they need to give the teams time to prepare. IMSA can bring back a special trophy and a spot next to the P podium for the highest finishing pro/am team to stand on during the ceremony but not a whole class to themselves. They have a choice of moving up to P if they want to stay in prototypes, or moving to GTD if they want to stay in a pro/am class. Of course, IMSA should do whatever it can to accommodate the PC teams during the transition, whether it be helping them out with communication with manufacturers to purchase their new cars, reduced entry fees, or anything that can help.

I don't want the series to lose the teams or worse yet have any of the teams fold, but at the same time it has become a class that adds basically nothing positive to the show (thanks to the starting driver rule we don't even get good qualifying sessions anymore) and is just a home to ride-selling teams that often put people in their cars that aren't ready for prototype racing. It has failed as a ladder, and it often hurts the on-track product with needless cautions, and they don't need the show to suffer.

PC has had a good long run, but it's got to end at some point. I'd like to see the participating teams take that as a win and come into a new era with the rest of the field.

[Speed-King]

Developing 3 new engines to put in the cars requires someone to spend money, and while it's easy to make any of those motors put out 550hp reliably on the street, making them into endurance racing motors is another matter and wouldn't necessarily be so easy... Particularly if they wanted to try to match the excellent service life the Katech units used to have (not sure if they still do after being bumped up)

They aren't quite at 550bhp, but why not simply use Trans-Am TA2-engines?! All the development is done, they're cheap to buy and to run and they are available from GM, Ford and Dodge.

[Accident]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

They aren't quite at 550bhp, but why not simply use Trans-Am TA2-engines?! All the development is done, they're cheap to buy and to run and they are available from GM, Ford and Dodge.

That would be a good idea, if they can run for 24 hours. I have no idea if they can or not. I assume they aren't based on the most current production engines though, which seemed to be what he was suggesting.

While I'm not sure that un-spec-ing the engine side of a spec class where the teams seem to favor the spec nature of things is the best thing to do, I personally wouldn't care if the V8s being used were the absolute most current production models, so the TA2 motors seem fine to me.

Also, for clarity's sake, in my previous post I wasn't meaning to imply that it would necessarily be hard to make endurance motors out of one of the current American V8 options but that they would of course require development into endurance motors which costs more money continuing with what they have.

Have any of the the LT1, Coyote or late-model Hemi engines been built to a dedicated road racing or endurance spec by any engine builders? The Multimatic GT350Rs use the "Voodoo" variant of the Coyote, so I guess that counts.

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by Accident

Not sure more downforce is the way to go for amateurs...

Downforce requires speed to work, which requires pushing harder... Can all of the amateurs we have push hard enough reliably to really take full advantage of more aero? We have heard that some of the amateurs have difficulty warming up the tires quick enough because they don't push hard enough. More significantly though I think, it would make them more sensitive to traffic disrupting their aero which is definitely not good for amateurs.

More aero from adding winglets and stuff means more bits of carbon fiber that can break, and broken bits off the car have a big influence on how it handles, either making it more difficult to drive or meaning the team needs come in to replace the nose or whatever. That either means that the on-track performance and action gets worse, or that the teams need more spares which means money. The current PCs are pretty tough, how many times have we seen them off the track and into tires or making light contact with the wall and be able to keep going with no noticeable performance loss? I'm not sure we need to make them more fragile.

Fair points, I grant that. The reason I went the way of adding more downforce is that I'm trying to avoid the goofups that seem to happen fairly frequently with these cars, and since Aero does not depend of warm or cold tires, I just thought that might be a way to go forward. Maybe softer tires that warm up more quickly? I'm wanting to keep the cars but reduce the number of accidents.

Originally Posted by Accident

Developing 3 new engines to put in the cars requires someone to spend money, and while it's easy to make any of those motors put out 550hp reliably on the street, making them into endurance racing motors is another matter and wouldn't necessarily be so easy... Particularly if they wanted to try to match the excellent service life the Katech units used to have (not sure if they still do after being bumped up).

While I know you were only mentioning it in passing, opening it up to other P2 open top chassis would get the class away from being spec, which means more money to buy what is perceived as the best package. Adding in new engines and different chassis means that teams either need to spend the money to buy what is best, or leaves it down to BoP, both things that all of the current teams do not have to/want to deal with.

If you are going to push faster, non-spec cars on them where they will have to spend more money to upgrade/buy the best and start relying on BoP, why not push them towards GTD where amateur drivers wouldn't be overstepping their limits and where they can put something on the grid that people might actually care about?

If they are going to do away with the class (and I think they should) they need to give the teams time to prepare. IMSA can bring back a special trophy and a spot next to the P podium for the highest finishing pro/am team to stand on during the ceremony but not a whole class to themselves. They have a choice of moving up to P if they want to stay in prototypes, or moving to GTD if they want to stay in a pro/am class. Of course, IMSA should do whatever it can to accommodate the PC teams during the transition, whether it be helping them out with communication with manufacturers to purchase their new cars, reduced entry fees, or anything that can help.

I don't want the series to lose the teams or worse yet have any of the teams fold, but at the same time it has become a class that adds basically nothing positive to the show (thanks to the starting driver rule we don't even get good qualifying sessions anymore) and is just a home to ride-selling teams that often put people in their cars that aren't ready for prototype racing. It has failed as a ladder, and it often hurts the on-track product with needless cautions, and they don't need the show to suffer.

PC has had a good long run, but it's got to end at some point. I'd like to see the participating teams take that as a win and come into a new era with the rest of the field.

I can see your points, but moving to any other class in the field for those teams means new cars at a half million bucks a pop, plus all of the spares and equipment. Any way you go, you're hurting the teams. There is no way around it aside from keeping the current cars. I would prefer they go too, really, but I'm not blind to the fact that IMSA needs every single bit of support they can possibly get, and I want the ability for the PC class to mean something beyond rolling chicanes and easy class wins for Core Autosport. But forcing the teams to replace all of the cars is going to see most of them either out of the series or out of the sport at this point, which is a really big problem. There is no money out there to do that, and anybody looking to move classes probably did so with the GT3 introduction.

You are correct in pointing out that it was a passing comment about the other P2s, but that may be an option. P3 is not happening now, I think we can all see that, particularly since Riley is gonna have their hands full with the P2s, particularly since Multimatic is also very, very busy. The car hasn't finished the design spec yet and unless there are few orders for the P2 car (which, let's be honest, is highly unlikely), the earliest the P3 car will be ready for testing is late 2017, which means not enough for the grid in 2018 and pushes using it as a replacement back to 2019. (Eeeeep.) The open-top P2 idea was put forwards because there is lots of Orecas and Gibsons and Morgans and the like out there. If one is going to replace those cars anywhere near now it needs to be a chassis which is ready now and produced by somebody who can make lots of them now, preferably somebody not making a P2 car. I don't want to be calling Onroak if at all possible, but with Ginetta all but out of the P3 game, ADESS proving to be problematic and Riley and Dome yet to hit the track, if we go P3 anytime soon we're handing yet another market to Onroak, which IMO at this point should be avoided like the plague. (Gibson, maybe? Is there enough Gibson 015S chassis out there to make this work?)

The different engines was an attempt at that. The reason I figured it could work is that Chrysler is really promoting their Hemi engines, the LT1 is already in use the Corvette C7.R and as your correctly pointed out the Ford Coyote is already being used in Conti. They will all make 550 horsepower easily and without too much in the way of stress, particularly since the same internals on the Corvette ZR1 (650 hp) and on the Hellcat Dodges (707 hp) make considerably more power. Chrysler could fairly cheaply I suspect make a Hemi for a PC category, and Ford's already halfway there with the Voodoo version of the Coyote and GM with the C7.R's powerplant. Low-stressed, torquey, loud-roaring Detroit V8s can, when sorted properly (and Katech has shown this with the LS3) run absolutely forever without breaking. Giving the class a choice of engines gives it more competition than there would otherwise be, which makes it worth more, and since you'd only have to do BoP infrequently, no need for lots of troubles with major changes to the cars.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

You are correct in pointing out that it was a passing comment about the other P2s, but that may be an option. P3 is not happening now, I think we can all see that, particularly since Riley is gonna have their hands full with the P2s, particularly since Multimatic is also very, very busy. The car hasn't finished the design spec yet and unless there are few orders for the P2 car (which, let's be honest, is highly unlikely), the earliest the P3 car will be ready for testing is late 2017, which means not enough for the grid in 2018 and pushes using it as a replacement back to 2019. (Eeeeep.)

I understand your point about Riley being too busy with the P2 cars to make the P3's, but I think Ave is actually constructing the P3 and invested in some composite making equipment to carry on the task. But do we know where the P2 car is being produced? Is the tub being made at Riley while the car assembled at Multimatic, or vice a versa? We are talking about small numbers of P2 cars anyways, so I think they will be up to the task.

[Accident]

I don't think the 5.5L in the C7Rs are LT1 based, I think they are still the same 5.5L that the C6R GT2/E cars used. I can't remember off-hand what it's called, LS.R or something?

While an old P2 open top chassis might be fairly cheap, surely an older GT3 car could be had for a reasonable price too. This is assuming that IMSA would be okay with an older GT3 car running or having a chance at winning, as BMW for example might not want to see an old Z4 beat out their new M6, so there could be some political stuff involved. Flying Lizard ran the older gen R8 though, but it was fairly anonymous both times.

It is a tough position to put the teams in, but upgrading cars is just part of racing. DP teams had to do it with the new aero, the whole P field will have to do it with DPi, lots of GTD teams had to do it when they moved to the GT3 regs.

There was talk of CORE moving to P2 a few years ago, and we know they aren't short on money. PR1 Mathiasen also supposedly nearly switched to a P2 this season. We already know Starworks is going to P class next year with the Riley. That leaves BAR1, JDC Miller, and Performance Tech that would likely need more consideration than the others, and I'm not sure how well they are off.

IMSA does need to think of the teams, but they also need to think of what is best for the product they put out as that is what will help gain them fans and grow the sport, and in turn help the teams find sponsorship. I'm not saying that it's only PC is holding things back or that they are ruining the show or anything, but IMSA has more to consider than just what these teams want. If left up to the teams, they would probably still be running these same cars 10 years from now so that they don't have to spend any more than the bare minimum.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Accident

I don't think the 5.5L in the C7Rs are LT1 based, I think they are still the same 5.5L that the C6R GT2/E cars used. I can't remember off-hand what it's called, LS.R or something?

LS5.R. As best I can tell, it's derived more from the LS3(the engine that the PC cars use) than the roadcar's engine.

[HORNDAWG]

There could be life for the LMP3 chassis in IMSA yet.... as the PC replacement chassis that would become the top class of the CTSCC.

http://www.racer.com/more/viewpoints...ation-for-2018






L.P.

[Coach Ep]

If the new Riley P3 finally sees the light, proves to be competitive against the Ligier armada and can be produced in rather large numbers (10+ p/yr.), I'm sure it'll be a candidate to be the new spec PC car. All it would need is a (Oreca?) spec engine with more power to at least equal the speed of the current car, hopefully it'll be a tad faster.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

If the new Riley P3 finally sees the light, proves to be competitive against the Ligier armada and can be produced in rather large numbers (10+ p/yr.), I'm sure it'll be a candidate to be the new spec PC car. All it would need is a (Oreca?) spec engine with more power to at least equal the speed of the current car, hopefully it'll be a tad faster.

Anything (prototype) that meets the safety, endurance and performance envelopes will be considered as long as it can also be produced at the price point IMSA establishes for the next PC chassis. I am positive it will be shopped around.





L.P.

[Rcz]

Those V8s, they kind you see in NASCAR, ARCA, USAC, WoO, and a variety of lower level racing series all use this these type of engines. So there may maybe a market for these cars to tap.

[Rcz]

The we must have them because they have them mentality is quite annoying.

Lmp3 should replace PC as the Jr. Proto or do nothing with them at all.