IMSA DPi Discussion

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

It's only viable as long as the manufacturers are interested. Once said interest is lost, there's no guarantee the privateers will come back with the ACO-spec cars. Burn them hard enough and they're GUARANTEED to stay away even once the manufacturer interest dries up.

P2 with no manufacturer involvement is not a viable top class for IMSA anyway. If they lose the manufacturers in the P-class, their best bet will be to go GT-only.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by joeb

I think things will be as equal as they can be, but most of the teams wanting to run a spec P2 seem to be in the market for a gentleman driver. Maybe this will change in the future but as long as there is an am in one seat the team is going to be gunning for the auto invite to Le Mans, and that is a big selling point to somebody wanting to go to Le Mans and fund the team in imsa.

Originally Posted by Maelochs

This will be another important issue, which will make discerning balance difficult. if the teams running P2s are the less prepared teams, running less prepared cars ....

To add to these points, there's going to be issue with more than just the car and team balance. The fact that they're used to running on Continental tires and then go to LM with a possible tire handicap (in either staying with not as good Conti or running new Dunlops for instance).

[Damian Baldi]

With Rebellion leaving P1, I could see a demise of P1-L, and why not, a place for the DPi at Le Mans.

[Makaze]

Most Manufacturers just wanted to choose one of the four P2 chassis and put their engine in it.They want the engine in the 600hp range and be able to race at Le Mans either in P2(except ACO/FIA BOP) or P1 Subclass.

Only GM/NASCAR wanted the NASCAR Bodykits on the P2.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by JLGarcia

Well, they were doing something better.

No. No they weren't.

It didn't necessarily pass the Real Sportscar Fan Purity Test, but on the other hand they didn't end up with a marquee class with 2 entries.

They would have had they not been subsidizing the entries, just as ALMS would've had more entries if they subsidized the field, but they were smart enough to realize that such is not the smart thing to do.

Seems a silly thing to still get all hot & bothered over. if the series broke out the checkbook and helped subsidize, say, PC teams buying new P2 chassis, I wonder if the same folks would have an ideological issue with it.

Depends. Are you talking about putting forth money to bring up ALL of the teams, or just one or two?

It's one thing to subsidize an entry or two(IMSA is still subsidizing AXR and SoD to a limited extent), it's quite another to subsidize a significant chunk of the field.

Subsidizing the majority, or entirety, of a field is the clearest sign of a weak class/championship. It was a bad thing for Champ Car and it was a bad thing for Grand-Am.

Subsidizing entries is a drag on the pocketbook of the championship, making it even harder for the series to profit. Since the need to subsidize a field usually comes from insufficient interest to turn a profit in the first place, it only compounds the loss of money and things recovering even harder.

Grand-Am could get away with it because they had NASCAR money to do it with. It was still a very bad thing - instead of spending that money on subsidizing a class that had insufficient interest to stand on it's own, they should have been looking into other options to boost interest in participation in their series.

[JLGarcia]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

No. No they weren't.

They would have had they not been subsidizing the entries, just as ALMS would've had more entries if they subsidized the field, but they were smart enough to realize that such is not the smart thing to do.



Depends. Are you talking about putting forth money to bring up ALL of the teams, or just one or two?

It's one thing to subsidize an entry or two(IMSA is still subsidizing AXR and SoD to a limited extent), it's quite another to subsidize a significant chunk of the field.

Subsidizing the majority, or entirety, of a field is the clearest sign of a weak class/championship. It was a bad thing for Champ Car and it was a bad thing for Grand-Am.

Subsidizing entries is a drag on the pocketbook of the championship, making it even harder for the series to profit. Since the need to subsidize a field usually comes from insufficient interest to turn a profit in the first place, it only compounds the loss of money and things recovering even harder.

Grand-Am could get away with it because they had NASCAR money to do it with. It was still a very bad thing - instead of spending that money on subsidizing a class that had insufficient interest to stand on it's own, they should have been looking into other options to boost interest in participation in their series.

Awesome- since you have all the answers, I'll leave you to it then.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by JLGarcia

Awesome- since you have all the answers, I'll leave you to it then.

Where did I say I had the answer to anything? Just because I can tell when someone's doing something stupid doesn't mean I have the magic bullet that can fix the problem.

[Coach Ep]

Originally Posted by JLGarcia

Awesome- since you have all the answers, I'll leave you to it then.

[Maelochs]

IndyCar subsidizes the field through Winner's Circle payouts ... and that series has come back from near-death to actually doing pretty well.

F1 subsidizes teams through shares of media money---so do most major sports leagues (like the obviously failing, tottering along, about-to-die NFL .... )

Subsidizing teams to get a series going when it isn't offering enough income through sponsor dollars and purses: (IndyCar)---worked. Subsidizing teams via a a share of the income of the whole league (NFL, etc) works really well.

The reason Grand-Am's subsidy program failed is that its product was not one the fans wanted ... but given what USCC looked like for the first two years and given who has won the championship each year ... one could honestly say that NASCAR's subsidizing of Rolex was pretty successful.

Further ... given that The France family put in the start-up money for Camel GT and all the series which grew out of that ... then switched over to Grand-Am/Rolex ... and considering the France family is still in control of North America's top-tier sportscar racing series ... I'd say that all those subsidy dollars have benefited both NASCAR and sportscar racing fans.

[Bob Baldwin]

Maelochs : As relates to your last paragraph I may be wrong but I seem to recall John Bishop going to the France family asking for some help to start that series . The inner circle talk at the time was France Family ISC etc ; was in at 75% of cost to float the series in the first year pending talks with T Wayne Roberts from RJ Reynolds to confirm and bring in " Camel " the following year .
Maybe not the right word here but the France family did NOT want the WINSTON dollars used in the Sportscar Series even though technically they were coming from the same Corporation . Co-Mingling of said funds VIA the various Racing Corp's set up by the France Family is somewhat Unique in Essence we will never really know which corp's were writing checks to whom ?

[joeb]

I can't remember seeing this posted here, but Marshall had some more info on the Nissan DPi program.

http://www.racer.com/more/viewpoints...ripple-effects

pretty much what was expected, but has actual material from the folks involved. The engine is the big part of the program and the Ligier bodywork will be "breathed on" slightly.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by joeb

I can't remember seeing this posted here, but Marshall had some more info on the Nissan DPi program.

http://www.racer.com/more/viewpoints...ripple-effects

pretty much what was expected, but has actual material from the folks involved. The engine is the big part of the program and the Ligier bodywork will be "breathed on" slightly.

Is that the right link?

[joeb]

Originally Posted by TF110

Is that the right link?

Nope!

Let me try again:

http://www.racer.com/imsa/item/13519...an-dpi-project

[TF110]

Originally Posted by joeb

Nope!

Let me try again:

http://www.racer.com/imsa/item/13519...an-dpi-project

Thanks! I read through the entire first article thinking the hpd indycar thing would lead to talk about the Nissan DPi

[joeb]

Originally Posted by TF110

Thanks! I read through the entire first article thinking the hpd indycar thing would lead to talk about the Nissan DPi

Sorry, I had both tabs open and copied the wrong one. :Cheers:

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by joeb

I can't remember seeing this posted here, but Marshall had some more info on the Nissan DPi program.

http://www.racer.com/more/viewpoints...ripple-effects

pretty much what was expected, but has actual material from the folks involved. The engine is the big part of the program and the Ligier bodywork will be "breathed on" slightly.

Well I guess we will find out just how much Raffauf is going to require for DPi body work to differentiate it from original constructor body work.







L.P.

[broadrun96]

Who is building the best powerboat DPi, and can Chris-Craft or Donzi get in on testing?


https://twitter.com/LE_Collectibles/...34747040788480

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

Who is building the best powerboat DPi, and can Chris-Craft or Donzi get in on testing?


https://twitter.com/LE_Collectibles/...34747040788480

Not so fast there! 2009.....

http://autoweek.com/article/nascar/h...ytona-speedway






L.P.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

IndyCar subsidizes the field through Winner's Circle payouts ... and that series has come back from near-death to actually doing pretty well.

The Winner's Circle is not a subsidy - it is a replacement for the standard race purse.

F1 subsidizes teams through shares of media money---so do most major sports leagues (like the obviously failing, tottering along, about-to-die NFL .... )

Again, not a subsidy - in this case because it is a specified part of the payout structure that teams are entitled to, just like in the NFL - though the NFL is a particularly poor comparison since stick-and-ball sports have always rewards their participants in a different manner to how motorsports generally have.

A subsidy in the world of motorsports is an additional payout to guarantee participation on top of the normal expected race earnings - generally, the race purse.

F1 and IndyCar's payouts are not subsidies because they're the expected payouts and they are done in line with the series' respective incomes(in theory in the case of IndyCar and it's tight budget).

To put it more simply, under the logic of what you've said, my local dirt track subsidizes entries by having a payout structure that gives competitors money. Money coming from the series/organizers/whoever else is not automatically a subsidy.

Grand-Am and CCWS subsidized the field by paying teams EXTRA money specifically to take part - the payouts were NOT part of the structure of the championship.

This is why subsidies are a drag on the series pocketbook - there is no income that directly recoups the cost of the subsidy, meaning that only a massive surge in the series' overall income can offset the expense, and if a series is struggling enough to need the subsidized entries then getting that surge in income is generally going to be quite an uphill battle.

Further ... given that The France family put in the start-up money for Camel GT and all the series which grew out of that ... then switched over to Grand-Am/Rolex ... and considering the France family is still in control of North America's top-tier sportscar racing series ... I'd say that all those subsidy dollars have benefited both NASCAR and sportscar racing fans

Startup capital is also VERY different from a subsidy - due in no small part to there usually being a repayment(with interest) deal as part of the agreement.

[Maelochs]

Lots of series have paid "appearance" money to drivers/teams. Anyway ... you need to be right, so you need to find definitions and descriptions which suit your view. I am cool with that.

I like racing more than I like pointless bickering on the Internet.

Testing at Daytona in mid-November .... hopefully a first look at the new DPis at speed.

Oh, wait ... am I allowed to post stuff about DPis in this thread?

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Lots of series have paid "appearance" money to drivers/teams. Anyway ... you need to be right, so you need to find definitions and descriptions which suit your view. I am cool with that.

I like racing more than I like pointless bickering on the Internet.

Testing at Daytona in mid-November .... hopefully a first look at the new DPis at speed.

Oh, wait ... am I allowed to post stuff about DPis in this thread?

I cannot wait as well.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Lots of series have paid "appearance" money to drivers/teams.

Appearance fees are more often than not part of the established payout structure.

Anyway ... you need to be right, so you need to find definitions and descriptions which suit your view.

It has nothing to do with a need to be right. It is nothing more than pointing out the facts of the matter: The DP fields in Grand-Am were as large as they were because GA was giving the teams additional money they were not otherwise entitled to, and Champ Car did the same thing.

Where are both of those championships, now? That's right, both merged with another series and found themselves under the control of people who DIDN'T pay teams extra money just to be part of the field - though the ultimate ownership situation of each merger is VERY different, the people in charge of the series in both cases ended up being the ones who stuck to giving money to the teams within the confines of their championship's payout structure.

This is the issue I am getting at. If you want to regard a subsidy in a different light, go right ahead. But you're still missing the ponit if you're going to try to debate the nuances of what exactly a "subsidy" is. I am referring to a specific problem that is NOT anywhere near as common as you're trying to make it out to be. One that is a VERY clear sign of a weak championship.

You want to call it something else, go right ahead. But don't try to act like it never happened - even Felix Sebates admitted to this matter.

[DeezPutz]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

Appearance fees are more often than not part of the established payout structure.



It has nothing to do with a need to be right. It is nothing more than pointing out the facts of the matter: The DP fields in Grand-Am were as large as they were because GA was giving the teams additional money they were not otherwise entitled to, and Champ Car did the same thing.

Where are both of those championships, now? That's right, both merged with another series and found themselves under the control of people who DIDN'T pay teams extra money just to be part of the field - though the ultimate ownership situation of each merger is VERY different, the people in charge of the series in both cases ended up being the ones who stuck to giving money to the teams within the confines of their championship's payout structure.

This is the issue I am getting at. If you want to regard a subsidy in a different light, go right ahead. But you're still missing the ponit if you're going to try to debate the nuances of what exactly a "subsidy" is. I am referring to a specific problem that is NOT anywhere near as common as you're trying to make it out to be. One that is a VERY clear sign of a weak championship.

You want to call it something else, go right ahead. But don't try to act like it never happened - even Felix Sebates admitted to this matter.

Why are you so obsessed with this? We've all moved on. Are you an embittered former Grand Am owner or something?

[Coach Ep]

Originally Posted by DeezPutz

Why are you so obsessed with this? We've all moved on. Are you an embittered former Grand Am owner or something?

We all share your frustration DeezPutz but at this point it seems better not to respond to FF.

[Coach Ep]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

IMSA should throw Rebellion a bone and figure out how to include the R-One into DPi (and also SMP to allow the BR01 to race on, preferably with a five-liter Nissan VK to have the power with the new cars) and once the class is established toss open the chassis rules so that HPD, Gibson, Crawford, Coyote or other players on this side of the Atlantic can jump in, and allow cars to use new engines but without the bodywork. Get in league with the PWC guys and Stephane Ratel and start getting connections built up with the SRO. Let the people the ACO is actively trying to screw over come to IMSA. That's the best one can do now, because LMP1-L is now officially dead and since LMP2 is now a class designed by nepotism, sooner or later they will have explaining to do....

The constructor limit is not gonna be lifted any time soon but if Rebellion, SMP or whoever is willing to cough up IMSA's marketing fee, I'm sure they'll be let in. Maybe one or two of them can jump in on ESM's deal with Nissan or make a similar one???