IMSA DPi Discussion

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Bcarr6

No source, just what I've read. Meant to put (possible) next to that one!

Apparently the Riley Multimatic bit of it is decided, but whether it takes a Gibson engine or a Mazda is still under discussion

From everything I've heard, Mazda's only linked with Speedsource. I've never seen any mention of Mazda being linked to the SoD team.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

From everything I've heard, Mazda's only linked with Speedsource. I've never seen any mention of Mazda being linked to the SoD team.

there were multiple articles mentioning the prospect.

http://sportscar365.com/imsa/iwsc/vi...-dpi-decision/

[Bcarr6]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

From everything I've heard, Mazda's only linked with Speedsource. I've never seen any mention of Mazda being linked to the SoD team.

As Joeb says, but it's never been anything more than an evaluation


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[broadrun96]

And the most recent one:

Visit Florida Racing’s 2017 Prototype effort in the IMSA WeatherTech SportsCar Championship is likely to be with a Multimatic-Riley chassis, either as a Mazda DPi or with the LMP2-spec Gibson engine.

[FormulaFox]

Huh. Don't know how I missed those details, but it seems I did. None of my connections made mention of it - I guess they're not expecting anything to happen with regard to Mazda.

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

From everything I've heard, Mazda's only linked with Speedsource. I've never seen any mention of Mazda being linked to the SoD team.

Mazda has only been linked with Speedsource because they were the only group running capable of developing the RX-8, and the Renesis, and were subsequently tasked with the Mazda LMP.

They sold other RX-8's and took care of the engine work, chassis was still Riley built, Mazda, just like GM, or whoever will want to sell their product, or, at least branding to other teams.

[Coach Ep]

More details, mainly BoP related, are (slowly) coming out:

http://sportscar365.com/imsa/iwsc/im...dpi-machinery/

I didn't find this quote sounding overly comfortable:

Raffauf said the plan will be to accept each FIA/ACO-spec LMP2 car, as homologated by each of the four approved constructors, without any major modifications, except for possible “initial variables” that have yet to be detailed.

Sound rather vague to me.

[WolfsburgRS]

The "glass half full" part of me sees the standard Gibson V8 engine as a backbone to the class as being a great thing in the long run. Think of it as the chevy small block to the early 80s IMSA GTP class. While the manufacturers get geared up to put out their proper cars with their individual bodywork, the majority of the privateers can pick up what should be a reliable and basic package and have a chance to take some overall wins while the OEM programs, inevitably, come up against some kind of learning curve.

Truth be told, if I was a well funded driver or a team looking for overall victories, this might be the best year to score some upsets.

[BullMan]

Originally Posted by WolfsburgRS

The "glass half full" part of me sees the standard Gibson V8 engine as a backbone to the class as being a great thing in the long run. Think of it as the chevy small block to the early 80s IMSA GTP class. While the manufacturers get geared up to put out their proper cars with their individual bodywork, the majority of the privateers can pick up what should be a reliable and basic package and have a chance to take some overall wins while the OEM programs, inevitably, come up against some kind of learning curve.

Truth be told, if I was a well funded driver or a team looking for overall victories, this might be the best year to score some upsets.

The cynic in me says that a well-established team needs to run a serious program with the ACO P2 in order to make sure that funny business doesn't start with IMSA P2s and the ACO P2s, BoP wise.

Starworks is just a ride-buy program now, and PR1 is too new. I don't know who that serious team could be though.

[Maelochs]

"Initial variables" sounds an awful lot like "handicaps for foreigners to keep our favorite teams on top." Of course, that would Never happen in an IMSA series.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

"Initial variables" sounds an awful lot like "handicaps for foreigners to keep our favorite teams on top." Of course, that would Never happen in an IMSA series.

Exactly my thoughts. They have a way to handicap a team if need be. And who knows if it's for a legitimate reason.

[Damian Baldi]

Originally Posted by WolfsburgRS

The "glass half full" part of me sees the standard Gibson V8 engine as a backbone to the class as being a great thing in the long run. Think of it as the chevy small block to the early 80s IMSA GTP class. While the manufacturers get geared up to put out their proper cars with their individual bodywork, the majority of the privateers can pick up what should be a reliable and basic package and have a chance to take some overall wins while the OEM programs, inevitably, come up against some kind of learning curve.

Truth be told, if I was a well funded driver or a team looking for overall victories, this might be the best year to score some upsets.

Plus, teams using the Gibson have the ability to cross the Ocean if they want, to really be part of the race, or just to learn about the cars before the European campain (as Jaguar used to do in the Group-C/GTp era)

[MagVanisher]

I think I should post this one as DPi will have generic bodywork and reduced speed in Daytona 24 Hours:

Raffauf: 2017 Prototype Speeds Could Be Capped at Daytona (via Sportscar 365)

[WolfsburgRS]

Originally Posted by Damian Baldi

Plus, teams using the Gibson have the ability to cross the Ocean if they want, to really be part of the race, or just to learn about the cars before the European campain (as Jaguar used to do in the Group-C/GTp era)

It seems like a very flexible package.

I know a lot of the doom and gloomers will say that IMSA will make sure that the Gibson is not competitive with the DPIs, but it's honestly in IMSA's best interest to keep those cars in the hunt performance wise. It'll keep everyone on their toes, and keep the ride buyers and pro-am teams chasing results.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by WolfsburgRS

It seems like a very flexible package.

I know a lot of the doom and gloomers will say that IMSA will make sure that the Gibson is not competitive with the DPIs, but it's honestly in IMSA's best interest to keep those cars in the hunt performance wise. It'll keep everyone on their toes, and keep the ride buyers and pro-am teams chasing results.

They will be competitive. As you suggest, it is in IMSA's best interest for the entire field to be, for all entrants no matter if they are full time entrants or not.








L.P.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by WolfsburgRS

.... it's honestly in IMSA's best interest to keep those cars in the hunt performance wise. It'll keep everyone on their toes, and keep the ride buyers and pro-am teams chasing results.

Excepting of course, any sort of reasoning based on past performance ... IMSA's and before that Grand Am's past performance ...

What seems like an obvious "best interest" to many of us ...

Let us recall, we are watching the combined management teams of two sports car series which somehow managed to find it in their own "best interests" to end up bankrupt.

Seriously ... for two years it suited their "best interests" to keep the DP teams winning, because there were more of them. Then suddenly BoP shifts and it is in the series' "best interest" to let a P2 win some ... seeing as DPs are toast anyway ...

I believe IMSA did indeed serve its own "best interests." They were pretty sure old ALMS fans would stick around even though the DPs won everything, and pretty sure the DP teams would stick around And the old ALMS fans would be all pleased and also stick around if they let a P2 win a few ....

But at no point was fair racing really a consideration, as far as I can see. Whatever pleased the stakeholders came first, and then whatever pleased the fans ... and straight-up, best-team-wins racing seems never to have been a consideration (The crappy "We trust you" self-testing for BoP is one clear indicator here. If the series wanted fair BoP, they'd test the cars themselves with their own drivers.)

Not saying I won't attend every race I can afford to, and not saying I won't watch the rest on TV ... but I am not going to expect IMSA to start seeking a level playing field when I can see no evidence that they ever have before.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by WolfsburgRS

It seems like a very flexible package.

I know a lot of the doom and gloomers will say that IMSA will make sure that the Gibson is not competitive with the DPIs,

Very Nostradamus like!







L.P.

[BullMan]

Originally Posted by MagVanisher

I think I should post this one as DPi will have generic bodywork and reduced speed in Daytona 24 Hours:

Raffauf: 2017 Prototype Speeds Could Be Capped at Daytona (via Sportscar 365)

Will the Conti tires hold up?

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by BullMan

Will the Conti tires hold up?

They're new.... already been testing them.









L.P.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by MagVanisher

I think I should post this one as DPi will have generic bodywork and reduced speed in Daytona 24 Hours:

Raffauf: 2017 Prototype Speeds Could Be Capped at Daytona (via Sportscar 365)

I see no mention of generic bodywork for DPis at Daytona in that article.

The only mention of bodywork I see there is the note that the cars will use standard bodywork instead of unique low-drag bodywork as they currently do.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

I see no mention of generic bodywork for DPis at Daytona in that article.

The only mention of bodywork I see there is the note that the cars will use standard bodywork instead of unique low-drag bodywork as they currently do.

That's the way I read it too, just the single aero kit for the year per car, DPi or LMP2.

[WolfsburgRS]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Very Nostradamus like!



L.P.

Natestrodamus?

As far as the DP/LMP2 during the merger, I do agree that early on performance was very much in favor of the DPs. That said, now that some general level of parity has been reached I think it comes down to teams. At the end of the day the current top-running DP teams are better teams than the P2 entrants. Whether it's luck, budget, talent or some combination of the three, if a better team had been running a P2 full season I bet they could easily be in the championship hunt.

As an example, if ESM had been able to convert their early momentum and ran a full season they would most definitely be fighting with Action Express. They've done reasonably well in the WEC and that is arguably a deeper pool in some respects.

[joeb]

ESM is looking at Nissan engines in a pair of Ligiers for next year. Not sure if this includes Nissan bodywork or just the engine.

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2016/0...programme.html

[Ephaeton]

I'm deeply confused by this, I thought "DPi" required custom bodywork...

[broadrun96]

I'm thinking IMSA has hired a brain to share and are willing to allow an engine with bodywork to come. And they have mentioned a few companies are working toward introduction at a later date. I know we all dismissed it but maybe there's something there with Nissan and not as much coming from HPD. But with the NSX coming in 2017 any HPD kit could be delayed and ESM needs something sooner than 'in the future.'