DP "The Class" is bad, but What about the Builders...

[RacingManiac]

Some opinions I like to see is about the builders for this class. A majority of us(myself included) believes that this NASCAR-like, templete based competition is a joke as far as sportscar racing, especially prototype goes. As it contradicts what makes sportscar great and interesting from the multimillion F1 business. Variety of technical approach is usually encouraged in sportscar and that's why we see cars that looks differet. On top of the fact that the templete itself is pretty "aestatically challenged" for the DPs....

But what about those people who build these cars. Given the rule they had to work with, I think we are seeing some tremandous progress here and as far as DP as a class goes, there are some quality products to be found. I mean a good car is as good as the rule that defines it, and the cars for the DP does seem to be taking to a pretty quality direction....despite appearance.....

Your thoughts?

[Aircon]

But don't you think that what makes sportscar racing great (i.e. technical diversity, innovation, etc.) is also what makes it out of the reach financially for al but works teams?

[RacingManiac]

I don't know, I don't think diversity has to be costly. Look at Dome or Riley and Scott. You could honestly get a car from them and expected to be somewhat competitive. Obviously though prototype racing was never meant to be a budget sport, which is why there are lower classes in sportscar. I can agree to a degree of GARRA's approach to keep the cost low, but I don't think it has to be templete based. You are limiting the potential of someone coming up with a design that could be good, and yet still be within the money limit. I don't think that's an impossibility.

[Scrutineer78]

The staunch supporters of ALMS who insist this idea will never last are in painful denial.

In case they haven't noticed, sponsors and factories aren't exactly running over each other to get into the LMP classes here.

Perhaps this wasn't the baseline for the original GA idea but it's working out excellently now. The teams are bringing in prototypes because it's enormously cheaper than ALMS, while teams are *leaving* LMP 1 and 2.

You may abuse them as "ugly" but in 5 years this could be the only prototype racing we have in America.

[RacingManiac]

I am NOT intending for this to be another GARRA vs ALMS thread. My bottomline for this is thread was this, as far as the DP rules goes, no one can change what GARRA wants to do, and that's fine. And as you point out that this could be where the customer wants to go in their racing venture, and that's fine. I am trying to say within the tight confine of the NASCAR-like Templete-based rule, the builders are doing what they car to turn out the cars. And I am trying to give them credit for it.

I don't want to make a sh#t stirring thread, its pointless and everyone has their opinion and it will never be resolved.

[Fab]

Originally posted by Scrutineer78
The staunch supporters of ALMS who insist this idea will never last are in painful denial.

OK, now you stop immediately to post that way, or I delete your next post.

You are able to support DPs positively. More, we've now IMSA fans saying positively that this Daytona race was pleasant to follow, and this serie could now win new fans in the IMSA/ACO series supporters. Each sit I checked this morning says that the race was fine, and that the rules may be a good idea on the long term. So let's give up the last months talks leading nowhere : there's two series, and that's all. each one of us is free to appreciate the one he likes more. Comparaisons seem more and more irrelevant, but if you really do want to keep on, do it positively ("I like this one because", and not "this one is and the rulers - and supporters - are morons").

In one word : if you wanna debase, find another place.

Or ask Craig to fire me as a mod.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally posted by Scrutineer78
The staunch supporters of ALMS who insist this idea will never last are in painful denial.

In case they haven't noticed, sponsors and factories aren't exactly running over each other to get into the LMP classes here.

Perhaps this wasn't the baseline for the original GA idea but it's working out excellently now. The teams are bringing in prototypes because it's enormously cheaper than ALMS, while teams are *leaving* LMP 1 and 2.

You may abuse them as "ugly" but in 5 years this could be the only prototype racing we have in America.

Scruty:
How old are you? How long have you been following road racing?
History says you are wrong and it seems, if you are over 35 you, have not paid much attention to the off track concerns, and history, of road racing.
If you are under 35, your irrational exhuberance, which often sound like "oh yeah-well..." is somewhat normal, but you should do some serious checking on road racings past. Especially how and why it survived the 70s and the supposed fuel crunch.
Those times were far worse than anything going on now.
IMSA started shortly before the fuel crunch, it thrived by using fewer restrictions not more.
Bob

[Aysedasi]

Originally posted by Scrutineer78



You may abuse them as "ugly" but in 5 years this could be the only prototype racing we have in America.

Strangely, I'm struggling to celebrate that thought.

We can and do abuse them for being ugly. After all, we are free to abuse any car that looks ugly. I don't consider my right to express my views on the looks of a car fettered by anyone's elses.....

[Aysedasi]

And I'll be backing my fellow mod Fab if this flamebait stuff continues.

[veeten]

I said it during the race, that the 2nd Generation DP's(Riley, Crawford) will perform substantially better in the season to follow, with only the Doran being the best of the rest.

The Fabcar, Multimatic, and Piccio will be left with no other choice but to do some real work on their aero designs just to keep up.

[cybersdorf]

Crawford - good outfit, in business for a long time although not with chassis under their own name.
Riley (& S****) - we know they are good.
Fabcar - they used to be one of the premier chassis builders in the IMSA scene; has technical development passed them by, I wonder.
Doran - has built some chassis, and has development experience; I believe this is his first prototype (if you can call it that ).
Picchio - small European manufacturer that was created from a project inspired by Bizzarrini; they are looking to make a step up the ladder, into international competition. It may be a very big step for them.
Multimatic - also a successful development company - not dissimilar to Crawford - they have a reputation to lose (and they are working on it!). Simultaneously involved in the Panoz Esperante GT3 project, btw.

I fear the older DP designs can't be improved under the current set of rules; the teams will have to buy new cars. That's the downside of cast-in-iron, "stable" regulations.

[gttouring]

the fabcars i think may actually do ,well.
the multimatic a fave of mine, seems to dirty in the aero sense, and well picchio looked okay-that front wing isn't speeding it up.
The DP rule set, although goofy, and questionable strength-how many wheels came off? and with this power the Riley pontiac breaks an axle shaft?
they work well as a class- this would be the best LMP2 idea for a cheap car, and a second class for privateers who wan t to go faster than GTS-sadly they can't and didn't and could barely out run a GT porsche- or a Porsche Cup car nee SGS- and in the end many Dp's could not out run the "lessser" competition.
the problem of the missing 100 or so horses isn't too hard to find, that or have them shed 500 lbs....
the constructors are doing a pretty good job given rules, evidenced by the nice Crawford-
the Riley has a Mosler Consulier look to it, and that is seriously ugly. the Fabcars are Glorious next to that

[Tim Northcutt]

The Crawford looks pretty decent...for a DP, given the rules...

The Riley design is for function...Bill Riley explained why they designed the greenhouse the way they did...and it contributed to the car's effectiveness...they are known for being functional and effective in their designs....

Finally, I think the Riley and the Crawford cars will be the cars to beat as the season progresses...

[veeten]

in some ways, the Riley reminds me of the Intrepid GTP of the late 80's.

wouldn't be surprised if he was involved with the original design back then...

[veeten]

I knew it, I knew it all along...

http://962.com/other_racing_cars/199..._intrepid_gtp/

[thebear]

Originally posted by gttouring
The DP rule set, although goofy, and questionable strength-how many wheels came off? and with this power the Riley pontiac breaks an axle shaft?

The DP rule set was generated by Mark Raffauf who just happened to be heavily associated with IMSA's original rules.

The "loose wheels" did not involve broken axles. The retainers for the lug nut failed. There were tire failures and shortages but no wheels or axles failed.

[TDDWEST]

When 2 GT Cars are on the podium, it diminishes the whole idea of Prototypes. Prototypes are supposed to be the cutting edge of techknowlogy, and these DP cars are Censored versions of what a Proto-type is supposed to represent.

It's definately hard to simply, "Run what you brung",...because of the competitive imbalance that it creates between the factory teams and the rest. It ends up being who has the most money. There has to be some middle ground,...and for now that is the ALMS which has good sized fields and somewhat of a competitive balance in the "Big Car" class.

[Fogelhund]

Originally posted by thebear
The DP rule set was generated by Mark Raffauf who just happened to be heavily associated with IMSA's original rules.

Well, not exactly true.

IMSA's original rules were formed in late 1970. Raffauf was what eight years old at the time? +- a year. Perhaps he was a visionary at an early age, and my assumption is not correct.

I do understand that he was well involved with getting rid of the GTP's, and introducing the WSC's. Perhaps those are the original rules you are referring to? I wouldn't exactly hold those years up as the shining highlights of North American racing, a time when many lost much of their interest in the sport (Opinion). It wasn't until those rules were abandoned that IMSA managed to grow at all.

So, Raffauf has now been instrumental in creating two master changes, that were ridiculed by many, viewed as ugly ducks and slow by most.

Hopefully a few years down the road, someone else will come in and make the necessary changes to make this a more attractive format to the traditionals.

[TDDWEST]

Originally posted by Fogelhund


I do understand that he was well involved with getting rid of the GTP's, and introducing the WSC's.

[sarcasm] and that was brillient![/sarcasm]

However it was ultimately better than having a one horse race,...and the idea has grown into a good competitive series.

I can't wait till sebring!

[Fogelhund]

Originally posted by TDDWEST


However it was ultimately better than having a one horse race,...and the idea has grown into a good competitive series.

[/B]

I couldn't agree more. I think that the DP concept in itself is brilliant, but the details are horrid.

The required roof line, and base engine are what is preventing many more from liking this concept. The Porsche 3.6 needs to be tossed overboard, and a redesign of the roof line, and I think most would gladly embrace the idea.

[JAG]

Persoanlly I believe it is very, very naieve to base your figures on the cost of running a DP on the first year the cars ran.

Once the better funded teams arrive, as we have seen, they will go to the head of the field.

You can artificially control the costs of the cars themselves, but teams can spend whatever they want on testing and development.

I always point to the BTCC as an example. It started as a low cost formula for near standard Front wheel drive, 2l road cars, yet ended up with budgets of £5m+, with F1 teams running cars. There wasn't much scope for development so manufactuers spent millions perfecting their aero package , gearbox etc., that may only gain them half a second.

[billnchristy]

I dont find it as hard to believe that 2 GTs were on the podium.

I wouldnt expect any closed rear engine sports car short of a porsche 911 to last a 3hr caution.

The new Gen. of cars are pretty darn good. They have set good times, they have proven a good amount of reliability (there were a lotta cars taken out during Lemonsoon i believe in 01?) The engines are definitely reliable and the trannys seem to be good.

The Rileys and Crawfords and even the Dorans still have really good chances for wins. The Brumos fabcars will still win a race or two but not half the races like last year. Multimatic and Pichhio need to rethink and Fabcar really needs an upgrade too.

People like to say the cars will still be the same in ten years...naw, doubt it, Gen2 has already almost obsoleted gen1. Gen3 will definitely do it and so on.

These guys claim they found 5 seconds in the chassis alone, theres probably 5 seconds in the new chassis too, Id expect 42s next time theyre at daytona, maybe lower for the pole time...and all this with a mere 500 reliable horses...not bad really.

Im pretty sure the WSCs were junk when they came out and GT1 died before its time but those cars were wholly unreliable too. Look at 1997 Lemans.
22 GT1s started 19 broke...

This season will provide some really good action between the top dozen or so DPs. The sprint races will come and go with maybe 2 or 3 failures.

[JAG]

You say Gen 2 cars have already made gen 1 cars obsolete. Isn't this totally against the phillosophy of the DP class.

[Aysedasi]

Originally posted by TDDWEST
When 2 GT Cars are on the podium, it diminishes the whole idea of Prototypes. Prototypes are supposed to be the cutting edge of technology, and these DP cars are Censored versions of what a Proto-type is supposed to represent.

I'm with you there my friend.

[cybersdorf]

Originally posted by Fogelhund
I do understand that he was well involved with getting rid of the GTP's, and introducing the WSC's.

Which were turned into proper racecars by the friendly people of the ACO who allowed them to develop (DEVELOP!) into something more spectacular. The DPs will never develop, change, evolve into anything other than what they are already because they aren't allowed to. - Unless the ACO sets up a DP class at LE Mans, and lets development run rampant again

Originally posted by JAG
You say Gen 2 cars have already made gen 1 cars obsolete. Isn't this totally against the phillosophy of the DP class.

Sounds wrong doesn't it. A bit like F1.