USCC (leave your axe outside)

[Rodger Davies]

Lighting at night races has been creeping in for years, it's certainly not just a US/TUSC problem. It might sound petty, but since they properly lit up Arnage corner my midnight excursion hasn't been the same for exactly the reasons stated above, there's less emphasis on the glowing discs and the brake lights.

So many other night races are heading the same way, it's a bit disappointing but something to get used to.

[jasonjessica09]

I believe the Daytona race at night is at 20% accept for the main tri-oval/pits which is fully 100% lit up. Which I'm sure makes viewing from the grandstand in front of the pits or at the first turn pretty good still.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

I think you guys fail to look at daytona for what it is and take into account that it's an oval track. All tracks have lighting,along the front stretch,at a corner here and there,and maybe one or two on the back stretch.all of daytona's NASCARdrome can be seen from pretty much anywhere on the track whith nothing to block light.so a light at this corner and that corner will flood into another corner, and the light clusters high on the banks or on the grand stands will flood into the infield plus pit lane lights and other random lights will illuminate portions of the track.

imagine if road Atlanta was a half or a one mile stupid small roval, the lights from the pits and front traight would flood other portions of the track.imagine if the nurburgring 24 was ran within the gp circuit it would be bright, I remember in leeh keens rain dance video the gp circuit portion was bright.

It would be cool to see daytona a bit darker, but it's in its nature as an oval track.i won't be complaining about the lights, hell they can turn them up to NASCAR night race levels and I would still watch.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

Yes! That's perfect, throw an axe in there get a sponsor and we got our selfs the offical logo for this thread.just imagine......

Originally Posted by Mechanic Z

The offical Ten-tenths TUSCC thread.
Sponsored by Kershaw, the offical axe supplier to the TUSCC fan thread.
!!!

[Nick Woodbury]

[Maelochs]

I've only been to one Rolex, but the lights didn't bother me that time.

Not every race has to be the same. At some tracks we can watch the brakes discs, at others, the lights, and at Daytona, the cars.

Nothing wrong with watching cars racing, I hope.

BTW, all Rolex cars needed to have working lights for night races, whether conditions demanded them or not. They used stickers for daytime sprint races because the bodywork was cheaper and simpler, I've been told.

And hey ... if a DP is as fast as a P2, why is it still a bad car? They no longer look the same, and with the diffusers/splitter/tunnel packages opught to be decently quick.

Yes they are heavy, and yes they are mostly tube-framed ... but if they can get the job done as well as the (equally spec) P2s ... and from testing it looks like the modded DPs might have been about as fast as the pre-overweight P2s.

I like variety. And I like fast cars. Seems I will be pretty happy on those counts at least in 2014.

Now leave me alone ... I am crawling back under my bridge to sleep.

Or ... since this is sort of a positive post, maybe I should sleep on top of the bridge and be an anti-troll.

Would that make me a billy-goat? The combination of Interwebz, fishing terms, and children's stories is so complex.

See you at the Roar.

[wdave0]

Originally Posted by Lanky Turtle

Daytona uses 20% of their stadium lighting power for the Rolex 24. With literally just 20% of the bulbs in each light bank bank turned on, the other 80% left dark.
Though when one starts coming up with excuses not to attend an endurance sportscar race, the fear that one might be able to see the cars too well at night for the past 15 years seems a bit of an absurd reason.
Even Sebring and Road Atlanta are somewhat lit with light poles in various locations and floodlights used in some turns. Just as Daytona was somewhat lit before the stadium lights were put in place in 1998. The entire frontstretch used to have light poles just behind the catchfence as well as on odd pole here and there in the middle of the infield.

How about not an excuse not to go but an opportunity to vote with one's wallet and attendance by going instead to Sebring and/or Petit?

[chernaudi]

Of course, I do fear that Muscle Milk and Oak with their Nissan powered cars will probably upset the apple cart again, just because the Nismo engine is better than the HPD power unit is.

That's been my biggest frustration with TUSCC so far--one step forward, half a step back. I'm just glad that they didn't have to go back to square one with some of the issues that they had. It would've helped if they tried to address the issues earlier, but as fans, we have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, and having that, it's easy for us to jeer, ridicule and criticize when we're not in the foxhole, regardless if who's in the right.

As for my issues with the DP cars, it's not even that they're tube-frame cars, or even as far as being basically mid-engined Trans-Am/IMSA GTO space frame cars with IRS standard across the board (I wouldn't rate them down with NASCAR stock cars, which are ladder frame cars with a triangulated roll cage). It's a cost issue to me.

An average DP now cost, for the basic version of the Riley, Coyote or Dallara chassis, about $480,000 USD. A bargain compared to a Porsche RS Spyder, which when new cost about $1.5 millon. But that becomes less of a bargain when a current generation LMP2 cost $450,000 because of the ACO/FIA cost cap. And a LMPC is faster than a DP, probably not insanely far off even the best LMP2s (read Nissan powered cars), and cost even less, significantly less than either machine.

Now with the mods to try and speed them up, the DPs went from being $480K cars, to possibly being $600+K cars, not too much off what a NASCAR stock car (NW or Cup) cost. Of course, since it's built for road racing, a you only need 1-2 DPs for a season as opposed to a whole fleet of cars in NW or Cup.

Of course, the big PO for me is that a pre-'14 DP cost as much as a LM GTE car, but at several tracks was at risk of being slower than a GTE car, or even a GT3 car, which at many tracks were as fast as GTE cars. Of course, GT3 cars are cheaper than GTE cars, and that could and probably has caused it's own can of worms to be opened, but that's for a different debate.

Of course, LMP1 is a factory play ground. At most races, LMP1 privateers were 3-4 seconds off the pace of Audi and Toyota easy. And even then, we have cost/benefit issues. If a Lola LMP1 cost about $1 million USD, and it was racing against a HPD that was rumored to cost $2.6 million, even with Rebellion's Toyota engine lease deal reportedly being worth $1 million, they were still saving about $500K over the HPD, for cars built for the same class, and essentially performed about the same. Most of us want to see the "best and fastest" cars in the world, but at what cost?

Of course, the biggest issue with TUSCC, and this is at primarily at an organizational level for on-track stuff right now, is if anything, they're trying too hard to please everyone--fans, teams, NASCAR, IMSA, ACO, FIA, and et al. Can't blame them for trying, but it's an impossible task, and for sure everyone's not of one mind or philosophy.

So we have no LMP1; fine, considering that Audi and Toyota didn't want to run prototypes in the ALMS and so far have shown no interest in TUSCC aside from Audi selling R8 GT3 cars to GTD teams. Porsche, same deal--they only sell GT cars, and have no interest in running prototypes, and the Lola and HPD chassis are obsolescent to the new ACO/FIA regs, so they're out.

LMP2 took off in Europe, but struggled in the US with weak sales, partly because of LMPC (the cars are made by Oreca, who also supply most of the European LMP2 grids), and it wasn't until Oreca started to heavily market the LMP2 machines that they make (which shares many parts with the LMPC, especially the tubs) that more interest has come in, and when Oak wanted to run a car full time this season.

The DP formula never took off outside of GA. GA wanted to be unique like IMSA GTP was, but the restrictive formula, less than aesthetically pleasing cars, and performance that was well below GT1 and LMP2, let alone LMP1, and was borderline GTE didn't get hearts pumping, and NASCAR couldn't sell GA to the stock car crowd. Getting rid of the tube-frame silhouette GT cars, which were often limited in terms of engine power to noticeably below what the equivalent road cars could do stock did help, but, like with all the moves that the ALMS made to boost entries and interest, for GA, similar moves were too little, too late.

Now we have GT3 cars racing in America outside of World Challenge, a big plus. We have GTLM, for the GT cars that race at Le Mans and in the WEC and are held to the same basic rules, a big plus again. We have an over-subscibed LMPC class, a big plus for that class, and for GM (who sell the engines) and Oreca (who sell the cars).

But then we have a top prototype class with LMP2 cars that bounced from being fully ACO spec, to being an different spec, and back again, with info being gleaned from what has appeared for a while be simply an inferior car for the class. And we have DPs that went from being roughly the price of a LMP2, to becoming much more expensive and highlighted the potential issues of what can happen when something low-tech and not designed with such performance in mind is pushed to--and possibly beyond--its limits.

TUSCC doesn't have to emulate what the ACO and FIA do, but the series does have to get better within the next couple of years--with a unified prototype class with one set of regs instead of trying to BOP cars designed with entirely different performance and technology philosophies--to realize that goal, if that is their goal. They'll even have to do that anyways to continue to earn the approval of ACO and FIA in Europe and France, if that's their goal.

I watch this racing for the prototypes primarily, and it's been that way for a while. I do like the GT cars, but I've always preferred the prototypes.

My axe to grind has a lot to do with so many opportunities being squandered so far by all parties involved. Let's hope that they don't squander many more.

[JoestForEver]

One thing I'm quite confused with is that in the 2013 Daytona 24, Montoya is already able to achieve 1:41, and the rest of the field 1:43, already the same pace as P2 cars. Then what's all the fuss about upgrading DP, accident and then upgrade P2 again?
---
Same applies to GTD as well. To me, GTD is more like Grand-Am GT cars rather than GT3 and I believe upgrading GAGT to GT3 is easier than fiddling with the GT3 with slower and weird spec parts, making GTD cars more expensive as it is only useful in the States while a whole bunch of second hand GT3 can be cheaply purchased in Europe.(e.g. Hexis DBRS9, 200,000 euro from BES website.)
But I do admit that GT3 cars are way too fast, sometimes faster than GTLM/GTE/GT2 cars and that's an issue.
The inaugural season will be OK now it seems with all the hard work by IMSA and thank you indeed. However, just get rid of dying GTLM cars or simply integrate them with GT3 cars instead of creating a anomaly called GTD is more budget-friendly. An ideal USCC to me will be DP+P2+PC+DW as the P class and a unified GT class, with DTMs in between probably given the referendum.

[ACFlinn]

Originally Posted by wdave0

Having been to Daytona 24s before and after the lights I am spoiled. The lights are bright enough to mask the glowing rotors, sparking pads, glowing headers, blue gas from exhausts etc. It is an extra element of night racing that is still at LeMans, Sebring and Petit, among others.

Over the past 50 years, the Rolex24 has changed. What used to be an endurance torture test won by laps or even hours (Interscope Racing Porsche 935 in 1979) has become a 24-hour sprint race (CGR beat WTR this year by 40 seconds).

I bet if you asked the drivers, an overwhelming number prefer and appreciate having the enhanced lighting. I definitely like it as a fan and Sebring spectator since 1978.

It also stands to reason that the better a driver can see the safer the racing is. I don't understand how it makes sense to compromise safety in order to get some cool photos.

The Rolex24 has an excellent safety record. Considering how competitive the races have been lately, every effort should be made to keep it that way.

Andy Flinn

[jeast]

Originally Posted by ACFlinn

Over the past 50 years, the Rolex24 has changed. What used to be an endurance torture test won by laps or even hours (Interscope Racing Porsche 935 in 1979) has become a 24-hour sprint race (CGR beat WTR this year by 40 seconds).

That's not really a fair or comparable argument since now the 24 is more NASCARish with fake debris yellows, wave arounds and lucky dogs.

[wdave0]

Originally Posted by ACFlinn

Over the past 50 years, the Rolex24 has changed. What used to be an endurance torture test won by laps or even hours (Interscope Racing Porsche 935 in 1979) has become a 24-hour sprint race (CGR beat WTR this year by 40 seconds).

I bet if you asked the drivers, an overwhelming number prefer and appreciate having the enhanced lighting. I definitely like it as a fan and Sebring spectator since 1978.

It also stands to reason that the better a driver can see the safer the racing is. I don't understand how it makes sense to compromise safety in order to get some cool photos.

The Rolex24 has an excellent safety record. Considering how competitive the races have been lately, every effort should be made to keep it that way.

Andy Flinn

I can't see where those races run in the dark have safety issues, indeed the last person I saw killed at Daytona roval was in daylight. Darkness was a facet of the multi-faceted sport of endurance racing, now sanitized (or
dumbed out) of the Rolex. It's not about the photos, it's about the spectator experience, even just the atmosphere of the event.
Really good drivers will tell you they don't like it so much because it takes away some of their advantage, much like those drivers who like rain because it is to their advantage. If we really want it to be totally safe the cars should be drones and all spectating should be closed circuit from town.

[Danske]

Originally Posted by JoestForEver

One thing I'm quite confused with is that in the 2013 Daytona 24, Montoya is already able to achieve 1:41, and the rest of the field 1:43, already the same pace as P2 cars. Then what's all the fuss about upgrading DP, accident and then upgrade P2 again?

Previously on common tracks LMP2 was faster than DP. Now it's apparently possible a significant portion of that difference was in the tires, not just the inherent superiority of the cars. However, it's also possible that ESM's HPD ain't the best P2 for Daytona, and additionally that their problems with the Continental tires and Le Mans aero at Daytona could be improved with experience and not technical adjustments. IIRC, when Conquest ran their Morgan-Nissan at Daytona on Continental tires with higher-downforce aero they had faster lap times while being horribly slow in comparison on the banking. ESM was really unexpectedly slow, and the series has said they're expecting to make more adjustments to the P2 side of BoP after the Roar, when they'll get more P2 data. Hopefully the other P2 teams won't benefit from having not participated in the previous tests.

[BullMan]

Originally Posted by ACFlinn

Over the past 50 years, the Rolex24 has changed. What used to be an endurance torture test won by laps or even hours (Interscope Racing Porsche 935 in 1979) has become a 24-hour sprint race (CGR beat WTR this year by 40 seconds).

I bet if you asked the drivers, an overwhelming number prefer and appreciate having the enhanced lighting. I definitely like it as a fan and Sebring spectator since 1978.

It also stands to reason that the better a driver can see the safer the racing is. I don't understand how it makes sense to compromise safety in order to get some cool photos.

The Rolex24 has an excellent safety record. Considering how competitive the races have been lately, every effort should be made to keep it that way.

Andy Flinn

They can manufacture a close finish when there is a safety car period every hour.

[Dyson Mazda]

How much faster do you guys honestly see the Nissan's being. Conquest had no problem out running the DP's in January.

[TF110]

The hpds turbo is restricted a bit more than the NA Nissan. I dont see Nissan powered car being that much faster tbh. Maybe a second or so.

[Accident]

Originally Posted by JoestForEver

However, just get rid of dying GTLM cars or simply integrate them with GT3 cars instead of creating a anomaly called GTD is more budget-friendly.

This has been gone over several times, it's not that simple to just "combine" them given that GTE cars are built to an actual set of technical regulations and GT3 cars aren't. The want/need for a pro/am class also makes having them in different machinery a plus. With the supposed GT merger coming in a few years, we will just have to wait until then for any changes I think.

Personally though, I wouldn't call a class with 4 2-car factory teams, that are some of the most popular/successful manufacturers in the world with some of the best teams in world with some of the best driver line-ups in the world, a "dying class."

[JoestForEver]

I have to admit you are right.
What frustrates me about the GTE cars is that for all that cash burnt by the works team, it is simply not fast enough, not satisfying, not a big enough grid. Had it not been factory support, it was already dead after GT1 I suppose, which is again a strong verdict I shouldn't make, to be fair, because there is no 'what if' for history.

[jasonjessica09]

Is there specific timetable or method in place for the GTE/GT3 merger at all yet? If not then I think you can't call GTE a dying class just yet. But still GTE only has 6 manufacturers world wide right now (Aston Martin, Corvette, Ferrari, BMW, SRT, Porsche). At least all of them will be represented at Daytona.

Maybe Daytona won't be the GTE showcase like I thought it would be since it is a high horsepower track. Look at tracks that are the complete opposite of Daytona. Street circuits like Long Beach and Baltimore come to mind. At those places GTE cars were able to compete with LMP2 and LMPC cars for overall positioning. I bet full fleded FIA GT3 cars at Daytona would be pretty darn fun to watch if it would ever happen.

[TF110]

If they didnt breathe through a straw then they would make serious speed.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

No.......If they didn't have sophisticated aero generating downforce and dragging them down they would have higher speeds on the banking.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

https://mobile.twitter.com/MuscleMil...MuscleMilkRace

Worth a look see.....

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by TF110

If they didnt breathe through a straw then they would make serious speed.

That really is my biggest problem with the class right now: The paltry power output of the GTE
cars is really not quite worthy of a top class.

[Matt]

The fact that 2/3 of the GTE class makes less power than their street variant is kinda silly.

[Danathar]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

I would concede, that those who watch NASCAR, don't care what's under the skin.

But, those who are attracted to Sportscar, DO care what is under the skin.

Having said that, the proposition that we change to appease the NASCAR fan base, precludes most of the current Sportscar fanbase. Not sure that is what should be the goal, as opposed to finding a way to market what Sportscar racing is to them.

I really don't know why people are arguing this. There was an experiment to test the argument that the fans don't care what's under the hood. It was called "Grand AM" and if it was succeeding wildly (lots of fans watching on TV and at the track), Jim France would not of bought the ALMS. He could of just "let" the ALMS die.