IMSA USCC in 2016 and 2017

[MitchZ06]

Wonder how long before it gets announced that MSR is getting the Lexus gig and it'll be nationally homologated as a GTE....

[HORNDAWG]

I think Walker is a more likely candidate than Shank.







L.P.

[joeb]

I moved the Lexus GT3 talk to this thread in case anybody was looking for it.

[MagVanisher]

Is Michael Shank Racing biting more than they can chew by adding a Lexus RC-F GT3 program in addition to their P2 cars?

Honestly, it's either him letting the prototypes go or decline the Lexus GT3 program.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

Not really the point. It's clearly a shot at IMSA's plan for a GT3 sprint series.

Or nah, 'cos they didn't just decide this now. It has been in the works since before Austin.

[Rodger Davies]

More and more GTD factory programmes seem to be popping up. GM and the ACO's refusal to accept convergence is really hurting the series' future direction. With all the other GTE manufacturers having alternative GT3s, it really should be GT3 Pro and Am next year, with GTE consigned to history (unfortunately), but as it is we're just going to end up with more factory programmes in the 'am' class with the best Silver drivers they can find due to understandably not wanting to fork out on a GTE car and we, as fans, robbed of seeing the factories all compete against each other.

So we now have GM being the main one preventing standard P2 chassis rules being implemented and preventing a united Pro GT class. And funding most of the series. I'm confused as to what to think.

Either way, would be nice to see a few Lex.....ai? Lexuses? Lexus'?

...a few fancy Toyotas in whatever US series there are next year, especially in the main enduros.

[Speed-King]

So we now have GM being the main one preventing standard P2 chassis rules being implemented

You talk like this is actually a bad thing....

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Rodger Davies

More and more GTD factory programmes seem to be popping up. GM and the ACO's refusal to accept convergence is really hurting the series' future direction. With all the other GTE manufacturers having alternative GT3s, it really should be GT3 Pro and Am next year, with GTE consigned to history (unfortunately), but as it is we're just going to end up with more factory programmes in the 'am' class with the best Silver drivers they can find due to understandably not wanting to fork out on a GTE car and we, as fans, robbed of seeing the factories all compete against each other.

So we now have GM being the main one preventing standard P2 chassis rules being implemented and preventing a united Pro GT class. And funding most of the series. I'm confused as to what to think.

Either way, would be nice to see a few Lex.....ai? Lexuses? Lexus'?

...a few fancy Toyotas in whatever US series there are next year, especially in the main enduros.

Callaway builds the 'GM' approved GT3 Corvette. GM also has the GT3 Caddy ATS that races in PWC. http://prattmiller.com/news/article/414

As to the complaint of P-2, I am HUGELY glad that the TUSC P class will have much more variety than the ACO P-2s!








L.P.

[Rodger Davies]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Callaway builds the 'GM' approved GT3 Corvette. GM also has the GT3 Caddy ATS that races in PWC. http://prattmiller.com/news/article/414

As to the complaint of P-2, I am HUGELY glad that the TUSC P class will have much more variety than the ACO P-2s!








L.P.

Originally Posted by Speed-King

You talk like this is actually a bad thing....

Yes, OK, I'm also glad that the IMSA top class will not be following the ACO's even more ridiculous P2 regs, but let's be honest here: for the last two years, we've all been clamouring for it, we just didn't think they could possibly be this bad. Perhaps if GM had supported a global P2 spec, we wouldn't have the mess that has been made of them.

And yes, GM has a GT3, and technically there's a Corvette GT3 too, but a Corvette that the factory has supposedly banned from competing in the US. Read that again: a Corvette that can't race in the US. That's how ridiculous things have gotten. Don't think for a second that if 'convergence' (by which I mean everyone agreed to use GT3) had happened, there wouldn't be a Pratt & Miller built C7 GT3 in the pipeline by now.

All hypothetical though; it is what it is. And what it is is a mess of huge proportions where we have works programmes in an 'amateur' class because the cars that have been built for professional series elsewhere can't be used in IMSA and another unique set of prototype regulations with no global relevance whatsoever. From where we are, I'd like the ACO to support introducing IMSA's top class cars to Le Mans, but seeing how no-one wants to get along these days, I won't hold my breath.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Rodger Davies

Yes, OK, I'm also glad that the IMSA top class will not be following the ACO's even more ridiculous P2 regs, but let's be honest here: for the last two years, we've all been clamouring for it, we just didn't think they could possibly be this bad. Perhaps if GM had supported a global P2 spec, we wouldn't have the mess that has been made of them.

And yes, GM has a GT3, and technically there's a Corvette GT3 too, but a Corvette that the factory has supposedly banned from competing in the US. Read that again: a Corvette that can't race in the US. That's how ridiculous things have gotten. Don't think for a second that if 'convergence' (by which I mean everyone agreed to use GT3) had happened, there wouldn't be a Pratt & Miller built C7 GT3 in the pipeline by now.

All hypothetical though; it is what it is. And what it is is a mess of huge proportions where we have works programmes in an 'amateur' class because the cars that have been built for professional series elsewhere can't be used in IMSA and another unique set of prototype regulations with no global relevance whatsoever. From where we are, I'd like the ACO to support introducing IMSA's top class cars to Le Mans, but seeing how no-one wants to get along these days, I won't hold my breath.

Convergence did not mean that everyone would be in a GT3! It was about all GT's using the same (single) platform from/per each mfg on which different kits would be developed for each different class of car.








L.P.

[Rodger Davies]

Yes, but it would have had the same base as GT3 I believe, seeing as almost every manufacturer at the table for the talks had, or was about to have, a suitable one. Either way, I take your point.

[HORNDAWG]

AJR will have 2 teams in the new 911 GT3 Rs next year....

http://sportscar365.com/imsa/tusc/al...3-rs-for-2016/









L.P.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

AJR will have 2 teams in the new 911 GT3 Rs next year....

http://sportscar365.com/imsa/tusc/al...3-rs-for-2016/

Good to see some stability with AJR and his customers.

[Bob Baldwin]

I was also glad to see where AJR went with Porsche once again . I would have been surprised if they had gone with a different MFG .

[Damian Baldi]

It looks like there is still a door open

http://www.racer.com/imsa/item/11749...17-p2-contract

[Rcz]

With IMSA directly involved in the formation of the rules, it’s hard to fathom how a sentence like “The candidate declares to be entirely independent of a major car manufacturer” was allowed to make it into the final document without a provision to include IMSA’s unique needs.

Oh, that's easy, Atherton is incompetent.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Damian Baldi

It looks like there is still a door open

http://www.racer.com/imsa/item/11749...17-p2-contract

That was an interesting read. Sounds like the aco really wants their chosen chassis constructors to move as many units as possible.

Originally Posted by Rcz

Oh, that's easy, Atherton is incompetent.

Or possibly IMSA didn't actually have a say in the process?

[Damian Baldi]

It's all about money. The ACO's fear, it that one of those "small" teams carrying engines from Chevy, Ford, or Honda, could start receiving money directly from the factories, and that could kill the european P2 idea of restricted cost.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Damian Baldi

It's all about money. The ACO's fear, it that one of those "small" teams carrying engines from Chevy, Ford, or Honda, could start receiving money directly from the factories, and that could kill the european P2 idea of restricted cost.

Huh? Those engines are not going to be allowed in 'ACO' competition other than at Le Mans in a TUSC participants car. They will be allowed in TUSC.





L.P.

[MagVanisher]

I feel that even if Honda/HPD (or Wirth) did get a contract, how will they beat that obnoxious Corvette DP who's trampling everyone (except for Ganassi) since 2011?

[Rcz]

Well the cars would be about the same weight, so any tire advantage would be gone.

But then again, the current Honda V6 is not really strong though.

And wouldn't the the new Vette Protos be called Corvette P2s now?

[MagVanisher]

Originally Posted by Rcz

And wouldn't the the new Vette Protos be called Corvette P2s now?

Well, it's still being called as Corvette DP and I feel that it'll carry that moniker past 2017!

[Coach Ep]

Interesting twist, seems the ACO is really trying hard not to cater the US needs forcing a (extra) split in universal application of the new P2 cars [which at this point we still have today...].

More reason for IMSA then to go their own way on the new TUSC prototype rules and pimp up their top class to make the cars faster - and thereby more appealing to the crowd. Having the P1/P2 compliant tub as a starting point is fine but let whoever wants to, build a car and/or engine around it.

If TUSC entrants want to go to LM with the same car they can opt for the 'ACO legalized option(s)' that will be made available - if they rather focus on the national series and want to receive manufacturer support (or be one), they can go the 'customize' route. We haven't seen international guest entries in years now and with the new ACO P2 rules it's hard to imagine that will chance in the future, even if IMSA would run the exact same rules.

[Damian Baldi]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Huh? Those engines are not going to be allowed in 'ACO' competition other than at Le Mans in a TUSC participants car. They will be allowed in TUSC.

L.P.

I was talking about that, Le Mans, not the WEC. Le Mans is the only thing that cares to the TUSC participants.

[MagVanisher]

While some prototype teams wanting to compete in Le Mans (even if Jim France's team don't like having generic bodywork), I wonder if there would be guest teams (coming from WEC/ELMS) competing in the NAEC?