|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
22 Dec 2014, 01:41 (Ref:3487044) | #201 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 123
|
There's a chance that teams that have defected to PWC for 2015 may miss endurance racing come 2016 and want to return to IMSA.
|
||
|
22 Dec 2014, 01:43 (Ref:3487045) | #202 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,078
|
Quote:
As for P1, you actually don't need P1 to be successful, just look at ELMS. I don't think it would work out in the whole 10 car schedule, but maybe for the NAEC races. |
||
|
22 Dec 2014, 13:42 (Ref:3487151) | #203 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,126
|
Are you speaking of Australia? I know there is a group that chose the name Cyber Motorsports down under and built custom car kits/parts. We started with the name first and our paths never really crossed. If this is who you are talking about, it is the first time the paths have crossed. That's the long answer, the short answer is, "No."
|
|
|
19 Feb 2015, 18:32 (Ref:3506730) | #204 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,491
|
Rahal wants to continue working with BMW in GT's and is interested in the new M6. They aren't sure how that will work with the future gt regs if they want to stay in the top class in IMSA though:
http://www.racer.com/imsa/item/11345...h-bmw-s-new-m6 |
||
|
19 Feb 2015, 20:36 (Ref:3506783) | #205 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,869
|
Quote:
|
||
|
19 Feb 2015, 20:49 (Ref:3506786) | #206 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,335
|
|||
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam. |
20 Feb 2015, 04:00 (Ref:3506918) | #207 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
|||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
20 Feb 2015, 05:04 (Ref:3506924) | #208 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,869
|
Quote:
Audi and the rest could just push for some quick homologation to get into the class with all pro drivers. |
||
|
20 Feb 2015, 21:25 (Ref:3507181) | #209 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 914
|
I am still trying to figure out the point of having GTE and GT3 on the global scale. Both are full classes of performance balanced GT car.
|
||
|
20 Feb 2015, 22:14 (Ref:3507196) | #210 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,491
|
|||
|
20 Feb 2015, 22:57 (Ref:3507209) | #211 | |
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
Yes it is moronic. Even the class names make no sense whatsoever, I don't understand why they've kept em. GTE a la GT Endurance isn't needed anymore (not that it was ever really) now that the SRO sprint world championship is gone AND it's not like the class is any more endurance based than any other out there. And GT3, as well as GT4 are obsolete today as GT1 is dead and GT2's been rebranded
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 01:16 (Ref:3507240) | #212 | |||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,491
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
21 Feb 2015, 01:32 (Ref:3507242) | #213 | |
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
ACO should just call it 'LMGT' and be done with it (as long as they want to carry on with unfortunate single class structure).
Even if GT3 was to stick to GT3 that would make sense. Couple of years ago Ratel said somewhere that he still wants to keep reserve place for GT1 "just in case" or something so probably no rebranding to that |
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 14:57 (Ref:3507361) | #214 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 914
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
21 Feb 2015, 21:01 (Ref:3507475) | #215 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,109
|
Can you imagine if the GTLM cars go about 2 seconds a lap quicker at most tracks next year where the P cars still run the same pace. That will be awesome I think. I love to see P and GTLM run closer together. It will be easy to restrict the ride heights or air restrictors of the LMPC cars and just make them the slowest class behind the GT3 cars. Since it is a dying category anyway.
|
|
|
22 Feb 2015, 22:33 (Ref:3507826) | #216 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,078
|
I personally would leave P2 alone, but would love to have a gt1ish class as top class.
|
|
|
23 Feb 2015, 11:51 (Ref:3508002) | #217 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,396
|
||
|
23 Feb 2015, 16:32 (Ref:3508066) | #218 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,109
|
||
|
23 Feb 2015, 16:57 (Ref:3508071) | #219 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,958
|
How exactly would having a GT1 and LMP2 category, be different than having a DP and LMP2 category. Still going to have BoP issues, upset entrants, upset fans... LMP2 needs to be the top category on it's own, or just go in their own direction completely, and drop LMP2.
|
||
|
23 Feb 2015, 19:24 (Ref:3508107) | #220 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
And the object of the 2017 ruleset is that, a unified P-2 class.
L.P. |
||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
23 Feb 2015, 22:05 (Ref:3508162) | #221 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,078
|
With the elms getting so many p2 cars, I don't think the ACO will rock the boat with these so called united rule sets.
TUSC needs a top Proto class with tech diversity and the P2 cars don't have this. Their cost cap water down cars of the P1 class. We can't have P1 cars yet, because they have become too expensive for privateers. Almost to F1 levels. So I think a new Proto class with the support of factories manufacturers(which are banned in the P2 class) like Ford and Chevy, would be a good idea. The cost of these cars would probably be about a factory supported GTE car. The GT body could be use to limit the areo dependence and focus on other technological aspects of the car such as battery tech. Because if we just get limited tech p2 cars with Vette bodies, then we might as well just gone with the DTM rules. |
|
|
24 Feb 2015, 01:11 (Ref:3508214) | #222 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,869
|
Quote:
|
||
|
24 Feb 2015, 01:49 (Ref:3508224) | #223 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
|||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
24 Feb 2015, 03:00 (Ref:3508239) | #224 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,078
|
So you think those p2 manufacturers will conform to the whims of TUSC. I guess we will see...
As for keeping DPs, it's not really a good idea because they no longer fulfill their purpose of cheap prototype racing. That racing philosophy will be taken over by PC and the LMP3 class. And going alone isn't a bad idea, the Group C cars and the IMSA GTP cars were similar but had very different racing philosophy to appease their respected racing audience. |
|
|
24 Feb 2015, 03:41 (Ref:3508246) | #225 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 914
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
2016 Moto GP | macca | Bike Racing | 4 | 17 Mar 2016 22:36 |
IndyCar + LMP1 + Formula E -> IMSA CanAm 2017 | NaBUru38 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 12 | 26 Apr 2013 15:58 |
2013-2017 V8SA Tyre Tender | GTRMagic | Australasian Touring Cars. | 6 | 23 Mar 2011 20:39 |