USCC (leave your axe outside)

[Ephaeton]

Originally Posted by Salamus

IMO they have done more right then wrong so far (...)

How would you know, your glass ball telling you this? They might have done something (or so their owner would hope), but haven't told jack about it.
We're still waiting for all the details. All of them. Schedule, Regulations, TV package, sponsorship, entries, ...

All we got is a name and some hype that wasn't sustainable by three months of awkward silence leading up to Le Mans (yeah I'm kindly ignoring that they've made at least three critical mistakes, because ISTM obviously it's subjective to call abandonment of P1, continuation of DP and looking at rovals to race there "mistakes" but there you go, I won't even consider those!). And then some bits and pieces here and there about directions they may maybe might be going plus, of course, the repeated reassurance that it's gonna be great (want an example? GT3 to GTC, er GTD. So in principle, you may be allowed to race some foreign car in the series if you do X adjustments to it. Of course won't tell about the X adjustments until ... hopefully January 2014).

That's exactly the kind of "uninformed optimism" Mr. Pickett referred to.

[Salamus]

Originally Posted by Ephaeton

How would you know, your glass ball telling you this?

No, from their announcements.

Hate the USCR all you want, some of us are at least going to give it a chance.

[Dyson Mazda]

Originally Posted by Salamus

No, from their announcements.

Hate the USCR all you want, some of us are at least going to give it a chance.

How can anyone be happy with the ALMS's status quo after watching the P1/overall race at Mosport?

[Ephaeton]

There's no information contained in the announcements other than their claim that they want to do something and the reassurance it's gonna be done right and it's gonna be great. Take the 'GT3' announcement e.g. and go back in this thread a bit to find Mike H.'s take on the amount of information. It's not about giving them a chance when they continually fail to come up with real information. Look at their announcement (on GA's site, interestingly enough, not on THEIR OWN site that doesn't contain any valuable information AT ALL) about GT3s in GTD: "GTD may also include FIA GT3 cars with minimal modifications, providing they meet class performance targets. Overall, however, the regulations will be based on the current Rolex Series GT rules. In addition, the Rolex Series’ current GX class will be transitioned into GTD."

I made the part bold that's really interesting but that lacks all the interesting information. So, Salamus, tell me what they did right WRT GT3 GTD integration. They might allow some car. After some modification. Maybe.

Uninformed optimism...

[Salamus]

Originally Posted by Ephaeton

There's no information contained in the announcements other than their claim that they want to do something and the reassurance it's gonna be done right and it's gonna be great. Take the 'GT3' announcement

Here is your information:
http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/artic...llowed-in-gtd/
Elkins anticipates that mostly resulting in changes to a base GT3 car’s air restrictor, as well as slight aero changes, including the adoption of the class-wide wing manufactured by Crawford Composites.
"I think for me, the primary thing we need to do is to keep with the spec rear wing that GRAND-AM has,” he said. “Then in terms of reducing the performance level, fitting some kind of restrictor, which typically all the GT3 cars have now anyway, and then looking at some minor things in terms of aero to tweak on.”
One of the previous holdups for GRAND-AM GT homologation, the thickness of the roll cage, no longer appears to be an issue, but Elkins said IMSA is still evaluating that situation.

[Ephaeton]

It seems we have different ideas of what information means.

"slight" aero changes.
adoption of spec rear wing (that's actually the opposite of a "slight" aero change)
"some kind of restrictor" fitted

But again, the way he says it, he thinks for himself that these and those changes are gonna be necessary. He anticipates.
That's not communicating things that they have come to a consensus/decision on. It's his take, so far.

The roll-cage "no longer appears" to be an issue. Now what. It no longer is an issue? Or it will remain an issue? It seems unlikely. You wanna build a car to this "spec" ? "Maybe needs a roll-cage, maybe doesn't"? Well, the situation is still being evaluated (as he says. Still being evaluated means, aka "we don't know yet. But I'm gonna tell you what I think might happen. I might be wrong though")

This is an extremely unsatisfying level of information.

What he's saying is that they intend to do this and that but won't spit out the specifics of it.
That obviously is satisfying and enough for some people, and they are happily optimistic about USCR. Good for you that you're obviously one of these people. I'm not.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Ephaeton

It seems we have different ideas of what information means.

"slight" aero changes.
adoption of spec rear wing (that's actually the opposite of a "slight" aero change)
"some kind of restrictor" fitted

But again, the way he says it, he thinks for himself that these and those changes are gonna be necessary. He anticipates.
That's not communicating things that they have come to a consensus/decision on. It's his take, so far.

The roll-cage "no longer appears" to be an issue. Now what. It no longer is an issue? Or it will remain an issue? It seems unlikely. You wanna build a car to this "spec" ? "Maybe needs a roll-cage, maybe doesn't"? Well, the situation is still being evaluated (as he says. Still being evaluated means, aka "we don't know yet. But I'm gonna tell you what I think might happen. I might be wrong though")

This is an extremely unsatisfying level of information.

What he's saying is that they intend to do this and that but won't spit out the specifics of it.
That obviously is satisfying and enough for some people, and they are happily optimistic about USCR. Good for you that you're obviously one of these people. I'm not.

rear wing changes are easy...unbolt one and bolt the other one on.

[Ephaeton]

I don't anticipate it being a problem for the engineers and mechanics to replace a rear wing.
I don't anticipate it being a problem for the engineers to figure out how they gotta change the rest of the car with the exchanged rear wing if and when they're given the specifications of the rear wing (and are allowed the necessary adjustments to get the balance right again).

That's not the point I'm trying to make here. The point I'm trying to make here is that the devil's in the details, details are the interesting part, and details is exactly what we're not getting.

[BullMan]

Here's a question: Are they going to mandate headlights on all the time like ALMS or use the Grand-Am rule? If they use ALMS/ACO rules then Turner and Stevenson would have to actually take the stickers off the front of the car and install headlights.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

Originally Posted by Mechanic Z

Greg Pickett looking at a possible Indycar program.
http://www.racer.com/muscle-milk-pic...rticle/305015/

I had a feeling somthing was up after reading Luhr is going to race at Sonoma with Sarah fisher racing, thinking of it a two car MM team for Luhr and Graf would be pretty cool.

[Maelochs]

Hate to do it but I have to back Ephaeton here (nothing against that poster, I just don’t want to pile on USCR … BUT …)

I believe Mr. Mike Hedlund said several pertinent things —Facts from a guy who knows firsthand—about the cost to rework cars and the aero changing when the win is changed because the aero is a tuned and tailored package—changing as something as important as the rear wing changes Everything else (and defeats however many hours of CFD, wind tunnel ansd track testing of the original package.)

But Ephaeton’s overarching point is even more important: So far, we have gotten nothing from USCR which is set in stone or even printed on paper. We have gotten opinions, desires, plans about plans … but no one knows if or how much P2s, GT3s, GTCs, or GTDs will really have to change to meet the rules because there have been no actual rules published so far.

I hope things go really well with USCR, and the tone of the recent interviews have been much more positive but so far it is all just spin, hype, and wishful thinking From the Series, let alone from the fans.

I will not take the “We are domed” tack just yet, but we ought to at least view the USCR press releases the way we’d view any other press release, or political ad, or commercial late at night on basic cable.

So far, USCR has not released anything concrete except the titles of the management. What that says about priorities, I will not opine.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

Originally Posted by BullMan

Here's a question: Are they going to mandate headlights on all the time like ALMS or use the Grand-Am rule? If they use ALMS/ACO rules then Turner and Stevenson would have to actually take the stickers off the front of the car and install headlights.

What about windows? Are gtd's going to get windows or are gtlm's going to lose them?

[BullMan]

Originally Posted by Lagunaseca_4life

What about windows? Are gtd's going to get windows or are gtlm's going to lose them?

GTE cars won't lose anything. No clue about GAGT, but if they're going to allow GT3 cars and make them change the wing, I would hope they wouldn't suddenly throw taking the windows out into the mix.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

I hope things go really well with USCR, and the tone of the recent interviews have been much more positive but so far it is all just spin, hype, and wishful thinking From the Series, let alone from the fans.

If you knew what I know...

(you'd know that spin, hype and wishful thinking is a management philosophy)

[David Land]

Originally Posted by Lagunaseca_4life

I had a feeling somthing was up after reading Luhr is going to race at Sonoma with Sarah fisher racing, thinking of it a two car MM team for Luhr and Graf would be pretty cool.

How old is Klaus? I wonder about his ability to adapt to oval racing, Lucas should be fine though.

[ACFlinn]

Originally Posted by Canada ALMS fan

Amen brother, I've already lost interest in the USCR and have moved on. Slow this, restrict that, spec, cheap, blah, blah, blah. It will be one hell of a club race series, not a TOP LEVEL PROFESSIONAL SERIES. Read Greg Pickett's comments in the last six paragraphs of this:http://www.racer.com/muscle-milk-pic...rticle/305015/

Just read the fourth paragraph from the bottom. That's all you really need to know.

Club race series? The USCR has already announced that the ALMS GT class (GTLM) will continue without any changes. In fact, I'm not sure how they could make it any clearer.

Andy Flinn

[ACFlinn]

Originally Posted by canamman

I see your point but that is not how it works in a capitalistic economy
such as the USA. In a perfect world the USCR should be able to capture all of the Rolex crowd and ALMS crowd together on the same weekend.
There is your double up at the gate for 1 race.

If the USCR product was equivallent to a 24hr LeMans field with all of the P1s
etc. then I would pay double for that weekend. Another words , the product needs to be that awesome to demand that kind of ticket price.

I am already going to Daytona no matter what. I have to see that in person. It is a watershed moment for sportscar. To see all of those drivers is really going to be amazing. Its been too long.

You make a strong argument as well.

However, is it possible that we underestimate the number of fans who enjoy BOTH series? For example, even though I live in Florida and prefer the Grand-Am, I also attend Sebring and Road Atlanta every year. I have also attended ALMS and Grand-Am races at Laguna Seca, Sears Point, Portland and Barber. How would your numbers account for fans like me?

We'll just have to wait and see how the USCR unfolds. Nobody knows for sure what will happen. But I think it will be amazing, too.

Andy Flinn

[Lanky Turtle]

Originally Posted by BullMan

Here's a question: Are they going to mandate headlights on all the time like ALMS or use the Grand-Am rule? If they use ALMS/ACO rules then Turner and Stevenson would have to actually take the stickers off the front of the car and install headlights.

Well since neither of them are confirmed for next year I would think the least of their worries are the headlights, which they both run during the Rolex 24, so it's not that they haven't mastered the art of installing headlights in front bodywork.
All this worrying about headlights and windows and window nets and number panels and lug nuts makes me wonder if people really even care about watching a race or are just obsessed with technical details about the cars that nobody should even care about other than the race crews.

[ACFlinn]

Originally Posted by Mechanic Z

I'm not surprised by Taylor's comment. He's been around GRAND AM for at least ten years, and the us vs. them probably rubbed off on him. He's currently one of the quickest drivers in DPs. In ALMS races, he's a bit of a handicap for the #3 Corvette. So, I'm guessing that that also has a bit to do with his hostility toward ALMS cars.
Funny, P2 at Mosport was a much closer race than Friday's Grand Am race.

Hey, maybe if he likes DPs so much, he can run in the 10 next year, and Corvette can get a quicker 3rd driver!

Taylor certainly wasn't a handicap at Le Mans - especially during his stints in the consistent and heavy rains that lasted for much of the race.

Considering how obvious it was that neither of the factory Corvettes could match the pace of the front-runners (tires?, ACO rules?), helping drive one of the cars home in fourth place was quite an accomplishment.

Also, keep in mind that Taylor has the least amount of seat time of any of the drivers in either of the factory Corvettes. So if his lap times are slower (are they?) than the other drivers, there's a valid reason.

Andy Flinn

[gregtummer]

Originally Posted by ACFlinn

However, is it possible that we underestimate the number of fans who enjoy BOTH series? For example, even though I live in Florida and prefer the Grand-Am, I also attend Sebring and Road Atlanta every year. I have also attended ALMS and Grand-Am races at Laguna Seca, Sears Point, Portland and Barber. How would your numbers account for fans like me?

Andy Flinn

USCR found out that there was only around a 10% cross over between the mailing lists of each series.

Of course, this statistic can be easily explained if one doesn't automatically assume that the two series have the same number of fans on their mailing lists.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by CyberMotor

If you need help, I'm here to help you.

I am not the one who can not seem to bother with navigating off the main page!








L.P.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Mechanic Z

In ALMS races, he's a bit of a handicap for the #3 Corvette. So, I'm guessing that that also has a bit to do with his hostility toward ALMS cars.

Hey, maybe if he likes DPs so much, he can run in the 10 next year, and Corvette can get a quicker 3rd driver!

That is a load of bull _____!! Time for a reality check.






L.P.

[Canada ALMS fan]

Originally Posted by Salamus

Looks like you won't be changing your name to Canada USCR fan.

But seriously, at least give it a try next year. IMO they have done more right then wrong so far and if they get the balance right, then the racing should be great. And I know, we all love the technological side of the ALMS, but we still got that in the GTE class.

I am really trying to really get into Grand Am this year it is just not exciting me. The total lack of direction from management thus far makes me think the large grid predictions will not happen in 2014.

[Canada ALMS fan]

Originally Posted by Breitling24

...which is why you have three consecutive posts today in the "USCR" thread?

I mean, I lost interest in NASCAR along time ago, and haven't posted, or even read one of those threads. Your comment just struck me as funny.

USCR: you want it, you know you want it.

I understand the irony, just having a little fun. I think I have posted here 3 times in the past month. Used to come daily for the gossip and rumours of future ALMS entries and Sebring and PLM grid news. No point repeating my views or beating a dead horse, nothing left to do but wait and see what the final product looks like.

[Breitling24]

Originally Posted by Canada ALMS fan

I understand the irony, just having a little fun. I think I have posted here 3 times in the past month. Used to come daily for the gossip and rumours of future ALMS entries and Sebring and PLM grid news. No point repeating my views or beating a dead horse, nothing left to do but wait and see what the final product looks like.