'09 ALMS Round 2 • St. Pete April 3-4

[Hugewally]

Originally Posted by skycafe

Which means what? Older spec GT2? GT3, or a version of, is on the horizon.

LMP3 would actually slot into speed spectrum on most tracks above GT2 I believe.

Personally i loved to see a six class series. P1, P2, P3, GT1, GT2, GT3. (but only if all the P cars were actual two seaters).

[The Badger]

Thats a crap idea . P3 & GT3 should be national championships or feeder series .

Why not have a P3 & GT3 support race instead then .

[NightStalk3r]

Originally Posted by The Badger

Why not have a P3 & GT3 support race instead then .

There already is, the discussion here is about the ALMS girds not support races.

[The Badger]

Oh ok ..... in my opinion GT3 and LMP3 does not have any place on ALMS grid . What do you tell them when the economy is on the up again ? Sorry but we dont need you any more !!! .....

If your championship is run to ACO rules , then run it to ACO rules . The ALMS grid is a little on the small side but ..... its still a decent championship .

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by The Badger

Oh ok ..... in my opinion GT3 and LMP3 does not have any place on ALMS grid . What do you tell them when the economy is on the up again ? Sorry but we dont need you any more !!! .....

If your championship is run to ACO rules , then run it to ACO rules . The ALMS grid is a little on the small side but ..... its still a decent championship .

But it never really has run strictly to ACO rules has it?

[Mal]

Originally Posted by The Badger

Oh ok ..... in my opinion GT3 and LMP3 does not have any place on ALMS grid . What do you tell them when the economy is on the up again ? Sorry but we dont need you any more !!! .....

If your championship is run to ACO rules , then run it to ACO rules . The ALMS grid is a little on the small side but ..... its still a decent championship .

As long as it is clear that it is a temporary invitation class to bolster numbers - I dont see the problem. I am sure if the LMS was in a similar crisis then they would do the same thing.

[Audi Racer]

The De fErran Acura did not win the green challenge. It did not finish the race. The Panoz did not win the Green challenge. Come on guys. It's a Thumping! Elan! Ford! V8. BMw has been known to be the best at fuel mileage in evey motosport series they do. In Grand-Am BMW was the best at fuel mileage 3 years ago when the Make A Wish Riley with Finlay and McDowell ran. In Formula 1 BMW managed to always qualify lighter than the rest. Yet go about the same distance. They probably have a 1 or lap advantage over the competition.


THe GT2 has two extra amenities in it's car compared to the rest of the GT2's. They mentioned it at Sebring. Anybody remember

[JAG]

The priority is more cars on the grid, GT3 is an internationally recognised class, LMP3 is not.

Once new teams have the ALMS bug, then you can look at easing them into the 'ACO' classes.

You may even find P2 becomes a decent budget option once GT2 engines are in use.

[Zurbert82]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

The De fErran Acura did not win the green challenge. It did not finish the race. The Panoz did not win the Green challenge. Come on guys. It's a Thumping! Elan! Ford! V8. BMw has been known to be the best at fuel mileage in evey motosport series they do. In Grand-Am BMW was the best at fuel mileage 3 years ago when the Make A Wish Riley with Finlay and McDowell ran. In Formula 1 BMW managed to always qualify lighter than the rest. Yet go about the same distance. They probably have a 1 or lap advantage over the competition.


THe GT2 has two extra amenities in it's car compared to the rest of the GT2's. They mentioned it at Sebring. Anybody remember

That's right, the de Ferran Acura didn't win the green challenge, nor did the Panoz. I'm not sure what your point is... Results here http://www.americanlemans.com/index_news.php?n=12756

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

The De fErran Acura did not win the green challenge. It did not finish the race. The Panoz did not win the Green challenge. Come on guys. It's a Thumping! Elan! Ford! V8. BMw has been known to be the best at fuel mileage in evey motosport series they do. In Grand-Am BMW was the best at fuel mileage 3 years ago when the Make A Wish Riley with Finlay and McDowell ran. In Formula 1 BMW managed to always qualify lighter than the rest. Yet go about the same distance. They probably have a 1 or lap advantage over the competition.


THe GT2 has two extra amenities in it's car compared to the rest of the GT2's. They mentioned it at Sebring. Anybody remember

Actually Ford's superior mileage was the reason why Grand Am introduced the 45 minutes-pitstop rule, as Krohn with their Riley Fords were pretty sucessfull in going the whole distance in the sprint races with one stop, that was in 2006, IIRC.

[cmk]

Originally Posted by JAG

The priority is more cars on the grid, GT3 is an internationally recognised class, LMP3 is not.

Once new teams have the ALMS bug, then you can look at easing them into the 'ACO' classes.

You may even find P2 becomes a decent budget option once GT2 engines are in use.

Is the priority really just more cars on the grid? The one thing I worry about is that people are focusing on absolute car count as if it is somehow indicative of the quality (rather than health) of the series' racing. I think that's an oversimplification.

What we have is not so much a chronically low absolute car count as a chronically low car count in 3 of the 4 classes. The total number of cars on track is, of course, still an issue, but what's really at stake is whether there is sufficient depth on offer to provide a good show in each class. GT2 is the one to watch right now because there is a good scrap between many competitive cars, but while we have 6 protos, they are no longer able to compete on level terms and thus we have no prototype battle.

Adding in another GT class with a paltry number of cars (say 6) and another P class with an equal number does very little for the series unless those cars are very very well matched with each other, and even in that eventuality do nothing to mitigate the boredom of 2 Acuras tromping on Intersport in P1. The only thing you get is a yet more confusing, fractionated field with a bunch of bland battles and, of course, GT2. Is it really making things better, or is it just providing even less impetus to bolster numbers in the classes that really need them?

We'll always have 2008, friends...

[porsche91722]

We are deep into one of the worst financial crisis in history. We (sports car fans) still have series which are struggling along, like all other business. St Pete was always going to battle to get a good grid. There is light at the end of the tunnel with more possible starters later this year throughout the field.

[fjn356]

I think cmk nailed it. The only thing I can do about this is sacrifice and go to more races. So I think I will add Miller and RA to Sebring and PLM. Maybe find someone to share gas money.

[Hugewally]

Originally Posted by The Badger

Thats a crap idea . P3 & GT3 should be national championships or feeder series .

Why not have a P3 & GT3 support race instead then .

Originally Posted by The Badger

Oh ok ..... in my opinion GT3 and LMP3 does not have any place on ALMS grid . What do you tell them when the economy is on the up again ? Sorry but we dont need you any more !!! .....

If your championship is run to ACO rules , then run it to ACO rules . The ALMS grid is a little on the small side but ..... its still a decent championship .

Why would it be crap? Sportscar racing used to have way more classes than just four in years past. I count 16 at Sebring one year.

And if you're so worried about hurting their feelings when things improve, then they'd have to have separate races just like IMSA used to do when there were too many cars in one class for the smaller tracks to handle.

[skycafe]

Originally Posted by cmk

Is the priority really just more cars on the grid? The one thing I worry about is that people are focusing on absolute car count as if it is somehow indicative of the quality (rather than health) of the series' racing. I think that's an oversimplification.

What we have is not so much a chronically low absolute car count as a chronically low car count in 3 of the 4 classes. The total number of cars on track is, of course, still an issue, but what's really at stake is whether there is sufficient depth on offer to provide a good show in each class. GT2 is the one to watch right now because there is a good scrap between many competitive cars, but while we have 6 protos, they are no longer able to compete on level terms and thus we have no prototype battle.

Adding in another GT class with a paltry number of cars (say 6) and another P class with an equal number does very little for the series unless those cars are very very well matched with each other, and even in that eventuality do nothing to mitigate the boredom of 2 Acuras tromping on Intersport in P1. The only thing you get is a yet more confusing, fractionated field with a bunch of bland battles and, of course, GT2. Is it really making things better, or is it just providing even less impetus to bolster numbers in the classes that really need them?

We'll always have 2008, friends...

Well, like to have a better 2009, 2010 and so on, sure don't want to say it will never be that good again.

Agree totally that increase in car numbers in present classes is what really needs to happen. You can cross off GT1, so that is really focused on P1 and P2.

So, how do you do it?

My questions about viablity of something like adding P3 is just as a field filler, and of course also has the necessity of some of those cars actually entering....are there actually any here in states?

The other option is to look at a heavily subscribed LMES series and see if you can entice some of those competitors to decamp across the ocean and do the balance of the season here. I would think that would require some healthy support ($$$). The likely level you pull over is the field filler level anyway, isn't it?

Low car count not so bad at St. Pete's short track. Field is going to look lost in Utah and some other places this year.

I think crowd would be happy with some GT3 cars in the race, but I think those need to be the myrid of makes that you see in European races, and not just Porsches. It is stop gap, sure, but, it adds to the show.

Crowds likely to be happier with a mixed group on GT3 cars then a mixed bag of P cars I would think, and an Audi R8 or two would help to keep that group's fans happy. Of course, opening the door for those doesn't mean we would see them, since we are talking some fairly expensive equipment there too.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by cmk

Is the priority really just more cars on the grid? The one thing I worry about is that people are focusing on absolute car count as if it is somehow indicative of the quality (rather than health) of the series' racing. I think that's an oversimplification.

What we have is not so much a chronically low absolute car count as a chronically low car count in 3 of the 4 classes. The total number of cars on track is, of course, still an issue, but what's really at stake is whether there is sufficient depth on offer to provide a good show in each class. GT2 is the one to watch right now because there is a good scrap between many competitive cars, but while we have 6 protos, they are no longer able to compete on level terms and thus we have no prototype battle.

Adding in another GT class with a paltry number of cars (say 6) and another P class with an equal number does very little for the series unless those cars are very very well matched with each other, and even in that eventuality do nothing to mitigate the boredom of 2 Acuras tromping on Intersport in P1. The only thing you get is a yet more confusing, fractionated field with a bunch of bland battles and, of course, GT2. Is it really making things better, or is it just providing even less impetus to bolster numbers in the classes that really need them?

We'll always have 2008, friends...

I tuned into the highlights at St Pete's, the lack of cars at the start was damaging from a PR and casual viewers perspective.

I wouldn't allow LMP3, you may end up with glorified club cars, but GT3 is an established class with recognisable, quick cars, and returns the ALMS to a two class GT structure.

P1 can only be sorted if Audi, Porsche or whoever step up next season. P2 must be on the agenda for both potential entrants and those looking to step up from GT2, but again only for 2010 and beyond. Manufacturer's are withdrawing and the class will use more cost effective GT2/Production engines

[JAG]

Originally Posted by skycafe

Well, like to have a better 2009, 2010 and so on, sure don't want to say it will never be that good again.

Agree totally that increase in car numbers in present classes is what really needs to happen. You can cross off GT1, so that is really focused on P1 and P2.

So, how do you do it?

My questions about viablity of something like adding P3 is just as a field filler, and of course also has the necessity of some of those cars actually entering....are there actually any here in states?

The other option is to look at a heavily subscribed LMES series and see if you can entice some of those competitors to decamp across the ocean and do the balance of the season here. I would think that would require some healthy support ($$$). The likely level you pull over is the field filler level anyway, isn't it?

Low car count not so bad at St. Pete's short track. Field is going to look lost in Utah and some other places this year.

I think crowd would be happy with some GT3 cars in the race, but I think those need to be the myrid of makes that you see in European races, and not just Porsches. It is stop gap, sure, but, it adds to the show.

Crowds likely to be happier with a mixed group on GT3 cars then a mixed bag of P cars I would think, and an Audi R8 or two would help to keep that group's fans happy. Of course, opening the door for those doesn't mean we would see them, since we are talking some fairly expensive equipment there too.

Take a look at the Asian Le Mans Series entries, Pescarolo 908, Oreca etc., they must be offering a very attractive package.

[Canada ALMS fan]

Originally Posted by JAG

Take a look at the Asian Le Mans Series entries, Pescarolo 908, Oreca etc., they must be offering a very attractive package.

Yes, and if some of those funds are coming from IMSA/Panoz, et al. those dollars should be used to bolster the ALMS instead IMO.

[Dead-Eye]

Isn't the AsLMS (we really need to find a proper acronym) all ACO?

[Bentley03]

Erm..........surely time to unstick this thread and sticky the thread for this weekend's ALMS race.

[Purist]

Huge, how many of those various 16 classes at Sebring were reliably in overall competition with one another though? Power-to-weight and other measures were much more widely in use back then. I believe it was Le Mans 1967 where Jochen Rindt was VERY close to the pace of the Ford GT40 MkIVs (7.0-litre) in a Porsche 907 (2.0-litre). So that put what, four prototype classes in close proximity with the 2, 3, 5, and 7-litre cars. We just don't have classes arrayed like that anymore. There's also the issue of sheer volume of entries. Le Mans at one time accommodated up to 60 cars, while Daytona and Sebring would have fields of 70-80+ cars. Five to ten classes look a lot fuller when you have those cars distributed in a field of that size, rather than one that's merely half the size.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Purist

Power-to-weight and other measures were much more widely in use back then.

No such thing as power to weight then; DISPLACEMENT was the determining factor.

[cdsvg]

Can only agree with the sentiment here that focusing on P1 and P2 car counts (for the ALMS, anyway) is much more important than adding a bunch of beetle cup cars to boost the overall car count.

[Purist]

Bob, that depended on the track, and even then, not always as much as you might think. A Lola T70 or Ford GT40 was around a ton, whereas a 2.0-litre Porsche was down around 1400lb. And in the late '60s, the 3.0-litre Porsches were pushing down to 1100-1200lb. Like I said, Jochen Rindt was harrying the 7.0-litre Fords in 1967 with a 2.0-litre Porsche 907. i believe it was a Ferrari 250P (3.0-litre prototype) that won Le Mans outright in 1965, against cars with much larger capacity engines.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Purist

Bob, that depended on the track, and even then, not always as much as you might think. A Lola T70 or Ford GT40 was around a ton, whereas a 2.0-litre Porsche was down around 1400lb. And in the late '60s, the 3.0-litre Porsches were pushing down to 1100-1200lb. Like I said, Jochen Rindt was harrying the 7.0-litre Fords in 1967 with a 2.0-litre Porsche 907. i believe it was a Ferrari 250P (3.0-litre prototype) that won Le Mans outright in 1965, against cars with much larger capacity engines.

I do not mean performance aspects; I was speaking of rules aspects.
Car were classified by displacement; did power to weight have an effect, but of course.
The ford GTs were NOT light. One reason to go to a bigger engine. They gained more weight but in the balance gained a large enough chunk of power to off-set the weight gain.
If one thought one could get a better over-all performance balance with a smaller class/car, they would go for it.