IMSA DPi Discussion

[Coach Ep]

Originally Posted by Bcarr6

That is one of those articles where the headline says one thing and the story says another

Basically- yeh it'd be nice but not now and ford arent interested currently

OR they are but don't want to show their hand yet


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I read it as: we're committed to Ford in GTE until the end of the project in 2019, after that we're more than ready to go DPi. If that would be with Ford I wouldn't be surprised if the project is set up and testing done during 2019 with a Rolex 2020 debut.

Long ways to go.

[chernaudi]

And as we've seen in motorsports, one season can lead to a night and day difference. Waiting a year in a half to see what could happen is an eternity in the motorsport world. Ford have plenty of time to make their decision.

[HORNDAWG]

But that does not take away from the 'stated' interest by CGR in DPi, period! All of you that are trying to beat this info to the ground is just ..... wonky! Yes it may never come to fruition, but at this point they would certainly like to play in that sand box with the other big kids.







L.P.

[Akrapovic]

Yeah this isn't like the Bentley one, where someone once seen a Bentley logo in the US and did 2+2=943. Ganassi have said DPi is interesting to them - being tied into the Ford contract doesn't really change that.

Also worth saying that if DPi is interesting to all these teams, then even if not everything comes true, it proves it is an interesting concept. It means it is an attractive series and set of regulations to run with, and that's important.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Also worth saying that if DPi is interesting to all these teams, then even if not everything comes true, it proves it is an interesting concept. It means it is an attractive series and set of regulations to run with, and that's important.

And Chip, like Roger, doesn't race with his own money so if he thinks it's a good idea it means he thinks he can find a backer to run a full pro team.

[chernaudi]

Ganassi might want to return to DPI, but he's also said that he wants to keep going with the Ford GT program as long as Ford sees fit to run it. And if he wants to go back to DPI and Ford isn't on board, then who with?

That's the question we ought to be asking. Any of us who follow NASCAR or Indy Car know that Penske will only do something if he spends as little of his money as he can get away with, and that's been the Chip Ganassi model as well. And I don't see Ganassi back in DPI without a car maker partner that's paying a lot of the bills. Or maybe a big sponsor.

[Maelochs]

I don't know how long Ford plans to carry on the GT program ... and if they have to decide to do a lot of revisions in 2020 versus buying a P2 chassis, sticking the same motor in that chassis, and maybe getting a shot at an overall win at Le Mans--and definitely in the Rolex and at Sebring--for less money that the GT (which is essentially a prototype anyway) ....

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

I don't know how long Ford plans to carry on the GT program ... and if they have to decide to do a lot of revisions in 2020 versus buying a P2 chassis, sticking the same motor in that chassis, and maybe getting a shot at an overall win at Le Mans--and definitely in the Rolex and at Sebring--for less money that the GT (which is essentially a prototype anyway) ....

[chernaudi]

No more of a prototype (and probably less of a prototype) than the old 1990's GT1 cars.

The Lamborghini Aventador uses a carbon tub and pushrod inboard suspension, but it is a prototype?

Anyways, in addition to the Acura DPI that tested in France and is back on it's way to the US, the Mazda DPIs (now in Joest Racing's hands) are supposed to start testing soon.

[carbsmith]

The Aventador's production doesn't hinge on the existence of a race program.

[chernaudi]

Same accusations can be made about the first Audi R8 V10 (GT3 version was out before the road car was), the Bentley Continental V8 (W12 engine is poorly suited for endurance racing), and BMW's waiver mobiles in the form of the M3 GT2 (had tons of features on the race car that weren't available on the road car) and the Z4 V8 GT3 and GTE (outside of engine swaps, there's been no Z4 road car with a V8 in it).

And even if it was a "prototype", we've had this debate in the LMP1 future and LMP1 future rules threads (why they're separate threads since they're kinda talking about the same thing, I don't know). For even the most "prototype" of GTE cars to be able to run even with a bargain basement LMP2, even the crap base Riley, they'll need to lose a ton of weight, gain engine power and gain aero. Something that can't really be done even with the Ford GT.

The GT's powertrain has already been used in a DP car, so it's not a far throw to see that same engine in a DPI car should Ford kill the GT program in a couple of years. It also depends on how LMP2/DPI/LMP1 privateer regs pan out. It wouldn't even be a bad engine to use in a LMP1 privateer car if LMP1 privateer teams can run air restrictor engines and Ford can get about 100-150 more bhp out of it without sacrificing reliability.

And that's one of the stumbling blocks I can see with using GT3/GTE engines in LMP1 cars, or bumping up DPI to LMP1 performance levels.

[Coach Ep]

The Ford GT program has repeatedly been confirmed for 4 years starting in 2016.

Don't expect the cars on track after 2019 (and don't count on customer cars either...).

A good time for the switch to DPi in 2020 if you ask me (a dual program would obviously be better but highly unlikely). It will be interesting to see which chassis is gonna be campaigned if Ford decides to return to protos.

And I wonder what an unrestricted Caddy engine can do compared to current P1-L engines.

[Maelochs]

I call the Ford GT a prototype because it was built precisely to the rules, using every advantage allowed and using every latest, lightest construction technique regardless of cost.

No one could build an economically viable customer car to those standards. And the Ford GT is Not a production car. it is a purpose -built race car racing in a class designed for street-legal, widely available, commercially viable production cars.

I don't mind. it is a huge stretch of the rules (don't even get me started on BMW .... Oi!) but it is Almost within the rules and it is a beautiful machine and very able and has provided many hours of excellent competition.

But it Certainly isn't a production car, and it is certainly running in a production-car class.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

The Ford GT program has repeatedly been confirmed for 4 years starting in 2016.

Don't expect the cars on track after 2019 (and don't count on customer cars either...).

A good time for the switch to DPi in 2020 if you ask me (a dual program would obviously be better but highly unlikely). It will be interesting to see which chassis is gonna be campaigned if Ford decides to return to protos.

And I wonder what an unrestricted Caddy engine can do compared to current P1-L engines.

Why unrestricted? It's not like the current p1 engines are running as best they can. They're sipping fuel through a straw because of the fuel flow regs. It's not like the Cadillac engine is a way better engine. It just works the best in it's series now because even with negative bop the low end grunt of it is better than the (turbo'd) others. You see the small displacement engines in the WEC because they have the hybrid to compensate and the turbo's work great in any scenario (like at Mexico). It'd be interesting to see it run in wec/p1, but I think it'd need a little more fuel freedom to be competitive. Thankfully that's just what privateer p1 rules are offering!

[chernaudi]

I think that fuel flow might have to be ditched in LMP1 privateer in favor of air restrictors while keeping fairly loose turbocharger boost regs.

You have to remember that when the old R8 was around, Audi were restricted by ACO and IMSA regs to 1.67 bar turbocharger boost. I'd bet that even Toyota and Porsche are pushing well above that. But what do you expect? The Audi V8 was 3.6 liters, the Toyota's 2.4 liters and the Porsche is 2.0 liters. Not to mention that the Audi engine was a V8, the Toyota's a V6, and the Porsche's a V4.

But DPI is an air restrictor BOP formula, not fuel flow. And it'd probably cost a lot of money to convert a DPI engine from air restrictors to fuel flow. The meters themselves cost $2000+. Not to mention the electronics to get them to work right. An air restrictor is a $10 piece of aluminum.

I think that fuel flow is a useless red herring for privateer teams anyways. Give factory teams the option between air restrictors and fuel flow, but let the privateers run air restrictors.

Outside of allowing DPI into LMP1 at LM, what does this all have to do with DPI as it is now?

[chernaudi]

ESM drops Cosworth in favor of Motec for electronics starting at Road America:

http://sportscar365.com/imsa/iwsc/ni...onics-package/

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

I call the Ford GT a prototype because it was built precisely to the rules, using every advantage allowed and using every latest, lightest construction technique regardless of cost.

It's structure is also designed more like an LMP than a road car, and it is resportedly capable of posting previous-generation LMP2 lap times when run without restrictions.

So, yeah, I'd call it a prototype.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

It's structure is also designed more like an LMP than a road car, and it is resportedly capable of posting previous-generation LMP2 lap times when run without restrictions.

So, yeah, I'd call it a prototype.

GT1's were able to do close to the same thing in the mid-late 00's. Are those prototypes too?

[Adam43]

What surprises me so much is that this has never been mentioned before.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Adam43

What surprises me so much is that this has never been mentioned before.

Shocking, isn't it!

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by TF110

GT1's were able to do close to the same thing in the mid-late 00's. Are those prototypes too?

Well, they weren't structurally designed almost identically to LMPs, so if you consider that an important aspect, then no... But they also shared so little with the road cars(most of them, at least) that you could still make the argument.

I won't, though, because I consider the similar structural design to be a defining aspect of it.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

ESM drops Cosworth in favor of Motec for electronics starting at Road America:

http://sportscar365.com/imsa/iwsc/ni...onics-package/

Let's see if they stop blowing up.

[Coach Ep]

Originally Posted by joeb

Let's see if they stop blowing up.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

So far so good I'd say!

[AoB Special Stage]