LMP2 Manufacturers and Engine Suppliers

[Danathar]

Originally Posted by TzeiTzei

Somehow those interviews left a bad taste in my mouth.

Nothing has been decided. In two years these cars will have had their first race. The concept of the car should be ready by now, so that those who actually build and race them have time to plan ahead.

Not allowing current LMP2s to race in 2017 will definitely boost the car numbers in 2016 . IF that happens then it could be a very bleak year for LMP2 racing. And at the same time it's a big **** *** for any manufacturer designing a new coupe right now. I mean, who is going to buy a car that is obsolete in two years' time. Great stuff.

Like Chiana said: **** *** Mazda. Although I expect IMSA to allow them to race anyway. If they are still around.

Put more powerful engines in to the cars. Leave the chassis as they are, except for maybe some of the cost cutting measures Beaumesnil mentioned. Let them use DP style bodywork if they feel like it. Who said that a prototype has to look like it came from Mars. If they're not competitive in ACO racing... too bad. IMSA will BoP them anyway in their series to make sure no one gets to benefit for doing a better job than others. There, problem solved. Is my check in the mail yet?

Not really. The whole point of unifying things in P2 is to allow teams to race anywhere a P2 car can race.

Your solution does not fix that.

Let's be honest here. The series should not buckle due to ONE manufacturer.

there is only ONE pushing for body specific stuff in p2 and that's GM. (Well, there is Honda but I'm not sure where the ARX fits in)

[Mike E]

No great surprise here: Zytek Z11SN officially becomes Gibson 015S.

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2015/01/28/gibson-015s-name-confirmed.html

[Gingers4Justice]

"Gibson" sounds about 29382732873 times slower than the word "Zytek". Although that might have something to do with the name of a past Maths teacher.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Danathar

The current TUSC top prototype field is 80% GM Corvette DP.

GM should step up to LMP1 or just get out of prototypes all together. If they said they would do an LMP1 program for the stateside races if other manufacturers like Audi showed up, I believe Audi and others WOULD come over. Their Corvete GTE/GTLM program is awesome. Save some money you are spending on the Corvette DP program and put it in your GT program or just pocket the savings.

You know, if it wasn't for the plain obvious money factor, you could almost see GM wanting LMP1 styled class for USCC. Even if no-one else entered. I mean, they circulated in GT1 for two years without competing against anyone else (except rare one-offs and trip to Le Mans) so we know they're not afraid of doing something even if no-one else is.

But IMSA will do whatever they ask them to do so stock car branding it is

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by TF110

How is manufacturer teams close to lmp2, which is private teams? They want their way and dont want to go to where manufacturer teams are- lmp1. Thats basically saying they want cheap cars (price capped lmp2's) but have the 'factory' behind it. Instead of spending some money to go to lmp1 they want to run close to what they already know, but change the rules to allow their special case for manufacturer-like bodies. Why should rules followed by everywhere else in the world be changed because Chevy and Ford dont want to step up where their peers race? Thats how I see it. Just go with how p2's would be or go to lmp1/gte.

With the budgets in P1 being what they are... high 8- or low 9-figures, I can perfectly see how that would be a step too far for many manufacturers, either because they don't have the money for that outright, or are spending it on a broader range of programs.

Is there really anything wrong with wanting to run factory(-supported) programs for somewhere in the $10-15 million range, rather than spending four or five times that? I don't necessarily see a place for that within the ACO's class structure, but that doesn't make anyone who is looking for that in a domestic series a traitor and enemy to the sport the way some guys on here claim it to be...

[Danathar]

Originally Posted by MagVanisher

I can agree with you Danathar when it comes to GM. They shouldn't become so greedy on getting overall wins on the prototype class that it's hurting TUSC in the long run.

I actually think that the loss of P1 to Sebring, Daytona (well, technically Daytona never lost P1 to begin with) and Petit has significantly lowered the stature of those races. GM: "I wanna win overall Sebring, Daytona and Peit but I don't want to pay LMP1 so change the rules so I can but not spend $$$"

Before you could say that the "best of the best of the best" (to use a movie phrase) cars in the world came and competed.

Now you can't and the races themselves are lesser because of it.

Those races (Daytona and Sebring in particular) are special and they should not cater to needs of lower tech in each general class (Prototype and GT). Sure, let them race as classes but don't let THEIR desires water down the event.

There is a reason why the 24 hours of Daytona is farther away in stature today to Le Mans than it was 20 years ago, and that's because the top prototypes at LeMans can't race there. I went to Sebring twice in the last 10 years. The highlight of the event was to see LMP1. I'm not driving from Virginia to Florida to see P2 or DP. Sure, it's cool to see them, but I'm certainly not going out of my way to do so. If a race is local then yea, I'd go but big commitment from the fans to travel and see require big rewards.

In order for those races to be something REALLY special you need P1, you need GTLM.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

With the budgets in P1 being what they are... high 8- or low 9-figures, I can perfectly see how that would be a step too far for many manufacturers, either because they don't have the money for that outright, or are spending it on a broader range of programs.

Is there really anything wrong with wanting to run factory(-supported) programs for somewhere in the $10-15 million range, rather than spending four or five times that? I don't necessarily see a place for that within the ACO's class structure, but that doesn't make anyone who is looking for that in a domestic series a traitor and enemy to the sport the way some guys on here claim it to be...

Well said!










L.P.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by Danathar

In order for those races to be something REALLY special you need P1, you need GTLM.

And yet, some of the best endurance classics on the planet (Nürburgring and Spa 24hrs, Bathurst 12 hours) have none of them.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

And yet, some of the best endurance classics on the planet (Nürburgring and Spa 24hrs, Bathurst 12 hours) have none of them.

But then again they never had them in the first place unlike the other three, so the argument is pointless.

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

"Gibson" sounds about 29382732873 times slower than the word "Zytek". Although that might have something to do with the name of a past Maths teacher.

Pretty fast Gibson

[Deleted]

Both Zytek and Lola had such sexy sounding exotic names. Now gone

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

With the budgets in P1 being what they are... high 8- or low 9-figures, I can perfectly see how that would be a step too far for many manufacturers, either because they don't have the money for that outright, or are spending it on a broader range of programs.

Is there really anything wrong with wanting to run factory(-supported) programs for somewhere in the $10-15 million range, rather than spending four or five times that? I don't necessarily see a place for that within the ACO's class structure, but that doesn't make anyone who is looking for that in a domestic series a traitor and enemy to the sport the way some guys on here claim it to be...

You missed the point, man. Its not "they should allow lmp1in tusc". Its not "theyre a traitor because they dont do lmp1". The point is they want to win races (overall) on the cheap while being a 'factory' team. Instead of being satisfied with GTE (BRAND identity they call for) and making an engine for lmp2, they want to brand a prototype a Vette (even though its not) with specific bodywork no one else in the class cares about. Do an hpd and make a chassis/engine combo and put "Powered by Corvette" on it. Thats my point. They want to be different for the sake of having brand recognition in a private class. How can someone defend that? Even if it was Toyota I would say "do gte or lmp1". Imsa just hold their hand through the process as if partners in a marriage.

[Speed-King]

They want to be different for the sake of having brand recognition in a private class

The top class of the series, whatever it is, should not be a privateer class... but if it can't P1 because of the costs involved, it needs to be something else.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by TF110

You missed the point, man. Its not "they should allow lmp1in tusc". Its not "theyre a traitor because they dont do lmp1". The point is they want to win races (overall) on the cheap while being a 'factory' team. Instead of being satisfied with GTE (BRAND identity they call for) and making an engine for lmp2, they want to brand a prototype a Vette (even though its not) with specific bodywork no one else in the class cares about. Do an hpd and make a chassis/engine combo and put "Powered by Corvette" on it. Thats my point. They want to be different for the sake of having brand recognition in a private class. How can someone defend that? Even if it was Toyota I would say "do gte or lmp1". Imsa just hold their hand through the process as if partners in a marriage.

I suggest you read the 3rd paragraph of the P-2 regulations. Although I know that will not satisfy.... nothing will.








L.P.

[Maelochs]

P2 in FIA is Much different than P2 in TUSC. One is an entry-level class for privateers, the other is the top class in a national series for pro and factory teams. FIA P2 can be low-cost, low-maintenance, mostly-spec chassis and still succeed because all they really are is filler.

FIA can create a wonderful P2 spec for FIA, but it might not be the best thing for GM—oh, I mean TUSC. I am not sure TUSC fans would take well to more spec chassis with different fenders.

The only reason I can imagine for TUSC bending over for GM is $$$$$$$. NASCAR is tired of paying to put races on TV for no audience, but GM thinks it can win enough with "Corvettes" to get some PR benefit, so GM is buying off TUSC.

Telling GM, "Build a P1" is not any kind of a solution. First off, where would it race? Not in TUSC, where it would be alone. Not in WEC, because there is so little U.S. awareness of WEC. Who would they race? In the U.S. ... no one. Hoping Audi would spend a ton of money to race in TUSC just to beat one or two GM P1s is pretty far-fetched. What would Audi gain? Unless Toyota, Porsche, and Nissan all came, it would be a wasted effort (Audi already beat everything in North America for a decade.)

So why would Porsche, Audi, Nissan, and Toyota double their investments to race in TUSC—a series which usually draws fewer viewers then even IndyCar? Well, they wouldn't.

I am not a huge TUSC supporter, but I can see the business side of TUSC's dilemma: if they adopt lame P2 regs which work for a WEC underclass but not as a top class in North America, the series loses money ... like it has any to lose. If they go their own way and still don't please the fans, they lose money ....

What really scares me is that FIAS is seemingly so far from deciding the P2 technical regs when manufacturers are going to have to start designing and building before the start of 2016 to get everything tried and tested and running right in time to make sales for the 2017 season.

No team is going to want to invest in a couple chassis and a to=n of spares if it doesn't have a bunch of track testing (I'd bet ESM would echo this right now) and look at Dome—a very experienced firm which designed and built a car which so totally didn't work they had to cancel its entire season. I cannot see the entire P2 customer base everywhere saying, "Sure, sell us unfinished, untested chassis which may or may not be seriously flawed—we'd love to give you our money for hopes and dreams."

This might be an exaggeration ... but aren't we all thrilled with those 2016 GTE/GT3 merger rules ... oh, wait, They never happened because the FIA couldn't get everybody on the same page.

Everyone jokes about the FIA laying down the law globally, but really, all they do is follow the money. Audi and Peugeot ruled the world because the rules made diesels unbeatable, until Peugeot had to go, so FIA kissed Toyota's butt to keep WEC alive, changing the rules to allow Toyota to compete—Audi allowed it because without Toyota they had no World Championship.

In all the world only NASCAR can really Lay Down the Law. All the other sanctioning bodies are beholden to factories, or broke. (Even PWC: they are doing really well, now that they got that huge influx of money for running a pure-Porsche class (same as kept ALMS alive for a couple seasons.)

We saw bad management kill ALMS and Rolex ... we saw it almost kill ACO in the early '90s until GTP came along. Bad management killed PSCR, which led to the mismanaged ALMS and Rolex ...

We could well see more of the same—politics and greed and power-plays and ego could well continue to choke a sport which is already struggling.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

Is there really anything wrong with wanting to run factory(-supported) programs for somewhere in the $10-15 million range, rather than spending four or five times that? I don't necessarily see a place for that within the ACO's class structure, but that doesn't make anyone who is looking for that in a domestic series a traitor and enemy to the sport the way some guys on here claim it to be...

Herein lies the TUSC dilemma.

P1 costs are ridiculous—totally unjustifiable for a North American regional series. There just isn't he PR return for a hundreds-of-millions program.

But ... If TUSC wants to do a P1-Light sort of show, a P2 chassis with a little more power and a little more freedom to innovate ... where do they get the chassis?

They are stuck with a Daytona Prototype scenario, where they have basically one or two companies building a spec chassis for a single series, which is lousy return on investment, which means the chassis have to be simple and durable instead of cutting-edge and globally competitive.

If FIA 2017 P2 squeezes out current P2, then in 2017 every car in TUSC will have an obsolete chassis with no factory support—a bunch of aging, warmed-over DPs with tacked-on aero and a couple aging P2s with no spares available.

Further, TUSC has been promising fans a fresh start in 2017, with exciting cars which are modern enough to attract the interest of the "Cars Are the Stars" crowd. If they go with an FIA P2 which is more spec than the current model (more shared chassis parts, basically a DP-style "many builders, one chassis" situation) then fans will howl ... or just leave.

However, if they announce an extension of DP (seeing as those will be the only chassis with any kind of manufacturer support, through Riley and Coyote) fans will not even howl, they will just depart, disgusted.

We all wish TUSC really did run The Best Cars in the World, which I think most will agree only WEC runs now. And I hope most realize that economically that won't work for TUSC, Porsche, Nissan, Audi, or Toyota so it just ain't happening.

We all wish Sebring and Watkins Glen and Petit and Daytona attracted the best cars and teams from around the globe, but it is impossible right now because FIA is catering to high-dollar European and Asian manufacturers who see the series as a private playground.

There really is no good solution that I can see. Either TUSC picks lame, spec, FIA P2 chassis (and lets GM add "Corvette" bodywork and dumbs down all the rest of the cars to match) or TUSC goes with its own chassis, which I cannot imagine will be very good because no manufacturers will be able to afford to compete. Maybe GM will get an exclusive contract to produce "Gen 4 'Corvette' Daytona Prototype" chassis and "Corvette" engines and the whole series will become a glorified PC class.

Whatever happens ... I fear the kind of solution we need is beyond the kind of managers we have.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

I suggest you read the 3rd paragraph of the P-2 regulations. Although I know that will not satisfy.... nothing will.








L.P.

You dont make sense. There is no 3rd paragraph for an unwritten ruleset. We are speaking of the future, not the present (in which gm has no lmp2).

Maelochs, Im not suggesting the answer to all of tusc's problems is to allow lmp1, but I do believe if they were allowed, at least 3 current manufacturers would show up (the only one in question is Toyota). And I also believe with them showing up, the fans would follow. Nissan is advertising in the Superbowl, Audi tests at Sebring every year (showed up until they werent allowed), Porsche will have a 919 running at an event at Laguna Seca later this year... its not unfathomable to see them being up for running a few races in the US. The gm situation is going to be tough. Does IMSA kiss up? Or do they stand up? We'll have to wait and see. Pro drivers, factory backing etc. will probably all be on the talking list.

[Maelochs]

TF110, if at least three P1 teams were Guaranteed (as in contracted) to show up, it would work. Having a two-car top class really doesn't work (despite what a few diehard ALMS fans might say.) The Top class needs to be art least half-a-dozen cars, given how many might be lost to attrition and given the need to look serious on TV. (Those ALMS fans might have been happy watching Muscle Milk thrash Dyson by ten laps each race, but for a new fan it looked like one car driving around on a track where other cars were racing--it looked amateurish and frankly embarrassing for a top series.)

The thing is this: how can the WEC teams run just a few races? How can they show up for selected events and hope to attract GM or Ford to the class? Or ... if three P1 teams show up for a couple of events and GM is the only P1 team involved for the whole season, we have that embarrassing spectacle of one car driving around while the rest of the cars race.

I really cannot see these WEC teams committing to an entire season in North America while TUSC is still struggling for ratings; I just don't see the benefit. Nissan isn't going to sell more econo-boxes by winning at Mid-Ohio (just racing at Le Mans is more PR benefit than winning the TUSC title right now.) Porsche already has a factory program in TUSC through Core/PNA. Audi seems content with its Customer Competition program---it made a big push to get a Rolex win, and hasn't tried much since. I guess they got what they wanted and weren't impressed.

Toyota? They sell so many Camrys they are often ahead of GM as the biggest carmaker in the world. What would another 50-60 million spent in TUSC gain them?

That's a large part of it. Either the WEC teams commit to a full season--and at least another car and spares and crew and engineers and haulers and all that--or they cherry-pick a few events when there is no WEC conflict and don't really help TUSC at all. (Are there any events when a WEC team could ship cars overseas fior a TUSC event? And how much would that cost?)

I just don't see the economics of it. I don't see where the WEC teams would spend multiple millions to race in the U.S., and I don't see where it helps TUSC to have a couple P1s embarrass the field at one or two events. Unless GM and a couple others make a full-season commitment ... the series is best not bothering with P1 at all.

And GM would have to start rounding up corporate money and designing pretty much immediately, while there is no commitment from any WEC team. I just don't see how it works. Hope it does, but ...

[Deleted]

This has been said millions of times before, but LMP1 should only come out for those big three events, not the full series. Leave those to Taylors and Jim France Expresses and whoever they have up there racing those 'Corvettes'. And before anyone comes to say "but they would rob out the biggest events of the year and show middle finger to regular entries" guess what
A) it happened in ALMS for X-15 seasons and everybody thought it was great, deal with it
B) those regulars still have their own little class to play with in those events so it's not technically robbing anything
C) if everybody starts *****ing and crying, fine leave Daytona to their little wave-by free lap shootouts, but Sebring and/or PLM should have the relevance back

Now it would be too big of a pipedream to hope ACO and FIA to make those big races part of the WEC LMP1 season because we know their 'desires' and obsessions well enough, but even as one-off rounds they would attract couple of the factory cars.

[joeb]

It does seem like they are going to be pushing the limit to try and get cars ready by Daytona 2017. I mean look what happened this year with the ESM cars who had no testing. Imagine if the whole field was in that same situation, I bet we could see another GT overall winner.

[Deleted]

Beaumesnil says that they need 18 months between releasing the rules and then adopting them. But if they give us just some general "guidelines" this June, does that count as actual release? Because he then says that advanced regulations should come out by the end of the year.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by TF110

You dont make sense. There is no 3rd paragraph for an unwritten ruleset. We are speaking of the future, not the present (in which gm has no lmp2).

No you make no sense. The new rules will not be that far of a departure from the current rule set. The car specs will change somewhat, but the general class and sporting structures will not.






L.P.

[BullMan]

Originally Posted by joeb

It does seem like they are going to be pushing the limit to try and get cars ready by Daytona 2017. I mean look what happened this year with the ESM cars who had no testing. Imagine if the whole field was in that same situation, I bet we could see another GT overall winner.

Add in the fact that we're going to see a sea of GT3 cars that are just as fast as GTE cars next year too.

[Deleted]

IMSA-GT3s are obviously going to be dumbed down below GTE performance levels, anyone thinking otherwise is naive.

Horndawg, calm down. You don't really know how they'll shape up either, and after slamming him in the other thread 'for not knowing exactly certain figures' you shouldn't be laughing so loudly.

[dmcga]

Ibanez Racing Orecas to be rebadged as Wolf before a planned Wolf-designed LMP2 coupe in '16

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2015/0...ez-racing.html

On one hand the ACO says it's "tough" that all these new coupes are coming out just before the new ruleset in '17 according to Marshall's interview. On the other it says it's going to collaborate with current manufacturers to create the next ruleset. I have to believe this has to result in very minimal changes to LMP2 as we currently know it, at least as far as the chassis is concerned.