USCC (leave your axe outside)

[David Land]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

At this point I'd rather they stayed gone and found a way to test their new chassis that didn't use they series they couldn't be bothered to race in except when it suited them.

Hard to blame them.

If I had as much money invested in the series as Ed Brown and Scott Sharp I would do the same.

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by FstrthnU

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2014/0...from-2015.html
So, best Pro-Am entries in P and GTLM in 2015 get auto-invites to 2016 24H of Le Mans (in LMP2 and GTE-Am). But the entry has to at least do the NAEC. Trying to attract more entrants?

Purely damage control in terms of the TUSC P2 field.

[Christian Mogami]

I was in the garages at COTA this weekend and there was a feeling floating around the garages like it probably feels in Ukraine at the moment.(when is it going to blow-up).
I can't really place the smoke but I think it comes from WEC being at the track at the same time and all the eyes/writers where there to see and hear all.

That ESM announcement on Saturday was just a big surprise and most thought that it would be the start(flame) to what was floating in the air at COTA.Something happened behind close doors from Thurs to Sat morning between IMSA and ESM because ESM pretty much gave the USCC owners the middle finger on Saturday morning.

Also with the RLM team being there...rumors were floating about the future broadcast team.

How about the Corvette BOP in IMSA and WEC?

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Mr. Reibe;

My rhetoric is adequate ... as is the logic behind it.

Try to read carefully and maybe notice the word "generally." it's right there in the first sentence of the second paragraph.

You also could have read the part where I said "Yes, I know about the Camaro and the fast Cadillac, and the Mustangs and Cobra-fied Mustangs, and the hot hatches, and all that. Thing is, none of those are really mass-marketed as sports cars. The Pony-Car/Muscle-car age is over, and "performance" is more aimed at mpg than mph—in the minds of most consumers as well as the factories."

Seer how that directly refutes your complaint before you even made it? Not a smooth move on your part.

These are the sort of omissions people make when they really have no valid basis to attack but want to attack anyway--deliberately mis-state or ignore part of the argument and then attack the argument that they have changed, because the original offers no easy targets.

Your critique technique is somewhat lacking.

The Big three make cars they lose money on just for racing people, people flock to drag strips to see them run, multiple drag racing sanctions are healthy.

All you have done is try to rationalize your faulty rhetoric that facts prove to be hot air.
Your defense is doa.

[David Land]

Originally Posted by Christian Mogami

I was in the garages at COTA this weekend and there was a feeling floating around the garages like it probably feels in Ukraine at the moment.(when is it going to blow-up).
I can't really place the smoke but I think it comes from WEC being at the track at the same time and all the eyes/writers where there to see and hear all.

That ESM announcement on Saturday was just a big surprise and most thought that it would be the start(flame) to what was floating in the air at COTA.Something happened behind close doors from Thurs to Sat morning between IMSA and ESM because ESM pretty much gave the USCC owners the middle finger on Saturday morning.

Also with the RLM team being there...rumors were floating about the future broadcast team.

How about the Corvette BOP in IMSA and WEC?

Interesting insight... what tipped you off to the IMSA tension?

[Christian Mogami]

Also overhearing the ESM drivers talking with their engineers and HPD techs.

The tires made the decision for them easier to go WEC China over PLM.
The Hoosers are that bad on a P2!

Also the WEC drivers were not happy with the Hooser rubber on the track.They have never seen such bad rubber!

If they don't clean of the track,what ever rubber that is on the track ends up on your tires.So your tires become Hooser tires(rubber pick-up off the track) at the start until your rubber replaces it on the track some laps later.

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by David Land

Interesting insight... what tipped you off to the IMSA tension?

It's palpable when you watch the interactions between management and teams..especially those that are leaving.

It's time for a US GTE/GT3 endurance series like Blancpain.

[lms]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

It's time for a US GTE/GT3 endurance series like Blancpain.

you mean something like the American Pirelli World Challenge?

[Ephaeton]

Originally Posted by lms

you mean something like the American Pirelli World Challenge?

Yeah like that...

minus GTS
plus GTE
minus series BOP
minus TCA/TCB
minus 50 minutes max
plus variety of endurance race lengths
minus disallowance of tweaking your car freely
plus tire variety

..to begin with

In other words: No, not like PWC.

[MagVanisher]

But it's the same thing as Blancpain/Pirelli World Challenge. They already have one, in the form of Continental Tire SportsCar Challenge.

[Maelochs]

Except Conti doesn't feature GT3, which offers the widest possible variety of GT machinery. Someone who wants to buy a car and start a team could either buy a ready-to-go GT3 and race, or modify stuff to Conti rules. Which is simpler?

Also, Conti is tied to TUSC. it will always be treated as a support series, and likely fans will always see it as such.

A BES-type series pitting McLarens, Mercedes, BMW, and Ferraris against Porsches, Vipers, and Corvettes in three-hour races could do real well in the U.S. I think---even threaten TUSC, because TUSC is so tainted in fans' eyes.

I love my prototypes, but commercially I think a GT series, if run right, could be profitable and popular--and there are plenty of examples a smart management team might follow---even Conti.

[David Land]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

It's palpable when you watch the interactions between management and teams..especially those that are leaving.

It's time for a US GTE/GT3 endurance series like Blancpain.

I guess I did sort of get that vibe at Indianapolis.

Anytime I talked to a former ALMS team they seemed to have the same attitude toward TUSC that I did.

Corvette Racing even straight up complemented me on my Muscle Milk gear.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by Ephaeton

Yeah like that...

minus GTS
plus GTE
minus series BOP
minus TCA/TCB
minus 50 minutes max
plus variety of endurance race lengths
minus disallowance of tweaking your car freely
plus tire variety

..to begin with

In other words: No, not like Blancpain Endurance.

There, fixed it for you.

[Danske]

Just from being outnumbered ~2:1 with small numbers involved it's going to look like the (non-Mazda) P2s are at a disadvantage. Assuming six DP and three P2 finishing in random order, a P2 finishing in 5th would see only one P2 and three DP ahead of them as the top four ~60% of the time, four DP ~20% of the time, and two DP/two P2 ~20%. That's assuming I've gotten my poker card-drawing stats right, but it all added up to 100%

So I'd say it looks like P2 teams would feel screwed even if everything were random, just from being out-numbered and the cars finishing ahead of them being more DP than P2 on average. Even if the other P2 ahead of them won they can still complain that if it weren't for that meddling BoP they would have finished second, and if the lone other P2 didn't win then obviously it never had a chance against that horde of DPs. If there were equal (minus one) numbers of both types of cars finishing ahead of a mid-pack P2 they couldn't so easily blame BoP for that finish. OTOH, if there were six P2 and only one of them finished in the top half of the field then it would be more obvious it wasn't just racing luck instead of BoP, whereas with just three you're only expecting 1.5 in the top half in the first place assuming all the cars are equal.

[CyberMotor]

I think the DPs were given 150 extra horsepower and all the fuel they needed to use that power. This direction is 180 degrees opposite of what the rest of the world is trying to do... become more efficient and use less fuel.

If the engines in the DPs can truly generate that much more horsepower and still be as efficient as the P2 engines, then I will have to eat my hat.

I think it has been a very transparent game of up-man-ship that has both negatively affected the bottom line and potential of the enterprise, while also damaging the integrity of the sport in America.

What can be done at this stage? I'm not sure. The only thing I can see is that they open up the drawing board and let the designers and engineers start proposing what they can do within general guidelines. The top-down approach is not working. In the world of international sports endurance racing, we need the European and Japanese teams and cars, at a minimum.

Efficient power delivered in space age cars at unbelievable speeds should be the montra and then let the designers start floating their ideal cars of the future. I bet the fans (also teams and drivers) would like that much better than the top-down BOPing.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

As much as I wish to see that as much as you,it ain't happening.nascar is all show and no go everyone knows that

[johncho]

The DP's had identical fuel capacity as the P2 cars, and despite the significant power difference, they have demonstrated better fuel economy all year. the DP fuel capacity was then Reduced 6 L (1.5 gallons?) for the COTA race but still the stint length was slightly longer than either P2 car. Can Someone explain that? dP's are heavier as well and are constructed with the same ancient technology as the Ford Model T if you listen to some people.

Originally Posted by CyberMotor

I think the DPs were given 150 extra horsepower and all the fuel they needed to use that power. This direction is 180 degrees opposite of what the rest of the world is trying to do... become more efficient and use less fuel.

If the engines in the DPs can truly generate that much more horsepower and still be as efficient as the P2 engines, then I will have to eat my hat.

I think it has been a very transparent game of up-man-ship that has both negatively affected the bottom line and potential of the enterprise, while also damaging the integrity of the sport in America.

What can be done at this stage? I'm not sure. The only thing I can see is that they open up the drawing board and let the designers and engineers start proposing what they can do within general guidelines. The top-down approach is not working. In the world of international sports endurance racing, we need the European and Japanese teams and cars, at a minimum.

Efficient power delivered in space age cars at unbelievable speeds should be the montra and then let the designers start floating their ideal cars of the future. I bet the fans (also teams and drivers) would like that much better than the top-down BOPing.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by johncho

The DP's had identical fuel capacity as the P2 cars, and despite the significant power difference, they have demonstrated better fuel economy all year. the DP fuel capacity was then Reduced 6 L (1.5 gallons?) for the COTA race but still the stint length was slightly longer than either P2 car. Can Someone explain that? dP's are heavier as well and are constructed with the same ancient technology as the Ford Model T if you listen to some people.

Probably multiple reasons, but if you look at the link below you can see how the cars stacked up at the beginning of the season, DPs had bigger tanks, but you also have to look at restictor size. Different engines make power in different ways, and how hard the engine works to make said power has an impact on efficiency. Also aero efficiency has a big role in economy. DPs with the new tunnels and other aero bits probably improved in efficiency. That is my theory but someone else may know better.

http://www.imsa.com/sites/default/fi...20%2314-24.pdf

[Christian Mogami]

Just look at NASCAR....big NA Race Engines make good MPG compared to other engines(boosted,small high-rev NA).

And because the DP engine has a lot more HP than the P2 they can even save more fuel when needed(lift early going into a corner and end of straights).

The P2 must be always on it, so they burn more fuel.

If the DP and P2 had equal HP then a P2 could do what Ganassi did,
save fuel to win the race.

[chernaudi]

Personally, if the DP cars were like the last of the original GT1 cars/first generation LMGTP cars (basically the cars from 1995-1999), I don't think there'd be this much ****ing and moaning about the whole subject. They had road car styling cues, non-complicated aero, carbon tubs, and often ran production derived engines (for sure McLaren/BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Porsche did).

And these cars with today's tires would be probably half way between LMP1 and LMP2 in pace.

[Maelochs]

Those GT1 cars were at the pinnacle of performance and engineering in their day.

When Rolex went to the Daytona Prototype (2003 I think?) it was a deliberate step backwards. There were no road-car styling cues, but the cars were ugly—but the worst thing was, they weren't even an attempt at "The Best" or even "close to the best." They were compromised designs built to a formula which didn't value performance, but rather (supposedly) low cost, low repair cost, and long service life.

Add to that, that the cars were basically clones, and there is every offensive item on the sports car fans' offensive check list. After GTP/GT1 offered cutting-edge machinery, engineering advancement, the quest for constantly improved performance, Rolex presented atavistic machinery, engineering stagnation, and the abandonment of the quest for improvement.

It was like asking NFL fans to get just as excited about Pop Warner football, when none of their kids were playing—all the stuff that made it what it was, had been removed, and what was being offered up was a cheap imitation, a surface representation of what had been.

Rolex with DPs looked like sports car racing, but underneath, it wasn't—it was spec, standardized, stagnant and was actually opposed to improvement.

Add to that, that Rolex was competing with ALMS, had a much bigger budget, and eventually squeezed ALMS off of Speed TV, ... and add to all that, that when Rolex was spending more and more money to capture market share, ALMS was arguably the best sports car racing series on the planet (Porsche, Audi, Acura, Aston, Corvette, BMW, Ferrari, Porsche plus a ton of privateers in real racing cars) but was being squeezed by five-year-old cars using 50-year-old technology but funded by NASCAR money ...

Pretty easy for a fan of sports car racing to dislike the slow and ugly pretender which was (apparently) winning the popularity battle. I think people had seen the mediocre product with the better marketing plan win way too often, and here it was happening is Sports car racing, a sport which seems to inspire strong emotional bonds.

Nowadays the DPs are actually a lot more modern—and al lot better looking—but the animosity runs so deep that fans cannot get over it. Even pointing out that P2 is no more open than DP to development and improvement doesn't matter, because DP is Bad.

Add to all that that real P2 machinery—the latest and greatest, like the new Oak-Ligier, the Oak-Morgan ... are getting beat and beat up by DPs ... fans of development and improvement are seeing the latest and greatest being handcuffed by the rules and hip-checked by the competition and Losing to cars which are tarted-up throwbacks to 50 years ago ...

Just too many hot-button issues there for logic to gain a foothold.

I don't care about styling cues. They could be there or not, I just don't care. What I strongly dislike is when cars with styling cues but otherwise bad design (like the DP "Corvette") set the standard for the whole field—when "styling cues" trump performance. When the package is made more important than the contents—when I am being sold Show but not Go.

If DPs used modern technology (the whole P-class could weigh 875 kg and perform that much better with less if TUSC weren't trying to balance for the bad weight-to-strength ration of a 1035-kg steel tube frame) that would be a huge boost. Having a CF monocoque is far from "cutting edge" but it is "industry-wide best practice" and to use anything else is a deliberate step back.

Mandating simple aero wouldn't be a big deal, so long as the cars were absolutely as efficient as engineers could make them—unlike the DP "Corvette" which wasn't even as good as the then eight-year-old original DP shell.

Production-derived engines aren't a problem either—Can-Am was ruled by stock-block-baswed Chevies for several years. Camel GT was stock-block. What they weren't was hyper-managed, over-restricted, and sealed. Take away that are of development, and take away that much more appeal.

Basically, Daytona Prototype offers nothing but externals—it imitates a modern sports car. Naturally, fans don't want an imitation.

LMP2 was conceived as a substandard class. P1 was where the real stuff happened—P2 was the sub-class, the LMPC of sports car racing, the budget class. As P2 rules got more restrictive, it became even more of an underclass—limited development, limited advancement—but at least they started out as some of the best race cars of the day, using the latest and best tech. P2 was never intended to be the premier class—everyone could see it was too full of compromises to headline.

DP was always a step (or several) below that. Everything good about P2 was gone, and everything bad about P2 was maximized. And now, it is the Premier class of the continent's premier series. it is easy to see why fans are not thrilled to be getting fourth best, and are even more irritated when we are constantly told how great it is.

[seanyb505]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

...getting fourth best, and are even more irritated when we are constantly told how great it is.

Preach it brother. Just like DP being a step backward in 2003, it's a step backward in 2014. I'm not arguing that the DP is as bad as it used to be; it is better than ten years ago. What it isn't better than was the alternative we had one year ago. Manufactured racing, volume of cars, general praising of the chassis, the increase in DP speed from 13 to 14 and telling people like me to "get over it" will not cause me to overlook what these cars are not.

[canamman]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Those GT1 cars were at the pinnacle of performance and engineering in their day.

Maelochs- Back in the 70's and early 80's it was the heyday
of CamelGT. When did America start running Gt's and
prototypes in the same race. More importantly why?
Was it a LeMans thing or just combining small fields to
fill a grid?

[Maelochs]

canamman, I had to hit Google to even start to answer your question. As far as I can tell as to why GTs and prototypes started running together and when, it seems it was after the death of Camel GT/GTP in 1993. But ... are we counting races that were always multi-class like Daytona and Sebring or just series outside of those?

Small grids. Too few prototype teams after GTP cranked up the costs and then the manufacturers pulled out. Possibly also related to the change from Speedvision (which aired all kinds of sports car racing) to Speed (which focused on Real Racing, by which I mean NASCAR ) which helped kill sponsor involvement.

I assume general mismanagement after the departure of the Bishops and Bill France helped kill series popularity as well, but I really don't know the inside news from back then, and I can only guess how much of what I read is real.

I do have a fair idea of what Andy Evans did to foster the growth of ALMS and Rolex—by totally screwing up PSRC for his own benefit, but I guess by then the grids were already shrinking. By the time GT1 was hitting it big, the damage had been done, i guess.

Not really sure how this question relates to the thread, but it is a topic which interests me and I would like to learn more about. if you know anything or can recommend any reliable sources for behind-the-scenes history of the fall of GTP/WSC/PSRC to ALMS period (or really, inside stuff about any era of sports car racing, I like it all) please let me know.

I know I am a big BSer, but I only like to BS about stuff I pretty much know, and I simply don't know enough about all that to do any wild theorizing.

[Speed-King]

The way I see it, the current lineage of prototype racing in the US separated from GT racing about a decade later than its European counter part. (An earlier line of US prototypes came to a dead end with Can Am II). The US were pretty much prototypeless(not counting single seater based Zombie Can Am) for half a decade until IMSA introduced first GTX and then GTP to counter the Porsche hegemony. So GTP was actually an outgrowth of GT racing rather than a continuation of the earlier prototype tradition. Which also meant that they were still competing together with the GTs in most races in the early eighties. This changed around the middle of that decade with the introduction of the new 'Lights' class after which prototype grids were big enough that they could for most races run on their own. This was actually continued past the end of GTP and well into the 90s up to the very eve of the creation of the ALMS, with PSCR running standalone prototype races at many venues sometimes with as little as a dozen of cars. It really was Panoz that brought back the all classes in all races format and probably not for a lack of competitors, but to emulate the way things were done at Le Mans.