I am organizing an interview with Grand Am president, Roger Edmondson. We at GRM feel that the progress Grand Am has made in recent years deserves some attention and want to get to know the guy behind it all. I have asked our staff to submit questions as to what they would like to learn from this guy.
I would also like to invite our readers to do the same. Please post any questions that you might have or any other interesting tidbits or points of interest concerning this interview. Thanks
What do you think is the most important aspect that has lead to the rapid growth of grand am?
Ask him how it felt getting rear ended by the Big Four motorcycle manufacturers re: Superbike participation.
I'm interested in the thought process behind allowing both unibody cars and tube frame chassis in the Rolex GT class. It's strange watching Porsche cup cars race against tube frame cars that aren't much different from each other besides their skin.
For instance, last year, Automatic Racing ran what was supposedly a "BMW M6". While it did have super sweet carbon fiber body work, it had virtually nothing in common with an "M6". It was a tube frame chassis that, sans bodywork, looked suspiciously similar to the deskinned "Pontiac GTO" also racing. And the "M6" wasn't running an "M6" motor either. Given the V8 ceiling, they had to run what was basically an e39 M5 V8. That same rule keeps the Viper out of the GT game. In fact, I know folks have lobbied Grand Am to let them run a Viper, but it would have to have a V8 as well. 
It would be more enjoyable, IMO, if they did not allow tube frame cars in GT. Let Vipers, Corvettes, Porsches, Ferraris, BMW's, etc mix it up. I'm all for leveling the field, but don't do it through the use of silhouette racers. The prototype category already does that. Let GT be actual production cars, even if they start as bodies-in-white from the factory.
Any other questions? Our interview is next Thursday.
In reply to Tim Suddard:
Tim, I'd be really interested in hearing his thoughts on the future of ALMS. While it is true that the racing and participation numbers in his series may be better, the general consensus is that DP cars are boring and ugly compared to LMP1/2 cars.
Does he have any intention of opening up technology in the DP class to allow for underbody aero etc?
How much influence will NASCAR have on Grand Am as we know it now? Is it possible NASCAR will want to do a 'spec' car like they did with the COT?
What kind of car do you drive daily as well as for fun?
It seems Grand Am has taken a NASCAR approach to Prototype. Even though it has more numbers due to keeping cost down, It seems the true sports car/prototype fan wants factory inovation. Any plans to allow multiple chassis design. The example of the GTO and the BMW being the same design. Tube frame sameness and DP similarity of design does not excite the Sports car world. Maybe allowing some innovation and not going as far as ALMS. I worked many Daytona 24 hr and it just has lost its international feel. Also to much of the track is brightly lighted which might be great for tv but for the fans the headlights on the banking was a highlight. This was once one of the big 3 International races and now seems to have gone its own way. Thoughts of a 40 + year sports car fan / Official. I would drive from Ohio every year to be there and now that I live in Orlando I am hard pressed to want to go at all.
Apparently I am in a minority of really liking the DP cars and other innovations that have come about in recent years such as night time lighting.
But I am always a fan of anything that dilutes the Porsche classes. It seems that everyone has a class that is written for the Porsches and if they let anyone else in the others are at a disadvantage.
It's not a question but as far as other classes I am more for cars that actually represent the cars we can buy and drive rather than just silhouettes ala Nascar. I guess my question, if there is one in here, is will they be going more towards real factory cars or further away. Racing cars that don't really exist outside of the race venue isn't nearly as interesting as seeing real live factory cars competing.
I mean a factory FWD becoming tube frame RWD is off putting. If you are going to use a GM motor in a tube chassis that's great, just don't allow it to be called it something it's not.
The only thing Roger Edmonson should be known for, is his involvement in the take over of AMA Superbike racing. So far, it has been an interesting assortment of screw ups after another. I'm curious how the 2009 season takes off.
Yes more like what ALMS is doing with GT2. I think it is the most interesting class as it is street based race cars. you can identify with and recognize the car and components when you look at it.
I am not saying DP has not done something as far as furthering the class from where it started. But it is quite a bit away from factory prototypes.
That's why I was wondering about the whole 'COT' type thing. I'd hate to see Grand Am's GT class become a bunch of spec tube frame cars with different tin, i.e. NASCAR all over again.
Ask him about banning tube frames completely from GT, keeping that specifically for the DP cars.
Yeah, i'm also interested in the allowance of tube frame cars in GT. I know they are much cheaper to build and repair, but somehow it irks me to see them out there with actual cars. I have a constant disagreement with a friend that's a professional driver, and he likes them because they drive better, but that just further backs up my point in my opinion.
I've got no problem with a tube frame class, but I'd like to see more "real" cars in the series to battle with the Porsches.
No problem at all with the DPs, love them. Spend some time up close to one, for what you get, they're fairly inexpensive and easy to repair.
In reply to bigwrench:
Keep in mind all the years of tube-frame GTO/GTU/GTS cars in IMSA.
I like the thinking behind the GA Prep 2 cars, because it allows Riley, Crawford, et. al. more opportunities to recoup their investment by selling to teams wishing to campaign RX8s or Mustangs or M6s or Corvettes or...
The DP's are anything but attractive, but the racing is good. Also, if I squint hard enough, the Riley's look like the Riley-designed Chevy Intrepid GTP.
I also like the ALMS' way of doing things, but feel they may price themselves out of a field just as IMSA did in the '90's.
GA seems to be trying to curb that, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.
With regard to GA GT, how competitive/interesting of a field are you gonna have in GT if you allow only prep 1 factory chassis cars? It will become pretty much a Porsche GT3 cup race. The RX8's are prep 2, as well as the Pontiac's, most the Vette's, the Mustang. The prep 1 Vette's have not been competitive. The prep 2 build allows for some creative thinking, and are far from spec. They have different engines, some use xtrac transaxles, some use emco, some use conventional 5 speed gearboxes. Some use indepen. rear suspension, some use stick axle. etc.
If you look at the test times from Daytona, most of the GT field was within 2-3 seconds, that is pretty amazing since a lot of cars were being tested by paying drivers who had little or no time behind the wheel of the particular car.
Prep 2 also allows the "sportsman" racer the opportunity to build and compete without spending the budget of some small nations.
A prep 1 car can go every bit as fast as a tube prep 2 car but they cost one hell of a lot more to fix when they are crashed. Crashed hard they often would be wrote off.
Grand Am has a nice balance with what they are doing in GT, I would just like to see a bit more power.
Did the interview this morning. Went well. Thanks for all your help.
