Yesterday a friend and I were discussing the current state of IMSA. Both of us have heard much complaining yet few alternative solutions. So, if you were IMSA and had to combine Grand-Am and ALMS, how would do so?
Yesterday a friend and I were discussing the current state of IMSA. Both of us have heard much complaining yet few alternative solutions. So, if you were IMSA and had to combine Grand-Am and ALMS, how would do so?
Pretty much as their plan was.....2 GT classes, P2, DP. I suppose continue to let the P1 cars hop the pond to run in a "exhibition only" P1 class.
Now, if I were the SCCA trying to do this merger, it would need to have a different class for every single competitor, a rules sheet for each class that would be too large to download on a 2TB hard drive, and then change everything the next year....
And if I were NASA trying to do this, all I would do is say how much the scca sucks all the time. 
The hardest part of this whole thing is to make the DP cars that much faster than the P2 cars that you can tell the difference at most tracks. AND still make them a reasonable thing to race. I hope how they did it works, that's for sure. But this would not be the first time that North American endurance racing took a different approach than the FIA/FCO did. And it turned out well the last time.
For the GT cars, I would totally meld the two into a GTPro and GTAm classes. I'm not a fan of the tube cars, regardless of the spinning triangles. And for the most part, both GT's had cars that were basically in both series- Vette's, BMW's, Ferraris, Audi's, etc. It's not a massive stretch to make them the same.
No more GTC, and no more PC- those were field fillers that made it more confusing to watch. At least the DP and P2 cars are obviously different.
It's never going to be easy, and there will always be those that complain. For me, I would go along the same rules as they have. Combine the P2 and DP cars, exclude the P1 cars as they do not add much in my opinion. They have VERY small numbers and take away from the P2 / DP battles, which should be for the overall win.
Say what you want, but if I were running a prototype and were a big team, I would only want an overall. The P1's make no sense to me except to only display engineering at the cost of the race. It reminds me of the 917 in CanAm, or the Toyota in GTP. They both more or less sealed the fate of their series'. Especially with a "new" series, I would want to avoid designing that in.
On the GT front, ban tube frame cars, period. We used to race one and I know why people like them, but to me, they are not representative of the spirit of the class. Reduce the number of GT classes (especially all the Porsche classes), and make is easier to follow with a clear rules set for the competitors. Having to explain to the people that come to races with you why there are 4 cars that all look identical race in different classes makes it a tough sell. At the professional level, you need to simplify it and create an easy to follow rules set.
just my .02.
Pretty much a clean sheet.
Yeah, you heard me, but it needed to be done.
Keep P1 and P2 aligned with the ACO so the big boys from LeMans come play. De-stupify the DP's and work with the ACO so they are P2 legal. Keep a PE (Experimental) grid spot open for the DeltaWang's of the world.
GT all gets thrown at the window. No more tube framers, there's plenty of GT1/GT2/Trans Am/World Challenge out there for them. Make a "GT Pro" for factory teams running the exotics (Ferrari, Porsche, Aston, Audi, etc), a "GT Sports" for the smaller cars (Frisbee, Mazda, etc), and a "GT Am" for the non-works guys running older stuff (RX-8, etc) and GT3 Porsche Cup cars. Make all three series factory tub/drivetrain only. Rules gimmicks to a minimum, let the factories sort out who needs to get faster.
Javelin wrote: Pretty much a clean sheet. Yeah, you heard me, but it needed to be done. Keep P1 and P2 aligned with the ACO so the big boys from LeMans come play. De-stupify the DP's and work with the ACO so they are P2 legal. Keep a PE (Experimental) grid spot open for the DeltaWang's of the world. GT all gets thrown at the window. No more tube framers, there's *plenty* of GT1/GT2/Trans Am/World Challenge out there for them. Make a "GT Pro" for factory teams running the exotics (Ferrari, Porsche, Aston, Audi, etc), a "GT Sports" for the smaller cars (Frisbee, Mazda, etc), and a "GT Am" for the non-works guys running older stuff (RX-8, etc) and GT3 Porsche Cup cars. Make all three series factory tub/drivetrain only. Rules gimmicks to a minimum, let the factories sort out who needs to get faster.
That's not clean sheet. That's the old IMSA rules, the ones that struggled for turn out. The series that got bought out by GrandAm/NASCAR.
Clean sheet means all new.
Say- we will take some Indy cars, put full bodys on them, and make them last 24 hours for the main prototype class, and then do the same for Indy Lights for the secondary class.
Or perhaps go back in time for the GT classes so that we see real small displacement cars, like back when Minis ran at Sebring, and we got a Austin Healy Sebring model.
That's clean sheet.
Gt- toss everything, start with 4 classes Sub 25k Sub 50k Sub 100k Unlimited
You take a stock car, add a cage and cell, strip it down to the factory listed curb weight. Only performance enhancements are those available from the factory for under the listed price
I'd get rid of the Daytona Prototypes. They were good racing but ugly and the P1/P2 cars are good racing but not ugly so.. done. If you race a DP... pick a new class.
P2 and DPs need to be separated.
I can only make an analogy of P2 being the "skinny highschool cross-county kid" and the DP's being the "fat kid eating all the twinkies". The way the rules are coming out with new floors, diffusers, clutches, they are giving the fat kid a pair of running shoes and and wife beater. He's still gonna be the fat kid.
I'd like to see two classes: one prototype, one GT, with no driver combination requirements for either. I understand completely IMSA's desire to keep as many teams and cars as possible on board for the first couple years, but I hope they make an effort to further consolidate classes. As to what the classes look like, I could care less if its DPs, P2s, Oreca FLM09s (the PC car), Deltawings, or any combination of these or any other formulas, as long as they get the equivalency right to give them all a shot to win.
As for the driver requirements, I don't want to see Pro-Am required classes moving forward. In Grand-Am, they had a separate Pro-Am trophy for each class, but they didn't get a class all their own. Gentlemen drivers have been a part of sports car racing it's entire life but, to me as a fan, it diminishes it for me to see a top level motorsport catering to rich amateur drivers, rather than showcasing the best of the best talent in the world.
In fact, I actually loved seeing the mix of Am drivers in with the all-pro lineups in Grand-Am, and actually found myself rooting for the ones that could honestly mix it up mid-pack with the pros on pace. Obviously (and unfortunately!) I'm not one of the rich guys writing the checks, so what they want will always carry more sway than me as a fan, but I bet there a lot of others like me...
Overall, I'm happy with what I'm seeing IMSA do this year, and the huge interest and new teams, names, and cars that I'm seeing.
Split most races between P classes and GT classes.
My .02, FWIW: the biggest challenges are: 1) speed differential between classes; 2) offering competitive classes at a lower cost levels.
Plenty of fans like the idea of unlimited (or loosely limited) tech for the fastest classes - showcasing the latest and greatest in making speed. It's cool. It's also expensive.
FIA pros are pretty vocal about gentlemen drivers, while we seem to take a more egalitarian attitude in the States. I'd argue the problem is not so much having gentlemen drivers in sports car racing as it is the speed differentials when overtaking. The greater the speed differential the greater the risk to both classes when overtaking slower traffic, and the less margin for error by anyone.
Which brings us back to costs. I agree in principle with others who have suggested taking the tube-framers out of GT. As much as I prefer seeing GT cars move closer to production-based platforms though, best guess is what we're talking about is cheaper, slower GT cars.
The solutions so far to the probem of making racing competitive AND relatively affordable are imperfect and arguably bred, variously: class proliferation (unloved, see: SCCA), exorbitant costs (see: F1), fewer teams fielding cars, and safety concerns.
Another way to go may be to split the fields of shorter races by class, the way World Challenge splits ST and GT sometimes, for example. Put the Prototypes on the track together and let them have at it, followed by a turn for the GT classes. Also, for the longer races, limit gentlemen drivers to daylight hours to minimize the chances of the kind of overnight incidents we've seen at LeMans, for example, when darkness makes speed and distance harder to judge while being overtaken.
We would potentially get more racing time, and more teams while accomodating the fastest cars, at the cost of time-compressed broadcast coverage, additional worker hours, and perhaps greater track cost. Still not a perfect solution, but maybe less-bad. YMMV.
DukeOfUndersteer wrote: P2 and DPs need to be separated. I can only make an analogy of P2 being the "skinny highschool cross-county kid" and the DP's being the "fat kid eating all the twinkies". The way the rules are coming out with new floors, diffusers, clutches, they are giving the fat kid a pair of running shoes and and wife beater. He's still gonna be the fat kid.
Only one problem with that analogy... 2013 DPs can achieve a higher top speed than 2013 P2s, it just takes them longer to get there. It's more like the 1960s when Indianapolis Roadsters competed against Formula 1 for an exhibition race. The F1 cars stormed away from the grid, but as soon as the Indy cars got a full head of steam, they blew right past them.
Honestly, I can't see a much better way of having done this transition. I am SOOOO excited for the GT classes, there are a hell of a lot of great competitors in the mix there.
The only 2 things I might have done differently:
1. Make GT Daytona 100% FIA GT3 compliant
2. Open up tires to any manufacturer in every class except LMP Challenge. Michelin makes a badass LMP2 tire that could probably be adapted to DP (or they could design a new tire if it were beneficial).
Pairing the DPs and P2s is just temporary until they determine a new class and to allow competitors from each series run correct? So let's drop all that nonsense and just deal with it for the next couple of years. The same thing happened when the series split into the ALMS and Grand-Am back in the late 90s. We ended up getting clearly defined prototype classes in each series that made each very identifiable to that respectable series. I'm very sure that will happen within the coming years.
IMSA has to have a compromise so they can have a field of cars for these events. Can't just start with a clean sheet right off the bat.
With that being said....I'm okay with the current rules and regulations. They are trying to do their due diligence. In the future I would love to see at least GTC dropped. Make it a support series as it once was. The biggest thing. Have one prototype category - that's it. 2-3 GT classes. One for your top model porsche, ferrari, corvette, bmw, viper, r8 etc. Another for your mid-levels like Camaro, Mustang, maybe tube framers. And a 3rd for cars like mini, civic si, FR-S/BR-Z, speed3 but then you'd be cutting into the conti challenge cars. That and Civics and BR-Z cars aren't in the same class.
And to note the conti series is great and shouldn't be touched. Maybe some enduros like the old firehawk series.
Open top DP cars?
DirtyBird222 wrote: Pairing the DPs and P2s is just temporary until they determine a new class and to allow competitors from each series run correct?
Correct. The target for that is 2016 or 2017, I believe. It would likely be ACO approved either as the new LMP2 class, or its own class in order to run at Le Mans, but the series has said this does not necessarily have to be the case if what the ACO wants for the new P class does not align with where the series wants to take it.
The Conti series is continuing basically unchanged, with just some driver requirements being adjusted to make it basically all pro-am, which is already essentially is.
The problem I see with running a bottom GT class that includes mini, civic, brz, etc is it becomes a safety issue. The speed difference between the prototypes and a class that low would make the GT's a slow moving barricade.
Keep them as a support series and give them a endurance event or 2 a year
In reply to DirtyBird222:
GTC is already gone. Do you mean LMPC?
yeah … both of those need to go
Spitsix wrote: Open top DP cars?
I don't think that will happen. A large part of DP was simple (in relative terms) tube frame cars with decent driver space and high on safety. The cage size and shape is carefully mandated and I doubt they will change that. That's what gave rise to the odd proportions with the early cars, although they changed that later on. Also from a personal coming of age perspective I love the 80's group C cars. the prior classic era was the 60's with GT40's, T70's, 917's, P4's etc again another classic era of closed cars.
I REALLY like the way this series is headed, actually.
It's unfortunate that Sahlens have dropped the Prototype battle, as I think they could have done something with Dinan. The Ford V. Chevy battle sounds promising, though.
There is a rumor that Subaru is stuffing an engine in a Lola and showing up in an P2 car (maybe...). Mazda has their old Lola chassis that they're packing a diesel into for P2 as well. The Deltawang has been getting quicker, perhaps it can compete this year.
GTD looks like the class of the field this year. Daytona and Sebring are going to be awesome, as it looks like Audi and Porsche will be stacking their decks with some serious driving talent, and Ferrari are no slouch, either.
I think they bit off more than they could chew trying to merge the two in such a short time period. The two series have different fan base and different inherent philosophies when it comes to road racing and i will not lie I have been pessimistic of the merger since it was announced (David has heard me complain since the announcement LOL).
The ALMS was my series of choice, unfortunately (IMO) the self absorbed and pompous upper management bumbled their way through the last few seasons and there was little hope the series could recover anytime soon.
I think a two year plan would have been more reasonable, and like some have said state with a clean sheet. Four classes max, American Prototype 1, American Prototype 2, GT Group A, GT Group B and work from there. We keep hearing how important the world racing link is but I see very little true commitment from north American teams to race over in Europe, a desire yes, but very few serious commitments to do so.
I’m just a fan. I do not know all the ins and outs of the business at hand to combine these two entities. I am sure from that perspective it made sense to combine the series as soon as possible knowing full well it would have to be a cluster eff for the first couple of years at least.
Being IMSA, I might also distance my self a bit more from the new series marketing. Keep a very defined line that IMSA is the sanctioning body and not the series itself (much like it was with alms). I have a lot of respect for the IMSA organization and the people there, my perception of nascar & grand am influencing or promoting that association would diminish that for me.
For 2014 I say run the P2 and DP as is, make a determination at the end of the year, what to do in 2015. From what I read I don't see a DP running at Le mans or if their is a future beyond 2014, in the current generation. I find it pointless to have the owners throw a bunch of money at a DP which may be it's last year (or switch to a different Generation of DP). For 2015 make one prototype class which would have the same speed as P1. I think IMSA did well with GT as they didn't make many changes and typically they are the best battles in both series.
I'd say make the two prototype classes mirror LeMans, and have 2-3 GT classes.
But I'm pretty indifferent either way.
I can't speak much for the prototypes, as I really don't get the ins and outs of the different classes, but I can say that about three different tiers of GT car would be perfect. Think also of the manufacturer tie in. If Chevy can market the Cruz (or whatever), the Camaro and the Corvette, and all can win their classes, that's a good way to bring money in, not to mention it caters to the different income levels the fans are coming from.
And yeah, no tube frames for these guys.
You'll need to log in to post.
