Which upcoming P2 prospect sucks LESS?

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Pontlieue

I care about ELMS, but more importantly, Simon Dolan does. And he has made clear that he is not a fan of the new LMP2 regulations. Considering that Jota is one of the leading LMP2 teams, it will be interesting to see what they do next.

I think I've read somewhere though that Dolan prefers ELMS because he likes the tracks more than those in WEC.

Greaves is also considering P1 potentially. And we know Zytek isn't making P2 spec bid. So with both Zytek teams possibly looking at hypothetical P1 switch, and being more European oriented, this is the solution again
http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...=143940&page=5

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Also I like open tires.

Too bad. I've heard multiple times, including from J. Hindhaugh, that ACO P2 will have control tire, except it won't be Continental but another brand. So it's a fully spec class for amateur drivers. At this point does is even matter how much better the ACO's officiating and FCY procedures are going to be compared to IMSA's?

[seanyb505]

Neither. ACO's version is appalling. IMSA's version has the most opportunity to be a great product. The idea of a manufacturer driving development of a racing car to learn more or improve their streetable offerings sounds great.

Spec anything, drivers are the stars, stifled development, competitive entertainment, and anything current IMSA related are 100% turnoffs.

[Akrapovic]

On paper, the IMSA version looks better. In practice, I don't have even the slightest bit of confidence that NASCAR will pull that off without it being awful.

[ATLFalconsFAN]

Originally Posted by seanyb505

The idea of a manufacturer driving development of a racing car to learn more or improve their streetable offerings sounds great.

You mean P1?

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

Too bad. I've heard multiple times, including from J. Hindhaugh, that ACO P2 will have control tire, except it won't be Continental but another brand. So it's a fully spec class for amateur drivers. At this point does is even matter how much better the ACO's officiating and FCY procedures are going to be compared to IMSA's?

It was said to be spec tire in the beginning, and for some time everyone incl people you mentioned expected it to be so, but later (at least) DSC said that this had been axed from the list-of-spec-items and they are open again

Of course $$$ might have changed ACO's mind since then again but I haven't heard anything about that.

Hindy isn't always so great of a source for up to date regs anyway, for example he seems to think that the LMP1 privateers are fully merged to the factory cars and that they don't have separate podium ceremonies anymore, even though that is painfully still the case and that sub class is identical to last year despite ACO promises. Has he even seem the podiums this year?

[Pandamasque]

There may be an unofficial non-hybrid class, but they are no longer classed as P1L and P1H.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

There may be an unofficial non-hybrid class, but they are no longer classed as P1L and P1H.

Wrong. Well alright there might not be L anymore, but it's been replaced by other weirdness:

* 'LMP1-H and LMP1' (TV graphics 1, regulations 1)
* 'LMP1-H and LMP1-P" (TV graphics 2)
* 'LMP1 Hybrid and LMP1 Non-Hybrid (regulations 2)
* 'LMP1 Manufacturers World Championship and Private Teams Category' (regulations 3)
* LMP1 Manufacturers World Championship and Endurance Trophy for Private LMP1 Teams (regulations 4)

And it's not unofficial, they are actually separated in everything but in the false promise and when *sometimes* they include Rebellion and Kolles in the same sheet. And even there they are separated with H and non H.

I suspect the only actual reason they removed L and replaced it with this nonsense was because they increased the privateer weight to 850kg from 800kg, probably because Kolles couldn't drop the weight by 75kg as they said was the case last year. So ACO compensated with this 'helping hand'. Prob the same now in LMP3 with 900->930kg increase when new manufacturer has cried

And despite of what Hindy says on podiums etc
http://www.fiawec.com/en/news/kraiha...mans_3256.html

[MagVanisher]

Originally Posted by seanyb505

Spec anything, drivers are the stars, stifled development, competitive entertainment, and anything current IMSA related are 100% turnoffs.

The "drivers are the stars" thing only works in NASCAR, remember? Look, some of the drivers competing in TUSC aren't well-known to mainstream Americans (except for hardcore sports-car fans). And yes, putting NASCAR magic into sports-car racing would make things worse!

I think it's time for someone outside of IMSA to take control of TUSC and manage it accordingly.

[Coach Ep]

Originally Posted by MagVanisher

I think it's time for someone outside of IMSA to take control of TUSC and manage it accordingly.

Sure, all you have to do is offer the right amount of money to Mr. France and TUSC is yours!

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by MagVanisher

The "drivers are the stars" thing only works in NASCAR, remember? Look, some of the drivers competing in TUSC aren't well-known to mainstream Americans (except for hardcore sports-car fans). And yes, putting NASCAR magic into sports-car racing would make things worse!

Why do you use word 'would', as if it hadn't happened already?

[YZFrider]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

On paper, the IMSA version looks better. In practice, I don't have even the slightest bit of confidence that NASCAR will pull that off without it being awful.

Sadly I agree. I feel the compromises with the future IMSA P2's have changed what was an admirable goal of unification of a global spec. (Blame in part with the ACO's decision of 4 constructors/spec engine) I say part because I feel even if it didn't come to the agreed upon 2017 regs, I think we'd still have branded bodywork and what not. I really am curious if a P2 team from Europe will run any of the big events (NAEC). If not, time to fully break away and just leave LM GTE as the link to Le Mans.

[seanyb505]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Why do you use word 'would', as if it hadn't happened already?

Yeah...*tinfoil hat ahead*

I have no doubts that one of the main TUSC focused reporting sites has direct input from IMSA management that it would be a good idea to publish articles focusing on the drivers.

At least I noticed such articles becoming a mainstay when TUSC started.

Anyway, I would love for myself and others to be proven wrong, and IMSA come out with a formula that's relevant, stable, and attractive. And maybe too much to ask, to not be able to take a look at that week's/year's BOP and see who gets to win that race/championship.

[August]

The ACO rules must be the bigger disappointment. A class that's had variety in chassis and engine constructors becomes semi-spec for chassis and full-spec for engines (and a BOP mess at LM24). Actually, I'm more disappointed of the cap of four chassis constructors than the spec engine as I can understand ACO's desire for no OEM involvement in the class (though two ACO-approved engines would've been nicer).

The IMSA rules seem alright for me. The bodywork styling cues and free engine choice with BOPing are sort of fake variety. But it's not any worse than the ACO rules. It's not as cool as the current P2 rules but can't be such a huge disappointment if you compare it to DPs having three approved constructors, multiple engine options, and bodywork styling cues.

So, for ACO this will be regression, for IMSA not so much. It's hard to say which ruleset is better, I'd prefer IMSA's without BOP, but with BOP I can't say I prefer either, maybe IMSA's for even having some fake variety. But because I'm more disappointed for ACO, I voted for IMSA.