LMDh (DPi regulations version 2.0)

[carbsmith]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

I would be ok with that if he doesn't at the same time lobby to be the chosen GM partner.

I'm not sure I understand the contradiction between needing factory support and trying to get factory support. Yes GM helps them out, and that's barely enough without teaming Jordan with a company CEO or a different driver every other race or having Jim France's cheque book and connections like the other Cadillacs.

WTR appears to be neither the car owner nor entrant for Super Trofeo, that's obviously pay to play.

[truebeliever]

Originally Posted by carbsmith

I'm not sure I understand the contradiction between needing factory support and trying to get factory support. Yes GM helps them out, and that's barely enough without teaming Jordan with a company CEO or a different driver every other race or having Jim France's cheque book and connections like the other Cadillacs.

WTR appears to be neither the car owner nor entrant for Super Trofeo, that's obviously pay to play.

Absolute truth is, with out Jim France's $'s, the sponsors ''given to'' WTR and the GM $'s, WT would have been a spectator years ago.

These are the facts of life, but also, that is life today.

[NaBUru38]

https://sportscar365.com/imsa/iwsc/i...2022-timeline/

The 2022 DPi technical regulations will be released in early 2020, and on-track testing will begin in early 2021.

[deggis]

ACO Continuing Dialogue on Potential DPi 2022 Adoption
https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...2022-adoption/

[joeb]

Originally Posted by deggis

ACO Continuing Dialogue on Potential DPi 2022 Adoption
https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...2022-adoption/

Sounds like they are happy to keep talking about ways to potentially boost the top class at the Marquee events in each series.

[TF110]

I'm not getting my hopes up. I think there's going to be issue with the players in the WEC not wanting to do another set of rules in accordance to IMSA. I think Aston Martin is going to be an issue because their car is, imo iffy at the moment on making the grid in a competitive state. If by 2022 they have it together and the cars can go faster (of which I have little doubt), maybe dpi 2.0 can come into play. But 1100kg and 700hp is not going to cut it. We saw what happened with the DP3 and previous gen lmp2. They had to give DP a huge power increase and they ran on brick hard tires which played into the hands of the more powerful cars.

[deggis]

"IMSA shows interest in DTM/Super GT's Class One regulations"

https://www.autosport.com/imsa/news/...ne-regulations

[seanyb505]

To be fair they've shown interest in my station wagon, and a premier station wagon class.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by seanyb505

To be fair they've shown interest in my station wagon, and a premier station wagon class.

For the record, I am also interested in the premier station wagon class.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by joeb

For the record, I am also interested in the premier station wagon class.

I propose it to require the construction of station wagons and an end to the (no)Sport(absolutely NO)UtilityVehicles filling the roads.

[TF110]

I thought we heard this story about a year or two ago? Supposedly there was a DTM America but it never happened. With the way those cars currently are, I would rather they not try to implement them in the top class. I would rather a more free hypercar type ruleset with a set hp/weight ratio.

[NaBUru38]

Ferrari is "interested" in LMDh with its own chassis.



https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...d-own-chassis/

[seanyb505]

To sum up Ferrari's thoughts:
- Hypercar - "No, no, no, eet's too expenseeve."
- LMDh - "No, no, no, we want to make our own car."
- GTE - "No, no, no, we could spend that much in LMDh."
- F1 - "No, no, no, thees is our year."
- GT3 - "No, no, no, we don't want to race Nurburgring."

Is that about right?

Personally, I'm interested in owning a Ferrari, but it can't be more expensive than other cars. But the other available cars should have the same engine, brakes, suspension, and body of a Ferrari. But if I was buying one of the other cars, I might as well spend as much to make it be a Ferrari. But if I'm spending that much on another car, I might as well buy a Ferrari...I'll probably stick with my station wagon.

[ATLFalconsFAN]

Originally Posted by seanyb505

To sum up Ferrari's thoughts:
- Hypercar - "No, no, no, eet's too expenseeve."
- LMDh - "No, no, no, we want to make our own car."
- GTE - "No, no, no, we could spend that much in LMDh."
- F1 - "No, no, no, thees is our year."
- GT3 - "No, no, no, we don't want to race Nurburgring."

Is that about right?

Personally, I'm interested in owning a Ferrari, but it can't be more expensive than other cars. But the other available cars should have the same engine, brakes, suspension, and body of a Ferrari. But if I was buying one of the other cars, I might as well spend as much to make it be a Ferrari. But if I'm spending that much on another car, I might as well buy a Ferrari...I'll probably stick with my station wagon.

That made my head hurt.

[TF110]

I think LMDh is the thing they're saying is reasonable right now because it can do both series. Right now it doesn't look like hypercar can do both series. They made this clear. But the idea that they can take lmp2 parts and use them on their own car isn't really that far-fetched imo. Contact the suppliers that do the lmp2 brakes etc. I think if they do come, they'll do a hypercar since they want their own chassis design. But I think they are going to have to influence the rule makers.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by seanyb505

To sum up Ferrari's thoughts:
- Hypercar - "No, no, no, eet's too expenseeve."
- LMDh - "No, no, no, we want to make our own car."
- GTE - "No, no, no, we could spend that much in LMDh."
- F1 - "No, no, no, thees is our year."
- GT3 - "No, no, no, we don't want to race Nurburgring."

Customers want a chassis with the Ferrari name on it, and that point finally came out late in the articles. They would have no problem buying the IP reproduction rights of say Dallara but make the car in their factory so it gets the Ferrari chassis plate and the "provenance" that goes with that. I get their point but is that really still a Ferrari? Well the Dinos were a Fiat parts bin special and the California was the same, much of the switchgear and bits are the same as my Ram truck. Yes, they both have Ferrari hearts but racing chassis buyers are a bit more particular. And we still, mockingly at times, call the DPi cars by their base chassis names.

But they do make a boatload, for Ferrari chassis standards, of the GT3 cars so it's not like they haven't put their effort in there. And the GTE cars sell fairly well as well, just ask Risi about the number of cars he's raced once for owner's provenance before their put in the shed.

Originally Posted by TF110

I think LMDh is the thing they're saying is reasonable right now because it can do both series. Right now it doesn't look like hypercar can do both series. They made this clear. But the idea that they can take lmp2 parts and use them on their own car isn't really that far-fetched imo. Contact the suppliers that do the lmp2 brakes etc. I think if they do come, they'll do a hypercar since they want their own chassis design. But I think they are going to have to influence the rule makers.

You raise a valid point there. Hadn't thought of it but, and give me a bit to roam here, what if they (IMSA/ACO) were to allow another to build the chassis under license from the approved vendor list? Say Ferrari could buy the, and I'll use Dallara just for ease and Italian linkage, rights to build a Ferrari badged Dallara chassis at the cost limit established by regulations. Yes, that would probably have to be added as the regs cover the rolling chassis I believe. But Ferrari has the know-how to build the tub and can build a car from the order bin. It could work and maintain a level of "affordability" if IMSA/ACO required a very specific construction standard and made them follow the chassis builder's specs exactly. Now, if they were to build something "better" at a loss that could become a problem and I'm not sure how to limit that. But that could also open McLaren up to making a Ligier, for variety sake, based LMDh. I'm not sure how many teams would want to do that, and think Toyota and SCG would stick with their plans. But could Toyota license and build an Oreca based Lexus DPi?

[Akrapovic]

The solution, as many of us have said, is to allow both building your own chassis and using an LMP2 base.

[chernaudi]

Which IMO may be fine if one, there was more than four (in actually effect basically, three) to choose from, and two, the aero and chassis rules were more open. Both of which IMO would avoid the current Oreca-defacto spec series in LMP2 in IMSA and the WEC.

I'd rather have teams have the option to build their own cars. DPI/LMPH/LMDH are going to be BOP classes anyways, so in theory there shouldn't be much of an advantage either way.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by seanyb505

To be fair they've shown interest in my station wagon, and a premier station wagon class.

Originally Posted by joeb

For the record, I am also interested in the premier station wagon class.

Originally Posted by broadrun96

I propose it to require the construction of station wagons and an end to the (no)Sport(absolutely NO)UtilityVehicles filling the roads.

Which reminds........TWR didn't treat their Volvos for the BTCC like a joke.....

https://www.roadandtrack.com/motorsp...-btcc-history/

[TF110]

Porsche now looking at LMDh officially instead of just a rumor http://www.dailysportscar.com/2020/0...programme.html. The wording makes me think that hypercar is getting the short end of the stick behind closed doors and is being confined to the wec only. This isn't what I wanted to see. Especially with Toyota saying that they would like to take their hypercar to Daytona and the like.

[chernaudi]

Only reason why Toyota is committed to LMP1 Hypercar is that one, they started up their Hypercar project already, and two, they want to build their own car, and not be constrained to basing it off a LMP2 chassis with a quasi-spec hybrid system.

Granted, if LMDH was opened up to non-spec hybrid systems (with a MJ or power cap) and being able to build or design your own chassis, then I'd be for it.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Granted, if LMDH was opened up to non-spec hybrid systems (with a MJ or power cap) and being able to build or design your own chassis, then I'd be for it.

That would mean throwing out everything that makes LMDH cost effective and attractive for manufacturers. In a perfect world: great idea - but in the current climate: economic suicide.

[chernaudi]

Yet that's not what Toyota and Glickenhaus are going for. If Audi were looking at it, I don't think they'd throw out their tradition of designing their own cars (even if Audi Sport never actually built them).

IMO, DPI, where you just stick a stock block engine in the back of an LMP2 car, is just the cheap, quick, simple way out. May as well just run a LMP2 with more open rules.

Besides, both DPI and LMDH are supposed to be BOP classes, so in theory there's just as little incentive to go one way or another anyways.

I'm already not in favor of the LMP2 rules as it's basically lead to an Oreca lead cartel. Only reason that hasn't happened in DPI is because of BOP.

All the ACO need to do is get away from the ultra big hybrid systems and fuel flow limits that made LMP1 into F1 Light in terms of budgets and tech.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Yet that's not what Toyota and Glickenhaus are going for. If Audi were looking at it, I don't think they'd throw out their tradition of designing their own cars (even if Audi Sport never actually built them).

IMO, DPI, where you just stick a stock block engine in the back of an LMP2 car, is just the cheap, quick, simple way out. May as well just run a LMP2 with more open rules.

Besides, both DPI and LMDH are supposed to be BOP classes, so in theory there's just as little incentive to go one way or another anyways.

I'm already not in favor of the LMP2 rules as it's basically lead to an Oreca lead cartel. Only reason that hasn't happened in DPI is because of BOP.

All the ACO need to do is get away from the ultra big hybrid systems and fuel flow limits that made LMP1 into F1 Light in terms of budgets and tech.

Have you been paying attention?

DPi- literally proposed as exactly what you described, that's it's reason for existing

LMP2- limited to a cost cap/budget for a reason, that's it's entire reason as well

DPi 2.0- spec again is there entire reason, no spec and common parts and it wasn't going to happen before CoVid

Hypercar- rules that seemed to ignore the desires of all but a few, Toyota was always going to build, pleasant surprise the rules could accommodate Glickenhaus. But you can't change DPi 2.0 (LMD in WEC) to increase the price, all of those who want to have committed at the higher cost.

Audi isn't even making noise about building a car at all, makes me think they're such in FormulaE for now to clean up the image for kids. Such a rich tradition that they joined the spec series and couldn't build anything at first, building their own car isn't important to any of the teams. Ferrari makes noise about it but that's PURELY about selling the chassis, their complaint was owners want a Ferrari chassis number not some other build.

[chernaudi]

IMO, it's still just short of Indy Car or NASCAR to me. Just buying someone else's car, putting a body kit and an engine in it doesn't make it "your car". IMO, that's the cheap and easy, minimal effort way out.

Also look at the DPI vs LMP2 mess that existed in 2017 and 2018. LMP2 teams were promised by the ACO and IMSA to have a chance to win. DPI teams didn't like spending more than LMP2 teams to be pegged back to near-identical performance levels.

We're already seeing these issues in present day LMP1, where Toyota, with an OEM developed car and powertrain, and a probable near $100 million budget, are being pegged back to privateer performance levels against teams, no matter how good they are, don't have the resources and a budget that at most is 1/10 of Toyotas.

Yeah, DPI 2.0 and LMDH is just fine for a car maker who just wants to pull what Aston Martin did in 2009-11 and just take a customer car, shoe horn their own engine in it, strap a bodykit to it, and say job done.

But to me, that's not what got me into the sport when I was a teenager. IMSA and the ACO need to go back and look at LMP900 and figure out what worked there.

I'm just tired of the whole minimal effort/instant gratification crowd.

I also know that IMSA and the ACO want classes that are less vulnerable to the swings of the economy and manufacturer interest. But you only get that if you make it appealing to privateers. It also wouldn't hurt if factory teams/OEMs were more willing to sell cars to customer teams. But even in GT racing (especially GTE and GTLM), that's the exception rather than the rule now.