IMSA USCC in 2016 and 2017 - Page 2

Deleted · 19 Sep 2014, 15:29 (Ref:3455077)

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeb

More info on 2017 Proto regs:
http://www.racer.com/imsa/item/10880...t-taking-shape

So

spec common tub
spec brakes
spec dampers
spec radiators
spec underbody
spec ECU
spec tires (USCC (assumed since Conti-Hoosier contract continues))

How exciting... ...

MagVanisher · 19 Sep 2014, 15:31 (Ref:3455078)

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeb

More info on 2017 Proto regs:
http://www.racer.com/imsa/item/10880...t-taking-shape

Going with the Global Racing Engine concept that Super GT (and DTM eventually), I doubt that will happen. I'll rather have variety than having the same engine specs.

Oh yeah, and having spec tires, ECU, and brakes? C'mon, they could do better than that!

Pontlieue · 19 Sep 2014, 15:33 (Ref:3455079)

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeb

More info on 2017 Proto regs:
http://www.racer.com/imsa/item/10880...t-taking-shape

Oh dear, what a disappointment....

I was hoping for something similar to the current LMP2 coupés.

But
-manufacturer styling cues
-BoP
-spec components

sounds more like DP without tube frames.

MagVanisher · 19 Sep 2014, 15:35 (Ref:3455080)

No, it's more like DTM minus the DRS and other expensive stuff.

Deleted · 19 Sep 2014, 15:36 (Ref:3455081)

Even LMP3 sounds more exciting.

jasonjessica09 · 19 Sep 2014, 15:42 (Ref:3455088)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiana

Even LMP3 sounds more exciting.

Well if 2017 LMP2 can resemble DTM or Japan Super GT, then that will be fine with me.

That sounds like a non tubed frame DP concept mentioned earlier.

MagVanisher · 19 Sep 2014, 15:45 (Ref:3455089)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasonjessica09

Well if 2017 LMP2 can resemble DTM or Japan Super GT, then that will be fine with me.

That would not happen as LMP2 and Super GT/DTM are different things, especially when it comes to the chassis tub design as well as other things like spec transmission, suspension, etc.

lms · 19 Sep 2014, 15:48 (Ref:3455090)

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeb

More info on 2017 Proto regs:
http://www.racer.com/imsa/item/10880...t-taking-shape

****ing ***** whoever thought this up. deserves a deltawing shoved in his ass. manufacturer-branded bodywork what is this, a deepee??????? branding cues on the bodywork, go **** yourself imsa.

finally the struggling p2 category was becoming interesting with the zytek, hpd coupe etc coming and now THIS.

maybe there is some good news "each championship (WEC, IMSA, etc.) will be responsible for their own adjustments" - so... wretched deepees only in NA? while europe, wec and the ALMS (hehe) will use normal bodywork? im ok with that...

lmp1 monocoque, dimensions that sounds great....

Danathar · 19 Sep 2014, 15:53 (Ref:3455094)

Quote:

Originally Posted by lms

****ing ***** whoever thought this up. deserves a deltawing shoved in his ass. manufacturer-branded bodywork what is this, a deepee??????? branding cues on the bodywork, go **** yourself imsa.

finally the struggling p2 category was becoming interesting with the zytek, hpd coupe etc coming and now THIS.

maybe there is some good news "each championship (WEC, IMSA, etc.) will be responsible for their own adjustments" - so... wretched deepees only in NA? while europe, wec and the ALMS (hehe) will use normal bodywork? im ok with that...

lmp1 monocoque, dimensions that sounds great....

GM brought it up, because they don't want to spend the money to make a Corvette LMP1 so they instead want to change the future of P2 so they can have manufacturer branded P2 on the cheap.

MagVanisher · 19 Sep 2014, 16:00 (Ref:3455099)

Quote:

Originally Posted by lms

****ing ***** whoever thought this up. deserves a deltawing shoved in his ass. manufacturer-branded bodywork what is this, a deepee??????? branding cues on the bodywork, go **** yourself imsa.

finally the struggling p2 category was becoming interesting with the zytek, hpd coupe etc coming and now THIS.

maybe there is some good news "each championship (WEC, IMSA, etc.) will be responsible for their own adjustments" - so... wretched deepees only in NA? while europe, wec and the ALMS (hehe) will use normal bodywork? im ok with that...

lmp1 monocoque, dimensions that sounds great....

That's how it goes... If you can't tell to GM how stupid their idea is, deal with it!

**joeb** · 19 Sep 2014, 16:01 (Ref:3455101)

Quote:

Originally Posted by lms

maybe there is some good news "each championship (WEC, IMSA, etc.) will be responsible for their own adjustments" - so... wretched deepees only in NA? while europe, wec and the ALMS (hehe) will use normal bodywork? im ok with that...

I have a hard time believing that the ACO will be promoting a spec P2.

I also can't believe IMSA would kick out teams in 2017 who will be running the new HPD or Ligier or maybe the Oreca beginning next year. So at the very least if you buy a new P2 for next year you will likely be grandfathered in for 2017.

My favorite quote from the article is the one where their target speed is "between LMP1 and GTE" wow, thanks for that.

MagVanisher · 19 Sep 2014, 16:03 (Ref:3455104)

But P2 is meant to be a cost-capped class, right?

Coach Ep · 19 Sep 2014, 16:41 (Ref:3455131)

correct.

So the problem is not making P2 basically a spec category but it being the top class in US sportscar & GT racing. The ACO has P1 to cater for more diversity and could always decide to bring the Light subclass of it back to the ELMS to satisfy the need for more technical freedom (and probably speed).

Since it looks like (even though it's still early days) P2 will not be evolved into P2+ or something (current P2 platform with more power and liberal tire regs), P1-L is the only hope for some decent speed and technology driven cars. Afraid though that it won't happen...

TF110 · 19 Sep 2014, 16:49 (Ref:3455136)

Somewhere between gte and lmp1= dp's version 4, or is it 5? Nothing new and innovative. Spec floor, brakes, tires, suspension, tub... sounds awfully familiar.

Deleted · 19 Sep 2014, 17:24 (Ref:3455152)

I'm sure Mike Shank will find a way to complain about the cost of this new spec DP car... I mean P2 as well. Updating cars every ~five years, blasphemy.

So I guess 2017/18 hopes and prayers are diminishing here too

Speed-King · 19 Sep 2014, 19:46 (Ref:3455204)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagVanisher

But P2 is meant to be a cost-capped class, right?

Yes, and the current cap was difficult to meet for constructors/impossible when building a coupe.

I'd think that that's one of the reasons for an increased use of spec parts - makes it easier for constructors to make a profit under a cap.

TRspitfirefan · 19 Sep 2014, 23:21 (Ref:3455324)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiana

So

spec common tub
spec brakes
spec dampers
spec radiators
spec underbody
spec ECU
spec tires (USCC (assumed since Conti-Hoosier contract continues))

How exciting... ...

IMSA has systematically destroyed nearly everything sportscar fans loved about our sport.
They are turning it into just another spec boring average form of motorsport/entertainment.

I'm really beginning to realize that there are so many better ways to spend my time and money.

Maelochs · 19 Sep 2014, 23:54 (Ref:3455341)

I feel exactly like TRSpitfireFan ... If this really is the future of P2, and particularly if P2 will be the top class in North America .. I will have to seriously consider not following the sport any more.

A bunch of identical cars with "styling cue" bodywork? What a joke for the top tier of professional sports car racing. NASCAR or DTM with pointy noses and mid-engines? No thank you.

Rolex proved that Daytona Prototypes' governing philosophy didn't guarantee either close racing or low costs--and alienated most of the fans. So ... why not try that same formula again, on a larger scale?

Because it will fail on a lager scale.

The problem here is that ACO-FIA would be just as happy with TUSC either dead or dying, and WEC can afford to have lackluster spec P2 cars because the class has P1. TUSC, with no P1, will be stuck with cars that WEC considers too unimportant to really count.

ACO-FIA can mandate spec P2s because it won't hurt the overall popularity--people are there for the P1s and the GT-Pros. In that case, low-cost spec P2s make sense.

For TUSC, having a car not even as good as current P2s as the top class ... I am already looking forward to taking out the bicycle on the weekends.

Rcz · 20 Sep 2014, 00:29 (Ref:3455359)

I hope they make them faster then what we have now.

The price of a P2 has creeped up over time so I can see why their doing this.

MagVanisher · 20 Sep 2014, 01:02 (Ref:3455366)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Rolex proved that Daytona Prototypes' governing philosophy didn't guarantee either close racing or low costs--and alienated most of the fans. So ... why not try that same formula again, on a larger scale?

Because it will fail on a lager scale.

You know, it would be nice if future prototypes are faster than the current regulations. But alas, I feel the same way as they didn't even open up like tires, ECU, and brakes.

P2 maybe a cost-capped class, but IMSA can make it better instead of screwing it up!

Rcz · 20 Sep 2014, 01:31 (Ref:3455369)

I was hoping that P2 would be left alone and a faster IMSA version would come out of it.

Well, it's still years off, a lot could change till the time.

MagVanisher · 20 Sep 2014, 04:09 (Ref:3455387)

Yeah, it's still 3 years away so there's room for tweaking... if they're not procrastinating that is.

But you know what, the IMSA P2 car should be built like a tank. It not only needs to have high safety standards, but its components need to be sturdy as well.

Think about it... Less damage on the bodywork after hours of fender-bangin' racing, more savings on repair.

pablocomics · 20 Sep 2014, 10:04 (Ref:3455412)

IMO the teams with paydrivers and glenteman are going to left the DP and replace them with P2. There are some reasons for that switch, the P2 are more secure, it seems that the P2 are less critical/easy to drive to drive than a DP and there are a very important aditional reason, you can sell the car easily than a DP, because those cars has market in Europe (and sometimes in Asia)

I think that DP are just gonna stay just on winner teams or runner ups because the BOP. We even may see any of the new P2-2017 in the late 2016

The big question will be...., are we gonna a Mercedes in GTD?

BullMan · 20 Sep 2014, 14:42 (Ref:3455471)

Quote:

Originally Posted by pablocomics

IMO the teams with paydrivers and glenteman are going to left the DP and replace them with P2. There are some reasons for that switch, the P2 are more secure, it seems that the P2 are less critical/easy to drive to drive than a DP and there are a very important aditional reason, you can sell the car easily than a DP, because those cars has market in Europe (and sometimes in Asia)

I think that DP are just gonna stay just on winner teams or runner ups because the BOP. We even may see any of the new P2-2017 in the late 2016

The big question will be...., are we gonna a Mercedes in GTD?

Probably, when the class has real GT3 cars in it. The manufacturers don't want to develop a special package just for TUSC. That's why we haven't seen a Bentley or a McLaren in the class this season.

carbon_titanium · 20 Sep 2014, 15:04 (Ref:3455475)

the main problem for manufacturers is that GT3 are produced with a lot of driving aids (TCS and ABS most of all), but in GTD are banned! so to produce an SLS GTD or bentley GTD, manufacturers need to project a new brakes system... Why spend money for a car that will be elegible only in 2016 if in 2017 will be allowed full fia gt3 specs?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
2016 Moto GP	macca	Bike Racing	4	17 Mar 2016 22:36
IndyCar + LMP1 + Formula E -> IMSA CanAm 2017	NaBUru38	Sportscar & GT Racing	12	26 Apr 2013 15:58
2013-2017 V8SA Tyre Tender	GTRMagic	Australasian Touring Cars.	6	23 Mar 2011 20:39