|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
29 Jan 2015, 04:16 (Ref:3498551) | #501 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
Quote:
L.P. |
|||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
29 Jan 2015, 07:39 (Ref:3498574) | #502 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,572
|
Quote:
Anyway in news, kcmg are first to purchase oreca's new 05 coupe! Edit-spelling Last edited by TF110; 29 Jan 2015 at 08:00. |
||
|
29 Jan 2015, 09:29 (Ref:3498612) | #503 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,335
|
Quote:
There is nothing to be gained for the series by allowing P1s in a few cherry-picked events. Sure, it might help those events, but the series as a whole would only be diminished by it. Even if it would make sense financially, I can't see it happening as long as Jim France is in charge of things. If he was interested in making money, he sure as heck wouldn't be playing around in sportscar racing. Things might change if there is a chance in leadership and the rest of the France clan decides to not bother anymore, but until that happens P1s at Daytona, Sebring and Petit are a complete pipe-dream. |
|||
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam. |
29 Jan 2015, 09:34 (Ref:3498616) | #504 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,335
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam. |
29 Jan 2015, 11:39 (Ref:3498654) | #505 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 664
|
I can also see them saying that they can continue with their own tub as long as they want. But when they design a new(-ish) car, then they must use the common spec tub.
|
||
|
29 Jan 2015, 12:56 (Ref:3498685) | #506 | ||
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
Quote:
1) Oreca 03 2) Alpine A450 3) Wolf GB08 Dear lord. At least with fake names of Morgan, Mazda, Ligier etc there are no alternative calling titles for the same car. |
||
|
29 Jan 2015, 14:32 (Ref:3498713) | #507 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 901
|
Quote:
Some will probably say something like "oh who cares if they want the credit they should build P1s" but telling your full season entrants/manufacturers to **** off for the P1s isn't a great way to keep relations up. When your top class has Ford supported Ganassi and multiple GM approved/supported teams, it's not quite as easy to shove them aside to make room for Audi and them as it was when you had 2 privateer teams as a top class (with one of them not even expected to make it past the halfway point anyway). Try to lure the Viper back out before it's not too outdated as well and you have about the perfect top class... |
||
|
29 Jan 2015, 14:34 (Ref:3498714) | #508 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 901
|
Edit: Double post...
|
|
|
29 Jan 2015, 14:35 (Ref:3498715) | #509 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 318
|
Quote:
|
||
|
29 Jan 2015, 14:38 (Ref:3498716) | #510 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 318
|
Quote:
Get rid of prototype racing until becomes viable again. GTE/GTLM racing is hot right now. I would be sad to see prototypes go, but what else is there to do? Look at VIR. It was crazy good as a GT only race. Lots of fans, good racing, etc. Why do we need prototypes anyway? You could run GT cars with good enough aero at the speeds prototypes run. Last edited by Danathar; 29 Jan 2015 at 14:49. |
||
|
29 Jan 2015, 14:43 (Ref:3498719) | #511 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 318
|
Quote:
Problem is that the WEC has it in it's mind that it NEEDS F1 level paddock facilities (which it doesn't). The rich people at the top of the FIA food chain HATE going to Sebring because it does not have the swanky facilities of Austin. |
||
|
29 Jan 2015, 14:47 (Ref:3498721) | #512 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 318
|
Quote:
Note on Daytona, there is also a Safety issue with Banking and P1 cars (same goes for Running IndyCar at Daytona on the Oval). The cars would be too freaking fast. Put too much downforce on them to slow them down and they would zip through the infield too quickly. The banking at Daytona is steep because it was built with low downforce Stockcars in mind, not high aero open wheel or prototypes. |
||
|
29 Jan 2015, 15:55 (Ref:3498747) | #513 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,434
|
Danathar posts: "At this point those races by themselves ARE more important than the series."
I strongly disagree. For teams running the full season, the marquee events are what the sponsors sign on for. Nobody forks over big bucks for the TV exposure from VIR. Sponsors want the TV exposure their products will get at the Rolex 24, Sebring, and PLM. If a bunch of P1 cars dominated those races, it would diminish exposure for the teams which the series needs to survive for the rest of the season. I sincerely doubt GM would appreciate fighting for a non-podium position. I sincerely doubt Ford would appreciate racing for fourth or fifth at best. I sincerely doubt a lot of smaller teams could even get a check at all if they would be would be "best of the rest" at best. Even GTLM teams would suffer, because GM and Ford would demand TV coverage after the P1 coverage, so GTLM would effectively be third or fourth on the time allocation list. People need to think not in terms Just of what the fans would like (though that is important) but also what series sponsors, team sponsors, and teams need; what the TV network needs. The idea that ratings would shoot up to the sky if a few P1 teams came over really doesn't make sense. Look at ratings for the CotA WEC race—not even as good as the Tudor race, and neither was all that great (though the condensed replay on Sunday did quite well, because it followed NFL football.) Seriously, who would benefit financially, and how, from having a few P1 car cross over for a few races? Who would make less? Another thing: all those P1 teams are on a schedule to develop their next season's cars. What would it benefit Porsche or Audi to totally tromp the field at the Rolex, which would be very expensive (air freight both ways for the whole operation for a few days running) and why would they risk breaking a car or hurting a driver for a non-points race which had in fact Nothing to do with the WEC, which the only thing they care about? In fact, the only thing those teams Really care about is Le Mans, though naturally as racers they want to do as well as possible everywhere. Anything which isn't going to advance that WEC program or help a Le Mans win is Not going to happen. Sure, Audi rents Sebring for testing—and we all know why. It is a really tough test track with a variety of corners and surfaces, which really beats a car. Audi likes to test there because it is a tough test. They have no reason to want to Race there if it is not a WEC points event. Also, look at the schedules. Sebring is a few weeks before the season opener at Silverstone, so the teams would have to finish Sebring on the 21st, pack fast and pay airfreight to get the cars back to Europe early the next week, then have ten days or so to clean up, repair, replace, and repack for Silverstone. Not impossible, but expensive, and it would put a lot of load on the team for no points and no other benefit. Much better to rent a test track somewhere close and do testing where the potential for damage would be a whole lot lower. Watkins Glen is two weeks after Le Mans, which means teams would basically have to rush like mad to get everything repaired and ready for Watkins Glen, and again, it would have to be air freight—and for no benefit. Petit Le Mans is a week before Fuji, which means teams would need to risk missing Fuji to run Petit, for no points, no benefits, nothing. Basically, the whole "Bring over the P1s" idea benefits no one except a very small group of fans, the majority of which will likely watch the races anyway, but will cost everyone except the fans huge amounts of money. I want to see P1 cars racing in North America, but I also want sports car series to make sound business decisions, or we end up with another ALMS—great racing and going broke. |
|
|
29 Jan 2015, 15:58 (Ref:3498748) | #514 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
|||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
29 Jan 2015, 16:02 (Ref:3498753) | #515 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
Quote:
L.P. |
|||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
29 Jan 2015, 16:16 (Ref:3498761) | #516 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
You can give a person glasses but you can't make them wear them. If you had read the current rules then MAYBE that paragraph would have been beneficial in understanding the possibility of werks cars in P-2. And that they are not strictly prohibited. Which gets back to the 'tech' from which they come! But I digress, as it abundantly clear that this conversation is useless.
L.P. |
||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
29 Jan 2015, 16:16 (Ref:3498762) | #517 | |
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
LMP1 teams wouldn't have the resources to pull those races off? Don't make me laugh Maelochs, they've done em before and can still do. The time frame at the start of the year is not particularly busy - there's weeks between the start of the WEC season. Your point on Watkins Glen is particularly amusing, how on earth can little US teams participating in Le Mans go back to States + fix their poor little GT cars or whatever in two weeks time, but multi million dollar corporate units cannot? Lol if they want to make them happen, they will. Besides, if team like Extreme Speed Motorsports can do full NAEC in addition to WEC, how can poor little Audi or Porsche or Nissan not? And Rebellion Racing has been able to do Petit Le Mans and Fuji on the same weekend by two separate teams. But no not these factory P1s apparently! Right.
Apart from maybe Toyota, the P1 manufacturers have need for larger presence in the US. I mean one of them is now even located there. But this has already been covered in length by others so I'm not gonna bother re-telling why the manufacturers would come. It doesn't matter if they're part of the championship or not. As for TV ratings, they won't rise or fall either way, that's pretty damn obvious for everyone involved. It's not even worth making a point about it. Also comparing Austin WEC's Fox Sports 2 "ratings" to USCC's FOX ratings is utterly pointless. Even against FS1 it's incomparable. Besides WEC's not a domestic series and no-one except nerds know about it really. Ford and GM money might not be as important as you make them to be, besides if/when Ford and Ganassi bail for GTE it's only Chevrolet in there trying to marketize those fake "Corvettes". Well I guess Mazda as well but it's not like they're really doing anything anyway. Is that GM bribe money enough to say no to P1s forever? Last edited by Deleted; 29 Jan 2015 at 16:23. |
|
|
29 Jan 2015, 16:45 (Ref:3498774) | #518 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,434
|
Some idiot, lost in negativity and obviously out of touch with any fragment of reality, posted: "Seriously, who would benefit financially, and how, from having a few P1 car cross over for a few races?"
|
|
|
29 Jan 2015, 22:14 (Ref:3498894) | #519 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,572
|
Quote:
|
||
|
30 Jan 2015, 00:04 (Ref:3498915) | #520 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 391
|
Quote:
|
||
|
30 Jan 2015, 00:24 (Ref:3498917) | #521 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 914
|
TUSC would be phenomenal with the following class setup if the GTE's were bumped to 500-550 hp motors
GTLM-Pro GTLM-Am GT3-Pro GT3-Am |
||
|
30 Jan 2015, 06:38 (Ref:3498968) | #522 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,396
|
I don't mind seeing TUSC becoming another GT-only series. And even though IMSA disbanded the Prototype class, there would be a time that it'll return in the form of DTM-based GTP class in which I wouldn't see it happening!
|
|
|
30 Jan 2015, 13:36 (Ref:3499104) | #523 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,434
|
Someone needs to post a poll asking whether fans would still follow TUSC if the went with lame, spec (even more than now ) low-budget P2 in 2017, a cheesy update of the current DP, or if the series went with a GT-only format.
|
|
|
30 Jan 2015, 13:46 (Ref:3499109) | #524 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,396
|
I would agree on having a poll! Personally, the TUSC Prototype Class should have two types of cars.
In the perfect world, I want the class itself having P2 machinery as of now running alongside GTP cars based on DTM. Should Bandoh-san approved on having his DTM-based GT500 cars on Le Mans, it'll open up manufacturers like GM to spend their money on making a Corvette GTP based on the DTM chassis. Of course, this thread is all about LMP2. Personally, putting manufacturer-based bodywork that doesn't do anything other than resembling a certain model is unnecessary and it'll add more cost! |
|
|
30 Jan 2015, 14:08 (Ref:3499121) | #525 | |
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
Going back to 'real' LMP2, and Wolf. Forget the $$$$$$$$-rebadging deal they have this season with Oreca & Ibanez, next year they are planning to bring out their own coupe - with ominous name 'Tornado'. But who's great idea was it to plan debut season for 2016, just year before the regs are gonna change anyway to whatever direction? Okay, unlike Oreca + SMP + HPD (+ Dome) debuting this year, they at least should have somewhat clear idea what the new generation P2 is supposed to be while designing the chassis and choosing engine, but still why not wait til 2017? God knows what Lord Beaumesnil and his officers decide to do with the specs behind the curtains, his interview with MP wasn't exactly the most friendly towards people 'too eager to build cars'.
Even Pilbeam's "new" open top makes more sense right now, partly because it's ages old design but also the South African series is likely gonna keep it alive as long as they want, even after ACO denies them from entering (2018 likely after grandfathered 17). Not that confidence in their arrival is too high though, sadly,,, |
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Judd LMP2 engine | Mike_Wooshy | Sportscar & GT Racing | 19 | 3 Feb 2011 22:21 |
New LMP2 engine - and (more) rule changes | ss_collins | Sportscar & GT Racing | 42 | 4 Oct 2008 14:49 |
Manufacturers propose new engine regs | Marbot | Formula One | 20 | 20 Oct 2007 12:17 |
LMP2 engine changes? (merged) | JAG | Sportscar & GT Racing | 31 | 20 Jun 2006 10:20 |
Engine Suppliers Championship? | Mr V | Formula One | 4 | 29 May 2002 09:46 |