What to do with LMPC? - Page 3

**Adam43** · 29 Jan 2014, 19:43 (Ref:3361767)

Quote:

Originally Posted by JacobP

If we get something like forty cars showing up reliably every race without LMPC, I don't see much value in this class other than a training class for young drivers and crews. I think IMSA should consider moving the LMPC to Continental Tire. That would make both series better.

To repeat some of the comments above. It is a filler, it wasn't needed at Daytona, but if you need it at other races then it had to be there I guess.

Accident · 30 Jan 2014, 13:52 (Ref:3362108)

Quote:

Originally Posted by JacobP

I think IMSA should consider moving the LMPC to Continental Tire. That would make both series better.

Please no. The only thing that isn't great about the CTSCC is the high number of cautions, and cramming amateur drivers in prototype machinery into fields that regularly have 50+ cars that would have a huge performance gap (imagine the closing speeds they would have on the ST cars) is just asking for even more yellows than we have now.

MJ_N_09 · 15 Mar 2014, 19:11 (Ref:3379404)

I think a BUMP is necessary for Sebring

FordCosworthPanoz · 15 Mar 2014, 20:16 (Ref:3379536)

Dump it before someone is killed.

Speed-King · 15 Mar 2014, 20:19 (Ref:3379548)

Quote:

Originally Posted by FordCosworthPanoz

Dump it before someone is killed.

Pay off Oreca to not sell any spares... that should take care of it really quickly.

BudLightJaguar · 15 Mar 2014, 20:26 (Ref:3379569)

PC class should be having combined events with Lites for the whole season. Like they will do at Kansas Speedway.

Canada ALMS fan · 15 Mar 2014, 20:28 (Ref:3379574)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Bring PC up to P2 performance would drive away the pay drivers and sink a lot of teams.

Perfect! The nonsense we have today will go away. Do you want 65 cars following a safety car all day or do you want to watch 35-40 professional teams with pro and proper gentlemen drivers racing safe and hard?

Matt · 15 Mar 2014, 20:53 (Ref:3379611)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt

Get rid of them completely.

.

MJ_N_09 · 15 Mar 2014, 22:05 (Ref:3379700)

I think only the 6 cars still running at Sebring (atm) and also RSR (totalling 7 Orecas) should be allowed to continue while the others told to **** off. Then, force them into the P class or give them something else to run. Even if they're put into P, they'll still run ahead of some of the other Prototypes IMO.

nkoske · 16 Mar 2014, 03:48 (Ref:3380230)

I use to be indifferent about LMPC, but after their spectacular showing today, either increase driving standards or circular file.

jasonjessica09 · 16 Mar 2014, 04:01 (Ref:3380245)

Quote:

Originally Posted by nkoske

I use to be indifferent about LMPC, but after their spectacular showing today, either increase driving standards or circular file.

I guess you can't do too much to LMPC in the 2 remaining NAEC rounds because there is a championship at stake there. But I have been saying that they should be moved out of Indy, COTA, and Road America. Especially if IMSA lites is running at the same track on the same weekend. If not then I guess you can keep LMPC in there reluctantly.

Breitling24 · 16 Mar 2014, 04:04 (Ref:3380249)

Change several drivers rating from "bronze" to "$hit" and get rid of them.

nkoske · 16 Mar 2014, 04:08 (Ref:3380254)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Breitling24

Change several drivers rating from "bronze" to "$hit" and get rid of them.

I was thinking "dingle berry", but your's is shorter.

Breitling24 · 16 Mar 2014, 04:24 (Ref:3380267)

Quote:

Originally Posted by nkoske

I was thinking "dingle berry", but your's is shorter.

pablocomics · 16 Mar 2014, 07:12 (Ref:3380346)

The problem is not the car, the problem are drivers, too much car for a bad bronze

chernaudi · 16 Mar 2014, 08:01 (Ref:3380384)

That and GTD and LMPC don't have traction control, the classes that really need it. Odd how the pro classes (LMP2/DP and GTLM) are allowed to have TC but the pro-am classes have it ruled illegal under the current rules.

pablocomics · 16 Mar 2014, 09:01 (Ref:3380430)

Quote:

Originally Posted by chernaudi

That and GTD and LMPC don't have traction control, the classes that really need it. Odd how the pro classes (LMP2/DP and GTLM) are allowed to have TC but the pro-am classes have it ruled illegal under the current rules.

Totally agree, but incidents like the Gaston Kearby crash aren't just a TC issue. There are a lack of skills and experience on some drivers.

Rodger Davies · 16 Mar 2014, 09:53 (Ref:3380456)

Quote:

Originally Posted by chernaudi

That and GTD and LMPC don't have traction control, the classes that really need it. Odd how the pro classes (LMP2/DP and GTLM) are allowed to have TC but the pro-am classes have it ruled illegal under the current rules.

Very good point.

Dead-Eye · 16 Mar 2014, 10:31 (Ref:3380474)

PC has never added anything beyond being a field filler. Now that fields are full, there's no point in having it any longer.

Starfish Primer · 16 Mar 2014, 11:00 (Ref:3380492)

Quote:

Originally Posted by pablocomics

The problem is not the car, the problem are drivers, too much car for a bad bronze

Yep, when LMPC are driven by Colin Braun or Bruno Junqueira can run consistently close to the P2s.

Dimension · 16 Mar 2014, 11:13 (Ref:3380503)

the driver aids were no factor at all in the situations that led to this discussion it was stupid driving. We need hefty fines, penalties, as well as permanent and temporary suspension to take care of this.

Look at GTD for proof. GTD was exciting and dramaless without TC. Why? No stupid driving decisions.

I suppose being in a theoretically fast prototype isn't good for the psyche of gentlemen drivers that are in some instances largely inexperienced and way in over their heads.

I don't expect there to be as many problems on less bumpy tracks however. Lets keep in mind the PC car is difficult over those with its lack of mechanical grip.

As it stands now, I'd try suspensions first and if that doesn't work, phase out asap.

Rodger Davies · 16 Mar 2014, 11:50 (Ref:3380520)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dead-Eye

PC has never added anything beyond being a field filler. Now that fields are full, there's no point in having it any longer.

There is when you have teams that have been encouraged to buy and run these cars for years. That's always the danger in creating a class like this. I hope it fades out in future but with the LMP3 concept on the horizon, I think there'll always be something at this level in the long term USC plans.

ArnageWRC · 16 Mar 2014, 12:23 (Ref:3380535)

As already said, it's not the cars but the drivers. There has to be a way of testing their ability to drive one of these cars.

They have to be able to lap within a certain % of a set time. You could put one of the top guys (and I mean a P2/DP driver) in the car to set a time at, say ROAR; the Am driver then has to meet a certain time consistently.
If they can't do this = no drive. Simple.

wdave0 · 16 Mar 2014, 12:26 (Ref:3380537)

AMholes.

Dimension · 16 Mar 2014, 12:31 (Ref:3380538)

I think drivers should have to verify their skills and experience by racing for 2-3 years in one of certain designated series before entering. In my opinion driver speed is less of a nuisance as driver errors are. And that is a matter of experience.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Do we have any info on the FLM09/LMPc cars yet?	davehenrie	Sportscar & GT Racing	6	25 Mar 2010 13:23