IMSA DPi Discussion

[Madkart]

A few words from IMSA's Director of Racing Platforms Mark Raffauf regarding the IMSA DPi v ACO LMP2 situation

[kvenom]

Originally Posted by Madkart

A few words from IMSA's Director of Racing Platforms Mark Raffauf regarding the IMSA DPi v ACO LMP2 situation

Even though it has its flaws, good to see IMSA sticking up for themselves. I wholeheartedly agree with him regarding top-class vs. second-class.

[Madkart]

Originally Posted by kvenom

Even though it has its flaws, good to see IMSA sticking up for themselves. I wholeheartedly agree with him regarding top-class vs. second-class.

I honestly think IMSA has been doing a fantastic job so far in regards to selling this new product. I've felt satisfied on how they've been handling the process and have really given a lot of details regarding how everything will run next year. I hope they can keep it up. Remember when IMSA released the 2014 regs with just two months from the Rolex 24? They have come a very long way since then.

[fieldodreams79]

They certainly have come a long way but their product should sell itself. Look at both GT classes, especially GTLM. I don't think we have quite the complications as Prototypes, but the on track product race in and out sells itself. I'm cautiously optimistic about the top class.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

They certainly have come a long way but their product should sell itself. Look at both GT classes, especially GTLM. I don't think we have quite the complications as Prototypes, but the on track product race in and out sells itself. I'm cautiously optimistic about the top class.

So you honestly think the P class at Sebring was a dull, uneventful, race? You think the grid as whole is not competitive or exciting to watch? I always find these comments somewhat baffling. As I found the race as a whole quite compelling other than the weather caused red flag, but even that was the correct thing to do.
I think that the new DPi will usher in another very bright period for sports car racing in N. America, as long as outside influences do not hamper it (economy, etc...).




L.P.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

They certainly have come a long way but their product should sell itself. Look at both GT classes, especially GTLM. I don't think we have quite the complications as Prototypes, but the on track product race in and out sells itself. I'm cautiously optimistic about the top class.

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

So you honestly think the P class at Sebring was a dull, uneventful, race? You think the grid as whole is not competitive or exciting to watch? I always find these comments somewhat baffling.

How did you get that out of his post? He didn't say racing was bad in protos at Sebring or otherwise.

[fieldodreams79]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

So you honestly think the P class at Sebring was a dull, uneventful, race? You think the grid as whole is not competitive or exciting to watch? I always find these comments somewhat baffling. As I found the race as a whole quite compelling other than the weather caused red flag, but even that was the correct thing to do.
I think that the new DPi will usher in another very bright period for sports car racing in N. America, as long as outside influences do not hamper it (economy, etc...).




L.P.

I didn't find the first TWO races dull or uneventful nor the grids uncompetitive, regarding protos. I didn't write that. You did, for some reason. There's no need to have to sell anything if the product is great, like the first overall races this year and GT from recent memory. Regs will be changing and they can get Proto right for the future, like GT has consistently been. I happen to have some faith that they can.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by joeb

How did you get that out of his post? He didn't say racing was bad in protos at Sebring or otherwise.

'But their product should sell itself'.. ' I am cautiously optimistic about the top class' ... is that not saying that the P class falls short of that mark and he has hope that it is corrected in the future? If not my bad. But that is certainly how I read (interpreted) the post. That it is dim, as compared to GT.





L.P.

[chernaudi]

I fear that until the DPIs come out (hopefully) next season, I think that the rest of the season will be a Corvette DP fest. Not due to BOP, which is basically right for once, but because of those guys having all pro driver line ups.

You can't really control pro am vs all pro driver line ups sensibly though BOP.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

I didn't find the first TWO races dull or uneventful nor the grids uncompetitive, regarding protos. I didn't write that. You did, for some reason. There's no need to have to sell anything if the product is great, like the first overall races this year and GT from recent memory. Regs will be changing and they can get Proto right for the future, like GT has consistently been. I happen to have some faith that they can.

Mia culpa then.






L.P.

[carbon_titanium]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

I fear that until the DPIs come out (hopefully) next season, I think that the rest of the season will be a Corvette DP fest. Not due to BOP, which is basically right for once, but because of those guys having all pro driver line ups.

You can't really control pro am vs all pro driver line ups sensibly though BOP.

More accuratelly, to me will be a fight between AXR #5 and AXR #31. New drivers of SoR don't seem to have the pace to fight with the best and WTR isn't in his best shape at all. MSR will likely score some pole, but soon or later one among pew and negri will make a mess during the race.

[FormulaFox]

IMSA needs to bite the bullet and give up the requirement to have the altered bodywork in order to use a different engine from the spec P2 unit. It's the single biggest problem with the DPi concept.

[chernaudi]

It depends on whether or not the rules makers and manufacturers/teams will be onboard, and it's the manufacturers who are involved as engine suppliers who are heavily onboard as insisting on manufacturer specific bodywork, namely GM and possibly Ford. I know that HPD/Honda aren't sure as to be on board or not.

IMSA I'm pretty sure can get away with a mix of manu. engines/body work, manu. engines/LMP2 bodywork, and the Gibson/Zytek engine/LMP2 bodywork. It can be handled though BOP.

Bigger issue IMO is that the ACO/FIA and IMSA seem to have a hard time just agreeing to disagree about the different priorities that the series have vs having a common platform.

Besides, it's not like a ton of IMSA teams outside of GTLM are banging down the door trying to race at the LM24 or other WEC rounds. Certainly not the main targets of the factory bodywork approach.

[Rcz]

“Some of the things [the ACO] might have expected that we would have done we already did in GRAND-AM and determined that didn’t work.

“Headlights and taillights are not enough. It’s not enough to excite the fan; it didn’t excite the brand.

“The goal with our cars is that when it goes by on the race track, you’re going to know what it is. That’s pretty much not consistent with their philosophy of this car.”

Well that's sounds different from the old gen3 DPs.

[Matt]

In for further discussion.

[fieldodreams79]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

'But their product should sell itself'.. ' I am cautiously optimistic about the top class' ... is that not saying that the P class falls short of that mark and he has hope that it is corrected in the future? If not my bad. But that is certainly how I read (interpreted) the post. That it is dim, as compared to GT.

EVERYTHING is dim compared to IMSA GT, imho.

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Mia culpa then.

[August]

Mandatory bodykit for OEMs is something I don't understand; shouldn't it be the OEMs own decision if they think it improves marketing possibilities?

I understand the one chassis per OEM rule as the bodykit may be impossible to apply to different chassis. However, should imsa drop the bodykit requirement, couldn't they allow the engine be used in any chassis? Heck, why not even allow that for OEMs with a bodykit; would it be so bad if there was a Dallara in Cadillac disguise and another Caddy-powered chassis with the regular bodywork? (Not that it'd happen.)

Anyway, I was just thinking about this scenario. If the OEM engines aren't allowed in the new P2s without the OEM bodykit, might there be e.g. Honda-powered grandfathered P2s next year, while the OEM remains wondering whether to commit to the DPi rules?

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by August

Anyway, I was just thinking about this scenario. If the OEM engines aren't allowed in the new P2s without the OEM bodykit, might there be e.g. Honda-powered grandfathered P2s next year, while the OEM remains wondering whether to commit to the DPi rules?

All new (current) coupe P2s will be grandfathered in '17. At the end of the second paragraph...

http://www.racer.com/imsa/item/12732...=1&limitstart=








L.P.

[TF110]

I think manufacturers should spend a lil bit of their money to differentiate their cars. They have a spec tub to use, making bodywork for their car (read: engine) makes the car unique from a regular p2.

I really think p1-L rules would be better with guys like Rebellion and Kolles able to run what they have. The wec wants all hybrid in the top p1 class. But I foresee that changing to 'alternative technologies' like hydrogen fc's or even all electric.

Dpi should be a base for an equal but subclass in p1. I think manufacturers may show more willingness to dpi if it's opened up after a couple years. Right now dpi looks like a start to something that could be huge. But it could also go the other way with no growth thanks to things like bop and equivalence measures.

[August]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

All new (current) coupe P2s will be grandfathered in '17. At the end of the second paragraph...

http://www.racer.com/imsa/item/12732...=1&limitstart=








L.P.

I know. What my point was, is if engine supply for grandfathered P2s might become the preferred option for OEMs that have an engine available but are unsure about a DPi program?

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by August

I know. What my point was, is if engine supply for grandfathered P2s might become the preferred option for OEMs that have an engine available but are unsure about a DPi program?

I doubt that is within the scope of allowing teams with "current 2015-'16 P2 coupes" to run them in 2017. If it does not already exist it would be a new homologation and not allowed.





L.P.

[carbsmith]

Originally Posted by Rcz

Well that's sounds different from the old gen3 DPs.

He's talking about gen 1 DPs, which originally had to use headlights, tail lights, and side mirrors from a production car (this made some degree of sense at the time as it's basically what the 911 GT1-98 did). The mirror requirement went first for safety reasons and eventually the lights got dropped because a Focus headlight turned 90 degrees sideways to fit on a Multimatic didn't accomplish much of anything. Gen 3s were supposed to be all as distinct as the Corvette DP but it turns out nobody was really interested.

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

I doubt that is within the scope of allowing teams with "current 2015-'16 P2 coupes" to run them in 2017. If it does not already exist it would be a new homologation and not allowed.





L.P.

Works just fine for pretty much everyone but Toyota. There's a reason Honda keeps threatening to bring out the ARX-04 again.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by carbsmith

Works just fine for pretty much everyone but Toyota. There's a reason Honda keeps threatening to bring out the ARX-04 again.

Current engines in P2 and P2 based P class cars, Judd, Nissan, Mazda MZ-2.0T (AER) and Honda.





L.P.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by carbsmith

He's talking about gen 1 DPs, which originally had to use headlights, tail lights, and side mirrors from a production car (this made some degree of sense at the time as it's basically what the 911 GT1-98 did). The mirror requirement went first for safety reasons and eventually the lights got dropped because a Focus headlight turned 90 degrees sideways to fit on a Multimatic didn't accomplish much of anything. Gen 3s were supposed to be all as distinct as the Corvette DP but it turns out nobody was really interested.


Works just fine for pretty much everyone but Toyota. There's a reason Honda keeps threatening to bring out the ARX-04 again.

...because you reminded me of that, the whole class needs to get a queasy feeling now.



Also, I don't think there was a requirement for headlights, etc off a road car for the first generation DP's. The only one I can remember that actually had road car lights was the Multimatic. The Fabcar-Porsche had headlight openings that vaguely mimicked the 996 911, but everything else was fairly "normal" prototype fare, especially the Doran JE4, which I think looks amazing with a big wing on it. That one had the most "GTP/GT1" look do the original crop.



That and the Fabcar-Toyota had pretty good looks as well(also with Celica shaped headlights, but not actual units).

[Rcz]

I don't know about that DP gen1 story. I'm pretty sure one of the IMSA bosses said that the aero wasn't going as far as the Corvette DP in the past. I think it's possible that the new cars may actually have a more purposeful look. From that possibility I can see why the ACO is a little worried.


BTW, I still hate the name DPi, you think they would make a break from the GRAND AM days. They should have just called GTP. I know I've said it before and I'm going to keep saying.