IMSA DPi Discussion

[BullMan]

Originally Posted by 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.

Gotta have that Daytona name in there, for some reason.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by 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.

DPi is no different than LMP.

Prototypes named after the track their marquee race takes place at. The DPi is far enough removed from the new LMP2 car to warrant a name change.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Rcz

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.

There's a rumor that the ACO will be renaming GTE to GTP("GT Progressive") with the upcoming rules overhaul(the one the Ford GT has been built around). It's possible that IMSA opted to pick a different name to keep things from being confusing.

If the GTE rename doesn't occur, there's every possibility DPi could be renamed GTP sometime down the road.

In the meantime, DPi makes perfect sense if they can't use GTP - naming the class after their biggest event, much like the LMP name does.

If DP itself didn't have the problematic connotations that GA's history created, they probably would've just stuck to the DP name completely unchanged.

[fieldodreams79]

I get the marketing and power play aspects of it, but a name is just that; a name. If they make them decent to race, good to the teams and fun to watch, they can call them Susan for all I care.

[Rcz]

Susan is a better name then DPi.



We all heard that GTE may be called GTP, but the P would mean premium.

[fieldodreams79]

Originally Posted by Rcz

Susan is a better name then DPi.

Yeah, it's dumb, but it's not the be all end all and certainly won't affect their abilities to corner at high speed or put on a good show.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

Yeah, it's dumb, but it's not the be all end all and certainly won't affect their abilities to corner at high speed or put on a good show.

Well they certainly will not be LMP2s, which I am sure the ACO and FIA will vehemently tell you.








L.P.

[Rcz]

Maybe give around 600 to 650 hp at 900kgs of weight. Yeah that would be great, probably would nip at a privateer lmp1 car heels. Way faster then the old P2 cars

[MagVanisher]

Making it faster would be great that it'll be comparable to a privateer P1 car, but will it have the same performance as with the rest of the DPi cars?

[truebeliever]

Originally Posted by 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?

On the surface, it seems a stupid rule to force the OEM companies to spend the funds doing their own bodywork, lock that design in for 4 years, but they cannot run at Le Mans?

Does IMSA seriously think any of the OEM apart from perhaps GM, will agree to this?

It would appear that the new LMP2/DPi for 2017, or whatever you want to call it, was a perfect opportunity for the USA to reconstruct prototype racing in a manner that works for the entrants and companies in the USA?

But yet again, it seems this opportunity has been wasted, cow towing to the ACO, who aside of Austin, do not hold any other races in the USA and very few USA based teams have any interest in Le Mans.

So can someone please tell me, in whose interest is this?

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by YZFrider

2.)BOP is necessary I guess but too much BOP I don't like.

Why is it necessary? If you have near spec chassis underneath, running mostly spec components and spec tires, with just some aesthetic brand recognition bodywork (clearly without LMP1 level of detail or development) on top plus the engine, why is it necessary? Isn't it called a "prototype" class?

Even fully freezed tech specs and occasional EVO kit made possible every couple of years would be million times more pleasing than constant performance balancing and wind tunnel aero fiddling.

And no, there is no BoP at all in current ACO LMP2 (even though the regs state there theoretically could be), even the air restrictors go by the displacement ratios. HPD might be the only one with break, but that's been there unchanged for like 4 years or whatever.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Matt

DPi is no different than LMP.

Prototypes named after the track their marquee race takes place at. The DPi is far enough removed from the new LMP2 car to warrant a name change.

But they are LMP cars, just with some stuff piled on top of them.

Also by acknowledging that Daytona is 'more marquee' than other races, you know the one that rules above them all just like Le Mans does, doesn't it underline the value of other events (read: Sebring)...

Out of interest, do you call that one track in Canada now Mosport or CTMP?

Originally Posted by Rcz

Susan is a better name then DPi.

Sure, just as Jay is Susan!
(first one to get the stupid reference gets reputation point from me =))

Daisy Tubes would be a great title too.

[TzeiTzei]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Sure, just as Jay is Susan!

RLM!

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by TzeiTzei

RLM!

It's like poetry it rhymes, etc

Ditto

[YZFrider]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Why is it necessary? If you have near spec chassis underneath, running mostly spec components and spec tires, with just some aesthetic brand recognition bodywork (clearly without LMP1 level of detail or development) on top plus the engine, why is it necessary? Isn't it called a "prototype" class?

Even fully freezed tech specs and occasional EVO kit made possible every couple of years would be million times more pleasing than constant performance balancing and wind tunnel aero fiddling.

And no, there is no BoP at all in current ACO LMP2 (even though the regs state there theoretically could be), even the air restrictors go by the displacement ratios. HPD might be the only one with break, but that's been there unchanged for like 4 years or whatever.

Poor choice of words on my part. Let me rephrase: I can live with some BOP, but too much like is rampant in the series and it rubs me wrong way. I am of the philosophy may the best engineering win. Adjustments here and there to get in the same window of performance, As you noted, there is already alot of spec in the formula....this is a prototype pro class. But...we all know who is in charge....*sigh*

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Chiana

But they are LMP cars, just with some stuff piled on top of them.

Also by acknowledging that Daytona is 'more marquee' than other races, you know the one that rules above them all just like Le Mans does, doesn't it underline the value of other events (read: Sebring)...

Out of interest, do you call that one track in Canada now Mosport or CTMP?



Sure, just as Jay is Susan!
(first one to get the stupid reference gets reputation point from me =))

Daisy Tubes would be a great title too.

Mosport.

[fieldodreams79]

If Canadian Tires keeps the gates open and facilities improving, then that's okay by me. I'll call it Mosport much like I called Charlotte by its name and not it's sponsor years ago.

Hopefully, we will see the DiPs at Mosport.

[DeezPutz]

Who cares what the top class is called? No one cares.

Also, I think Sebring and Petit are the marquee events.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

If Canadian Tires keeps the gates open and facilities improving, then that's okay by me. I'll call it Mosport much like I called Charlotte by its name and not it's sponsor years ago.

Hopefully, we will see the DiPs at Mosport.

Same with Sears Point.

[HORNDAWG]

Well this is certainly food for thought on the 2017 LMP2 supply chain!

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2016/0...-shortage.html









L.P.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by Rcz

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.

they have changed the name of the series a few times ... in the first year alone.

I say we all lobby for GTP. DPi is lame and either a throwback to evil times of a notation indication picture resolution. it has zero sports-car resonance.

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

There's a rumor that the ACO will be renaming GTE to GTP("GT Progressive") with the upcoming rules overhaul(the one the Ford GT has been built around). It's possible that IMSA opted to pick a different name to keep things from being confusing.

Didn't know that. Whatever.

[Akrapovic]

Also not a fan of Dots Per Inch either. I'd much rather have something like LMP-A. Le Mans Prototype - America.

It's an LMP base for America. Not a Daytona Prototype base for the rest of the world. Just my take on it.

[Maelochs]

Cost-effective---teams need to be able to afford to race. Obviously having two wildly different chassis types made BoP impossible, and the alternative—more open rules—would cost much more than the series makes.

That is the driving force here: IMSA/NASCAR want WeatherTUSC to succeed as a business, which means the teams need to nee able to afford to compete.

There just isn’t a lot of profit in sports car racing in North America. The series which have survived are generally stock-based and low-cost (relatively.) There doesn’t seem to be a lot sponsorship money nor a lot of fan interest which might drive sponsorship.

With ACO going to a (basically) spec LMP2 class (really a variant of the old DP) it only makes sense for IMSA to adopt a similar standard.

The teams have a chance to buy a car which might actually have resale value, and could, with minor modification, be used in more than one series. Hopefully the chassis and motors costs will be kept affordable (in the context of available sponsorship dollars) which means the teams won’t be going out of business—or going to other series. ALMS had great cars, but never figured out how to make the series affordable for the teams.

Chassis manufacturers have a decent chance to sell enough chassis and spares to stay financially viable ... between the three series running the basic ACO-compliant LMP2 chassis, unless one of the chassis really sucks hard by comparison, all four manufacturers have a fair chance to succeed as businesses.

Full-on LMP1 cars simply do not work for North American manufacturers, not for most global manufacturers. Sales are strong enough without them, and since most carmakers sell mostly pick-ups, SUVs, and cheap econoboxes, top-tier sportscar racing does nothing for their brands.

If Ford or GM thought winning Le Mans overall would be a big PR boost and increase profits over time, they’d be there. They haven’t been there in decades, and I don’t expect them.

So what we get is a huge compromise ... but still a step up from ACO LMP2 (basically spec) and the old Rolex series (basically spec and outmoded.)

With IMSA we get reasonably modern cars and a variety of engines. Sure the engines are “balanced” to the point that none is better than any other but at least we get different engine notes.

The best teams are still going to win, but then, they are Always going to win. The best teams would get hired by the manufacturer willing to spend the most money and would win through dollars and skill if design and development were open. They will still win under current rules because they will maximize every benefit and minimize errors and faults.

As I see it, the proposed 2017 regs give IMSA a chance to establish a reasonably profitable series which remunerates teams sufficiently that they stick around, and rewards fans likewise.

The cars won’t be dinosaurs, and hopefully the teams won’t need subsidies. Hopefully the balance of racing excitement and cost-containment keeps the series viable.

Nobody is getting what s/he wants. NASCAR (Grand Am) wants one chassis/one motor and lots of crashes; the old ALMS guys want P1. One won’t sell to sports car fans, the other costs too much. But so far in 2016, IMSA has pulled off two very good races. No blunders, no stupidity, no unfair BoP (though of course some will argue this) and IMO some very entertaining on-track action.

I may be crazy but I have hopes for sports car racing in North America.

One further minor hope: With every team running one of four chassis, a handful of engines, and only a few sets of bodywork, maybe BoP could be set for Daytona, reset before Sebring, and left alone for the rest of the year? I am pretty sure teams would need waivers to put different-length shoelaces in the drivers’ boots, so one set of BoP regs should last all season ... which would maybe allow teams to win by strategy or skill or something ... I hear those things are factors in some sports.

[jimclark]

Hey mae!!!

Forgive nm ignorance (mebbe I belong back on the old SPEED boards :biggrin: ) but I've not been keepin' up with stuff...what in 'ell is DPi? hrug"

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by jimclark

Hey mae!!!

Forgive nm ignorance (mebbe I belong back on the old SPEED boards :biggrin: ) but I've not been keepin' up with stuff...what in 'ell is DPi? hrug"

Short answer:

ACOs LMP2 chassis, with GT3 engines, and new bodywork associated with the GT3 engine manufacturer. So a team will buy an LMP2 chassis and then a GT3 engine (lets say - Nissan) and Nissan will have Nissan branded and styled bodywork to go with the engine.

To be run in the IMSA Series only.