Maserati Confirmation

[tblincoe]

this is really going to be a non-issue in the end... people are just over analyzing and freaking out because its the off-season and we're getting excited that its almost race-time again.

the car hasn't turned a wheel yet in ACO competition and until problems arise i don't see the need for a big fuss. the MC12 will be controlled by the IMSA in the ways it deems necessary and i dont see the need to get all worked up about this...

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by fangio

I am convinced that, when th ACO says they have not been consulted about the Maser invitation, this must be true.

Three IMSA officials went to France to talk to the ACO specifically about the Maserati in the past month. Either the ACO wouldn't talk to them, or have conveniently forgotten that conversation (just as they seem to have forgotten the coversation where they told Maserati that their car would be fine.)

The Astons are a factory entry for this year at Sebring and from August/September the customer cars will appear, to run in all series, including ALMS.

May I suggest a change in wording? "The Astons are a factory entry for this year at Sebring, and from August/September the customer cars MAY appear, ASSUMING that teams have appropriate funding and interest." There are no announced or guaranteed ALMS teams for this Aston. Rumours, suggestions, that's it.

Now, do we think it's a good idea to have the MC12 run without points but taking the podium and taking the risk of not having any competitive Maranello's and Astons any more?
IMHO I think the MC12 is not a GT1 car to the spirit of the rules.

We currently have no Maranello's or Astons.... so the difference is?

[fangio]

I am surprised that there are no Ferrari Maranello's entered in the ALMS (as far as I can see), as BMS Italia said they would run in the US and not the FIA GT.

But whatever is said, the ACO feels that the MC12 is just like the Mercedes a few years ago and I am convinced that Maserati (ic Ferrari) thought that the ACO would accept them anyway.
The car is so expensive that there will probably never be more than 6 worldwide, so why offer the GT1 class because of a few cars.
The Maserati is a class of its own in its current form and no other car has a chance against it.
I don't think that's good.......

[paul-collins]

Originally Posted by fangio

The car is so expensive that there will probably never be more than 6 worldwide, so why offer the GT1 class because of a few cars.

The Maserati is a class of its own in its current form and no other car has a chance against it.

I assume you're talking about the race cars, as the homologation run of 25 road cars was pre-sold.

I understand your sentiment on the latter point, and it does make me nervous. Since this is essentially a marketing exercise for Maserati, I'd prefer to see the car overrestricted initially and have the restrictions relaxed on a race by race basis to allow them to get close to the proper GT1 cars. Let them know that should they build the properly dimensioned (fully legal) race car and get it homologated, they can then run the regular restrictions - and if they define the class at that time, so be it.

[fangio]

Paul, you're right. That's the way to do it.
There are not enough cars (and dollars) around to scare people away.

[Nordic]

But what about the teams who are scared away by the MC12 and IMSA's ability to run a series to any given set of rules, either ACO ones or, should IMSA decide, there own?

[paul-collins]

The solution to that is for IMSA to write their own rules, with the ACO rules being a subset thereof. (Fogelhund has previously referred to this as "ACO+" rules)

Codify it so that the competitors know where they stand. Or make this exemption explicit, limited, short-term and comprehensive (including records of consultation with those affected).

[fangio]

[QUOTE=paul-collins]The solution to that is for IMSA to write their own rules, with the ACO rules being a subset thereof. (Fogelhund has previously referred to this as "ACO+" rules)

We have seen in the past, with the ACO and FIA rules being different, that it just raises the costs.
It should be possible to have a worldwide set of rules; which I thought we were getting close to. But then you have to stick together and be strict.
The current situation with the ALMS running to ACO rules but changing where they think they should, breaks it up.

It could push even more teams towards the LMES which is not good for the American fans.

In GT Racing the Le Mans 24 hrs is still what we are all looking at, so everybody should work with the ACO. That may not always be easy, but I think if you have good arguments, they will listen.

Don't forget that the Sebring 12 hrs, without the link with the Le Mans invitation, would never see it's current grid!

[paul-collins]

I understand your point, fangio, but I'm not sure I agree. After all, the best time for sportscar racing in North America not only had a variant on the rules, it had a completely independent set (IMSA GTP). Yet somehow they were able to compete at Le Mans and have healthy grids.

I don't think the ALMS can possibly lose any competitors in any meaningful way to the LMES. They can only lose them to another geographically local series.

Sebring as a race has stood on its own for 52 years with varying levels of European support. It'll still do so regardless of the ACO/ALMS outome. And they don't have any automatic entries for Sebring anyway - only the whole series and Petit Le Mans do.

[Nordic]

Originally Posted by paul-collins

I understand your point, fangio, but I'm not sure I agree. After all, the best time for sportscar racing in North America not only had a variant on the rules, it had a completely independent set (IMSA GTP). Yet somehow they were able to compete at Le Mans and have healthy grids.

Great days indeed. Even before the late 70's marked a rebirth after a decline in the mid 70's.

Back then the cars where even changed to suit the US the 956 became the 962 to suit the crash box design needed for the US. Both versions raced side by side at Le Mans.

Many cars entered in the IMSA type class at Le Mans without problem, 935's and M1's raced beside there grp 5 counterparts without issue.

I wonder where it all went wrong? or has it. I hope the ACO & IMSA will be able to put this behind them after Sebring and move towards a workable soloution. I don't want a situation where there are at least 3 sets of rules a GT can be built to.

[Fogelhund]

I'm not certain that costs would go up in a ACO + rules situation. Frankly, you could make a very strong case that they would go the other way. Given the Maserati is outside of the rules, (Given good management by IMSA), there is no way that it should dominate. The car should be pegged at most equal with the fastest car in class.

If we assume that the Aston and Corvette C6.R are equal in speed once fully developed, they become the class benchmarks. The Maserati would be given penalties whereby they are no quicker then the benchmark. You will be able to purchase Corvette's and Aston's for cheaper then you would a Maserati...

If Maserati had spent a tonne of dough on a car that met the legalities, it is theoretically possible for them to dominate in the manner Audi has. That has more of a chance of rising costs, then do a car that absolutely will be pegged in terms of performance, and absolutely will be penalized if it exceeds this performance.

Further, an ACO + arrangement allows for the possibilities of providing "breaks" for otherwise obsolete machinery. Take the Panoz LMP1 for example. Give it a small restrictor break that allows it to be faster, though not equal. There are many LMP900's and (SR2) LMP675's out there that might race in the ALMS IF they were allowed to, and were closer to the front. An example could be the Robinson Racing Riley Mk IIIC. Had we been able to have ACO+, that car would likely still be racing some, or all ALMS events. Certainly we would see healthier LMP2 fields, with older cars. I've talked to the owners, and know for a fact they would be racing if they were given some restrictor breaks, at least enough to be closer.

You have all kinds of possibilities in ACO +.... what if you allowed in by application only, certain cars.... Let's say a Gentilozzi Trans-Am Jaguar. Ok, so its tube framed, but its pretty cheap, and quick enough to run with the GT1 cars with certain enhancements. It is a well prepared, nice liveried car. I'm not a fan of the AGT machinery that was not reliable, not well prepared, and dropping pieces, but well prepared machinery could be given consideration under this scenario.

I strongly prefer the existing bodied cars, but it could be interesting, and make cars cheaper, not more expensive.

I completely agree that there should be a worldwide set of common rules. IF the worst comes to pass, hopefully IMSA will closely follow those rules, but make intelligent and controlled decisions, whereby they can manage their series, that has challenges, and differences to that singular great race in France. To put it midly, many ACO decisions don't make a great deal of sense when it comes to running a full season series.

I feel if Aston would just enter two cars in the ALMS for the season, then this would not be an issue.

23 cars, with perhaps no clear challenger for Corvette in GT1 just isn't adequate....

[Mal]

LMSR.net has a link to the IMSA regulation amendment. It states that the Maserati will have 50kg of ballast at the start of practice and they will adjust this to suit the performance until the evening of the race.

They are clearly trying to regulate the cars speed from the start. They should, IMO make sure it is slower than the competition and give Maserati a deadline to properly homologate the car.

[paul-collins]

Originally Posted by Mal

They are clearly trying to regulate the cars speed from the start. They should, IMO make sure it is slower than the competition and give Maserati a deadline to properly homologate the car.

If this is a marketing exercise for Maserati, surely they can't object to that. They ought to have to struggle to keep up with true top-shelf GT1s in the same level of development and preparedness (read CxR or DBR9 or S7R). It would really backfire on IMSA if Maserati trounced the opposition at Sebring (like Cadillac did in SWC last year, with Andy Pilgrim stalling on the grid and charging back to second place) and show that they just weren't prepared.

By the way, that tech reg is dated February 14.

http://www.imsaracing.net/2003/compe...letin05-02.pdf

edit: here's an interesting thing, nevermind the 50kg extra and the restrictions-on-the-fly: "Cars in this category must be prepared to make runs with certain adjustments for reasonable periods of time to be determined by IMSA, to determine sensitivities."

[jhansen]

IMSA and the ALMS clearly have a lot of wiggle room here in regards to restricting the car. And considering that the car is not going to be scoring points, this is a total win situation for the ALMS. I personally cannot wait to see the car in the flesh.

[kdr]

i've got rather lost in the changes and talk of changes in recent years. is there a plan somewhere to standardise the specs for GT1, GT2 classes across both FIA GT and ACO/LMES/ALMS?

[lj79]

I thought that they had been, well FIA and ACO anyway?

If someone can, in a nutshell - simple guide, recap on the regs across FIA and ACO / ALMS?

Its probably been said before, why can Maserati race`in FIA but not LM, when the regs have been standardised? Or have they only been standardised in part?

This will have been mentioned before I am sure, the mind boggles.

[paul-collins]

Ker, that was the word, until Ratel forged ahead on the Maserati issue and then announced the liason with JGTC (SuperGT) on the eve of the LMES awards banquet.

How the FIA gets their GT rules together with ACO, when ACO has spec'ed a lap time at Le Mans, and when FIA tries to get parity with JGTC rules, without annoying the Japanese, will be interesting to watch.

[fangio]

I think we all agree that it would be best if all GT's, including the Maserati, can run worldwide to one set of rules.
Weight and restrictor chages can kep the speeds together as they are doing at Le Mans starting this year.
The ACO will slow down cars that are "too" fast in their group (GT) and "help" cars that cannot get to the front. This will work for a type of car, not single cars.
So if the factory-supported Porches in GT2 are running at say 4.06, all Porsches will have a weight or restrictor adjustment.

Now that it seems IMSA is adding 50 kgs to the MC12, maybe there is a solution.
But, ever heard about sandbagging???????????????

[tblincoe]

Originally Posted by fangio

I think we all agree that it would be best if all GT's, including the Maserati, can run worldwide to one set of rules.
Weight and restrictor chages can kep the speeds together as they are doing at Le Mans starting this year.
The ACO will slow down cars that are "too" fast in their group (GT) and "help" cars that cannot get to the front. This will work for a type of car, not single cars.
So if the factory-supported Porches in GT2 are running at say 4.06, all Porsches will have a weight or restrictor adjustment.

Now that it seems IMSA is adding 50 kgs to the MC12, maybe there is a solution.
But, ever heard about sandbagging???????????????

read the technical regs issued by the IMSA on the Maserati's entrance being allowed in the ALMS and you will see that the IMSA will be able to effectively control the Maserati even if the drivers try to "sandbag"

[paul-collins]

Originally Posted by fangio

Now that it seems IMSA is adding 50 kgs to the MC12, maybe there is a solution.
But, ever heard about sandbagging???????????????

Ah, but that's a problem that the ACO's going to face with their 3'55" GT1 target too, isn't it? Just imagine how much brake dust is going to accumulate at the entry to the Ford chicane next year...

[kdr]

Originally Posted by paul-collins

Ah, but that's a problem that the ACO's going to face with their 3'55" GT1 target too, isn't it? Just imagine how much brake dust is going to accumulate at the entry to the Ford chicane next year...

so thats why they're making the gravel trap bigger there...

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by fangio

I think we all agree that it would be best if all GT's, including the Maserati, can run worldwide to one set of rules.
Weight and restrictor chages can kep the speeds together as they are doing at Le Mans starting this year.
The ACO will slow down cars that are "too" fast in their group (GT) and "help" cars that cannot get to the front. This will work for a type of car, not single cars.
So if the factory-supported Porches in GT2 are running at say 4.06, all Porsches will have a weight or restrictor adjustment.

Now that it seems IMSA is adding 50 kgs to the MC12, maybe there is a solution.

HOT DAMN MARTHA, it shuuureee looks ands sounds likes good old NASCAR too me.

Bob

[Fogelhund]

Bob, please don't infect every thread with your never ending drivel about restrictors.....

[tblincoe]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Bob, please don't infect every thread with your never ending drivel about restrictors.....

haha... that is a recurring theme of Bob's

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Bob, please don't infect every thread with your never ending drivel about restrictors.....

I did not say restrictor, you did, apparently the connection is so obvious even blinders cannot stop anyone from see the truth.

If you are happy with rules, that have a contrived farce, replacing racing where the mechanincal dept. of one brand proved it could beat another's, heads-up, good for you, some people are easily pleased and impressed.

You really should catch some Bracket Drag Racing, one of the few places where be quicker and faster means you can lose, sounds like it is your type of racing.

Bob