|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
2 Oct 2005, 17:50 (Ref:1422147) | #1 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 3,580
|
should IMSA take a step away from ACO regs?
What do you think: is now the time for IMSA to loosen its ties with the ACO, and modify its regulations to make the ALMS more attractive for potential entrants? Perhaps introduce a new "sub-GT2" GT class in addition to the existing ACO-conforming categories.
|
||
__________________
Oops |
2 Oct 2005, 18:32 (Ref:1422162) | #2 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 932
|
Where you been? There's the four-door S2 category in addition to the further grandfathering of both pre-2003 and hybrid LMPs, the restrictor breaks given to pre-2003 GT1s, and the invitation of the Maserati MC-12. They're at least one step away from ACO regs by now.
Sorry, no opinion if a sixth, SWC GT-like class would be attractive to teams. |
|
|
2 Oct 2005, 19:35 (Ref:1422203) | #3 | |||
Ten-Tenths Hall of Fame
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,837
|
Another Comment
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
No trees were harmed by this message. However, several million electrons were terribly inconvenienced |
2 Oct 2005, 20:49 (Ref:1422252) | #4 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 341
|
I agree with Danske, the ALMS is stepping away from the ACO enough to keep the series attractive to those in the USA/North America.
But as Atherton stated this past weekend, the ACO regulations will remain the backbone of the series as it has a direct link to LeMans. Obviously teams like Maserati find a benifit without that direct link regardless. I would assume these 'fantom' S2 teams will as well. |
||
__________________
Cleveland (Lakewood), Ohio |
2 Oct 2005, 21:33 (Ref:1422281) | #5 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,153
|
Why should they drop ACO regs? LMES has great races and grids with them, so as far as I can see ALMS is doing something wrong somewhere.
|
||
|
2 Oct 2005, 22:13 (Ref:1422327) | #6 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 341
|
They are not doing anything wrong per se. The ALMS has become a victim of what they were doing right, being the first to create a series around the direct regulations of LeMans.
When the LMES was formed it stripped the ALMS of some (and potential) European teams, as now those teams don't have to cross the pond to compete during the year. That was a big 'hit' for the ALMS. Now the ALMS is working hard to overcome that loss by creating rules which may be more attractive to US/American based teams. There will still be the ACO regulations in effect to serve the US based teams who wish to compete for a chance at the 24. Some just do not seem to be interested for whatever reason, witness Dyson, who seems to be more than happy to only compete in the US. On the other hand teams like GM/Corvette are doing so not only for the exposure in the US, but also the desire to race in the most prestigeous sportscar race in the world; The LeMans 24 Hour. The ALMS is simply trying to reach a balance which will serve both agenda's. With the 'success' of the Grand Am, this diversion from strict ACO regs is necessary at this point. There is only so much different types of racing which can be supported, and the US has a 'boatload'. As sportscars are a niche market, I applaud the ALMS in their efforts to put world class sportscars on the grid during the year. Lest we forget, the ALMS teams dominated LeMans this year. |
||
__________________
Cleveland (Lakewood), Ohio |
2 Oct 2005, 23:41 (Ref:1422372) | #7 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,147
|
LMES has great grids for now, and they exist in a vacuum of sportscars.
I wouldn't consider what ALMS is doing to be "wrong" in the context of what the LMES is doing. No lessons to be learned there. Not that I think that there couldn't be improvements... |
||
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean? -Bill James |
3 Oct 2005, 00:09 (Ref:1422381) | #8 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 4,154
|
I am not sure that many of the LMES teams would be running here if LMES didn't exist. I don't think Team Jota would be running here as an example, nor do I think Pescarolo would either.
If you were going to do something different in the prototypes, what would it be? Go to power to weight with American V8's? What chassis rules? Would those chassis have to pass crash test? Who would take up the challenge if it was there, and what keeps them out now? robert |
||
|
3 Oct 2005, 00:33 (Ref:1422387) | #9 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 932
|
A big difference between the ALMS and LMES is the number and length of races in the season, but that's been well-travelled (beaten?) already. I couldn't say if the possibility of additional paying drivers for longer races really would help or not; funding might not be the problem. One thought is that the longer races might introduce a bit more randomness to the results which could be encouraging to some teams.
Another thought is that the ALMS could adopt a position of "if it ain't for sale it ain't invited", but would that produce a mass exodus and fan revolt instead of more interest? |
|
|
3 Oct 2005, 00:51 (Ref:1422392) | #10 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
I want the ALMS to forget about attracting European teams and look at encouraging a handful of IRL/ChampCar/GA teams to run in P1/2 and GT1.
I would hope Penskes arrival will encourage others, as will Dysons renewed commitment at a time when he could quite easily walk away, with another series ready and waiting, if he believed the series did not have a future. Two more big teams of Dysons calibre in P1, together with the expected Porshe P2 customers and the series would be transformed. |
|
|
3 Oct 2005, 00:54 (Ref:1422394) | #11 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Quote:
I doubt they would be racing prototypes if there was no European based series. |
||
|
3 Oct 2005, 04:12 (Ref:1422439) | #12 | |
Rookie
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 29
|
A good thing going for LMES is that you can run the same GT car in both LMES and in FIA-GT. This is about 20 races per year, if you like, and you do not have to modify the car. Imaine what it would be like if World Challenge or Grand-Am had the same cars as ALMS. Everyone would be just entering more races and ALMS would have a full field.
Philip |
|
|
3 Oct 2005, 07:24 (Ref:1422491) | #13 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,153
|
You've got a point there Philip, I think the World Series would fit into ALMS quite nicely as a "G2" class kind of thing.
|
||
|
3 Oct 2005, 08:58 (Ref:1422564) | #14 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,710
|
i think there are some teams in LMES witch would run an european GrandAm if there is someone. its only a question of money. and european teams have the advantage with lower costs to get to LeMans. If there is a team comparable to Jan Lammers Racing for Holland and most of the LMP2 teams in LMES in the US, they would drive GrandAm and not a ACO series.
|
||
|
3 Oct 2005, 12:35 (Ref:1422746) | #15 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,147
|
Philip, you may have a point on GT; there were teams such as JMB, TRG and Orbit who regularly used to run both series.
Danske, I doubt randomness would change much in the longer races; look at the ALMS record for the long ones, you'll see that inevitably the top teams rise to the top again. If anything, the longer races tend to exacerbate the problem of the professionalism differential. The only randomness factor is if the top professional teams get caught in some on-track action that has nothing to do with them, or if JJ starts thinking he's Johnny Herbert... Bramzel, you're right, G2/S2 or whatever it's being called is definitely aimed at SWC cars. |
||
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean? -Bill James |
3 Oct 2005, 13:20 (Ref:1422802) | #16 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 555
|
Quote:
All the Teams which are running in the LMES would do something "national" if there were no LMES. And all the big Teams like Creation, Rollcentre, etc. would do something national or FIA-GT like they did before LMES. The "only" Problem of the ALMS is the NASCAR/GrandAm realtionship and the ressources. I´m not sure what happend if NASCAR donßt support the american way of GrandAm. |
|||
|
3 Oct 2005, 13:29 (Ref:1422819) | #17 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,710
|
of course the main problem is GrandAm/Nascar money.
No race directly after the both big ones (Sebring, PLM) in 2006. thats bad because some european teams perhaps would drive a second race if they are already in the US like PLM and Laguna this year. |
||
|
3 Oct 2005, 17:57 (Ref:1423045) | #18 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 4,154
|
ALMS is going to need to stand on its own. I don't think you can depend on European teams to run too many races here, too expensive. Also, their sponsors don't have a tie into North American markets in all cases, so not that benificial from a sponsor standpoint.
robert. |
||
|
4 Oct 2005, 06:14 (Ref:1423386) | #19 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
In my opinion cy , i think they should stick with or loosley with ACO regs . It took long enough to get most of the cars to a stage where they can compete against each other without undergoing major modifications . Remember John Nielson commenting on how expensive it was to convert a Panoz LMP1 from ALMS to ELMS regs .
For this reason I would like it to stay the same . |
||
|
4 Oct 2005, 14:54 (Ref:1423718) | #20 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,555
|
I agree with The Badger - if the rules were different then we wouldn't get grids of extended numbers when it came to the likes of Sebring or Petit Le Mans because teams would have to change their cars too much, and spend too much money.
|
||
|
4 Oct 2005, 15:10 (Ref:1423729) | #21 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,354
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
IMSA delaying introduction of 2004 LMP regs | Graham Goodwin | North American Racing | 31 | 19 Jan 2004 23:01 |
McCarthy in IMSA | Dan Rear | North American Racing | 1 | 8 Jan 2004 07:03 |
IMSA Site | Liz | North American Racing | 10 | 28 Jan 2003 00:22 |
IMSA Returns | Craig | North American Racing | 1 | 5 Oct 2001 21:25 |