USCC (leave your axe outside)

[FstrthnU]

Honestly, the Le Mans connection puts the series in a bind because Corvette Racing (and to an extent SRT) WILL leave for the WEC if they can't include Le Mans in their yearly USCR program. A non-points exhibition round or some other thing wouldn't be fair for either the Le Mans Teams or the non Le Mans Teams. On the other hand, it's outrageous to expect every GTLM team and/or LMP2 team to enter Le Mans each year. So I think whatever solution they choose someone will get screwed over unless they have a REALLY good race planner.

[Maelochs]

“The problem here is that you have two series, one which has failed because it couldn't get a sufficient field of cars or a decent TV deal, the other which hasn't got the best cars but has got enough of them to have a good field. The combined fields of the two series will be excellent, so that problem is solved at least.”

What?????

Seriously, do you think all ALMS fans are going to start watching Grand Am just because there are two P2s on the grid?

Seriously, what will save USuCkR for the first two years is GTLM alone. People who were happy watching three P1s and three P2s aren’t going to be all excited because a dozen DPs have been added—the DPs are just another filler spec class like PCs in that context.

ALMS fields are on par with Rolex grids, just ALMS has more PCs (their equivalent of a DP, except modern and quicker) then P1s or P2s, but very good GT fields. And even with half-a-dozen top-tier prototypes, the fans turn out.

The “Problem” is not just having enough cars on the grid—it is having cars the fans want to see. Adding more cars fans Don’t want to see is not a “solution.”

Also: “The DPs were designed to be cost-controlled and competitive. That was their reason for existence from the start.”

No. They were designed to be spec racers. The Design isn’t what kept them “competitive” (How “competitive” is one team winning almost every race in one season, and four championships in a row?) The Rules which allow no mods, no tweaks, no Development from season to season—what you aptly call “managed mediocrity”—is what prevented any one team from being dominant—supposedly. I guess we have seen how that works out, though. Let's drop that myth that Rolex always has "Close Racing." That is pure advertisement.

The DPs were designed to be identical, with fake differences from car to car—basically a difference in name only. They were designed to be cheap, but they were not particularly cheap to operate. I mentioned the Last Turn Club series on The Cost of Racing—operating costs are always the biggest part of the budget: hiring, transporting, feeding and housing crew, hiring drivers, transporting cars, tires, fuel, etc. A P2 might cost a little more (or not) but running one costs about the same.

We don’t want to draw incorrect lessons from the past. Grid sizes is not the issue, it is the presence or lack of quality cars. Neither series had enough, and still won’t, once combined.

Also, cost of the P1 cars might have been an issue in ALMS, but [B]only relative to RoI.[B]

Keep in mind ALMS had plenty of quality prototypes, factory and private, until about 2010—even after Porsche, Audi, and Acura pulled out. The problem came when teams needed to find new sponsors or buy new cars—it no longer made sense to buy a P1 or a P2 because the teams couldn’t find sponsors, not because the cars cost too much.

Recall please that Highcroft bought a brand new 2011 HPD ARX-03a P1 just for Sebring, but couldn’t afford to run it for the rest of the season. So the cost of the car wasn’t the problem, it was the lack of sponsors caused by the poor RoI.

And please notice that None of the teams who pulled out of ALMS went to Rolex as a better alternative. There was no RoI there either, which is why NASCAR had to subsidize teams. Adrian Fernandez pulled out after winning the P2 championship—he didn’t go to Rolex, he shut down his team. Highcroft won the ALMS championship a couple times and then shut down the team—they didn’t go to Rolex.

Adding spec cars didn’t help ALMS in terms or RoI for the series as a whole even though it filled the grid because fans didn’t care about spec cars. Plenty of teams entered PC, and found it to be a cost-effective way to go racing—quicker and cheaper than DPs, and because they are modern, high-downforce cars, the driving experience is a better development tool for moving up to real prototypes.

However, the series didn’t gain, because fans don’t like spec cars. ALMS fans who showed up or tuned in did so because of the P-cars and GTE.

Same with Rolex. Plenty of cars on the grid, but no one cares about spec cars.

The problem here is that neither series offered enough money to go racing as a business. ALMS had no TV, Rolex had no fans. The problem is not and never has been small grids, just a low number of exciting cars on the grid.

This is what happens when people keep trying to defend their favorite series: they draw bad conclusions, which will lead to bad decisions in the future.

BOTH SERIES FAILED. Neither had a working business model. ALMS attracted a lot more fans, but that wasn’t enough, but Rolex didn’t attract fans—and No Fans, No Series.

Trying to promote DPs is like trying to promote PCs—cost-effective, cheaper to race, and they do nothing to help the series stay alive.

[FstrthnU]

I think this is also steering into the debate of what the teams want vs. what the fans want. I think in terms of costs/cars, privateers would like to keep them lower, but I think EVERYONE (fans, teams, IMSA) wants USCR to have a good advertising and funding/sponsorship deal to boost that ROI and attract further attention/sponsorship.

Also, we need to keep in mind that some of the current privateers will always be struggling to make ends meet and find sponsorship, or that they're offshoots of the main NASCAR/Indycar operations. If USCR's stature grows then it MAY pick up some of the Indycar fans, but even notwithstanding the ownership the general US motorsports attention will be on NASCAR and that's where teams will focus on.

[Gingers4Justice]

There are lot of people seemingly very unhappy with some people's tastes. Personally, I will pay attention to the new prototype class and I will find it more interesting than the farcical situation of watching just two cars fighting it out for an overall lead for three hours. Though I'm sure I will be told it is wrong to think this.

I really didn't think this merger was about GA vs ALMS but some fans appear to be making this the case. Both series were going the same way. The ALMS was a shadow of what it used to be and GA, in truth, never really took off. In hindsight, with the precedent set by NA single-seaters, this sort of merger was inevitable.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by FCYTravis

83,564 minus 57,963 is ~25,500.

That gives a guesstimate ~23,000 raceday attendance for Saturday. Not spectacular, but not 13,000 either.

That is an assumption that there were 2,500 on Friday.

It is 25,500 over two days... split it how you like..

[Ephaeton]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

(...)The problem here is that you have two series, one which has failed because it couldn't get a sufficient field of cars or a decent TV deal, the other which hasn't got the best cars but has got enough of them to have a good field. The combined fields of the two series will be excellent, so that problem is solved at least. (...)
But I know that most of the people here want ALMS-style racing over Grand Am-style racing, (...)

Look you can't combine a series of bumper cars with a racing series. Different means of entertainment for different people. The bumper car series officially bought the racing series. Bumper car drivers will be bumper car drivers, and USCR gives people bumper cars to drive with. PLM & Sebring will lose stature, because they're no longer a race but a bumper car show. You can't combine chess and wrestling and cater for the wrestling fan, except if the wrestlers may beat up the chess players. And that's what's happening here.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

The problem here is that you have two series, one which has failed because it couldn't get a sufficient field of cars or a decent TV deal, the other which hasn't got the best cars but has got enough of them to have a good field.

The ALMS failed due to bad management. I'm not sure how many times that has to be repeated. What you list are symptoms of the illness. Many of us were saying this in 2007/8, because we knew of the errors of management. We were even saying they were currently having success in spite of themselves, but they found ways to screw it up of course.

Grand Am had it's grids, due to subsidizing owners. You can't point to a series strength, if the series itself had to subsidize the cars to keep the numbers up.

FWIW, there was a suggestion for Panoz to do exactly this as well, and they nearly did... but chose to spend the money on the Abruzzi and Deltawing instead...

BOTH FAILED, both will be dead at the end of the year.

The combined fields of the two series will be excellent, so that problem is solved at least.

At least temporarily... but it isn't a solution, just a bandaid.

The ALMS has a handful of good events - Sebring, PLM, Mosport, Long Beach, Monterey to an extent. It's hardly turning out in droves -

Brent, you aren't going to get many more people at Sebring, PLM or Mosport, no matter what you do.

It's enough to keep the series running smoothly, but advancing it either requires major promotional efforts to advance the series and its style of racing and/or keeping the cost of competition to a point where one can justify the ROI to sponsors. Maelochs is 100% right on the need to advance a business case here, and I'm certainly not a supporter of managed mediocrity, but we have to be realistic in our expectations. The beautiful and very fast cars will go nowhere if nobody can afford to run them.

It's simple, we have a long history of knowing what works for fans, and what doesn't. Same with entrants. If they want to build something successful, it is easy to see. The cheap cars have never been successful either.. and in everycase, those series lasted less time than the expensive ones.

Having a two month break in the middle of the season is horrendous and needs to be eliminated, simple as that. You can't put a major series on hold in the middle of the year to go run an event four thousand miles away that doesn't count for your series and that at most a dozen of your nearly 50 cars will run at. It's not fair to the other teams, annoys sponsors and is bad for the series. GTLM being the "primary class that a definite majority of the fan base is going to be interested in" is stupid if true. Why would they be? You think these people aren't gonna be interested in any of the other cars? This comment is just Grand Am hate, and I'd dare say that a sizable majority of the fans who go to events will be quite up to watching all of the cars, not just the GTLM machines. If Le Mans dictates that two month break, then sorry, those teams have to move on without Le Mans. After all, people argue here that the series is popular enough, is it not a possibility that they may choose to run the USCR rather than Le Mans, or leave the cars in France and fly guys home for a race in America before returning for the 24 Hours?

You'll NEED at least a three to four week break. By the way, the GTLM cars are huge attractors of the fans, not hate, reality. I'd suggest that Corvette Racing alone attracts a large number of the fans. If you don't accomodate their wishes to run LM, and give them a proper break (not two months), they'll run WEC instead, and you'll end up with a situation of really just having the cars from Grand AM on the grid. If you want this to work, you have to be accomodating, and learn from the past.

Having manufacturer recognition is gonna be in the USCR in any case - you know Corvette, Porsche, Ferrari, BMW and the like won't go anywhere. That's gonna be the case either way. That recognition and draw is important, but if you can't make it last other than in spurts than what is the point? Living on the whim of the makers has destroyed series after series in North America - Trans-Am, Can-Am, IMSA GTP, CART, ALMS. All let manufacturers take over the series, and after they ran the private runners out they pulled out themselves, effectively taking what they wanted and leaving. That can't happen again here.

Well, manufacturers including the ones you listed will leave at a drop if they don't get what they need. Corvette's primary goal is LM, the rest is gravy. Screw that up, and they'll be in WEC. Porsche and Ferrari just want to sell cars to privateers for the most part... So you'll either meet the needs of those owners, or not. BMW.. comes and goes.

While you can't let manufacturers dictate, you can't have the situation where the cars aren't worth watching, like Can Am II, PSCR and Grand Am, all who actually had shorter life spans than their more expensive brothers before them, due to lack of sufficient fan interest. I would also suggest that one of the main reasons for the close competition in DP, was due to a program of BoP, which is also the reason for the close competition in GTLM. If you built the rules, and simply let them run, there would be only one chassis/engine combination in short time in DP. That side from Grand Am, the BoP for the top class needs to remain a strong positive from the Grand Am side.

I'm not going to argue the same points endlessly, but will summarize as follows. Sportscar has been cyclical continuously. The expensive route has largely been uncontrolled and ended due to Oil, factory domination, and poor management. The cheap route ended each time due to lack of fan interest. If this cycle is to end, someone needs to find a solution that incorporates the positives of both philosophies.

In the end, ROI is critical. It doesn't matter how cheap you make it, if there is no return, it won't exist for long... well except as an expensive club series, which most won't care about, or want to watch. There are, and always will be other options for manufacturers, privateers and fans.

Enjoy the conversation. :-)

[CyberMotor]

I am one who supports prototype endurance racing because it is relevant to the real world. All of the technical innovations that have occurred in this sport during the past decade have been outstanding, IMO. GA with the DPs didn't seem to want to participate in this global advancement of the automobile and now, it seems, this advancement will stop in North America with the advent of USCR.

For those of you who have been against the 'relevancy' issue, it looks like you have won. For the rest of the world, it looks like we have lost. I supported and promoted, in any way I could, the advancements in technology of Audi, Toyota, Peugeot, Porsche, Mazda-Dyson and Drayson. Without all of this 'relevancy' disappearing, I don't see much left to support.

It is interesting that the way the word 'relevant', as despised as it is by some, is getting twisted to mean something different. NASCAR has twisted this to mean that their new cars are relevant to the brands because their spec car looks a little similar to a showroom car. This is stretching the concept to the max and has little to do with technological advancements that can be tested on the track and then integrated into their automotive fleet. Audi understands this, Porsche understands this, Corvette understands this, so I don't understand why it is not understood by those attempting to build a series for the future who are not incorporating technological advances in propulsion and fuel systems as one of the major factors in designing rules for new classes.

[962]

Maelochs
"Seriously, do you think all ALMS fans are going to start watching Grand Am just because there are two P2s on the grid" they watch ALMS now with not much more i don't see why we should not watch USCR just because there are DP's racing with them.

"No. They were designed to be spec racers" Ummm no! not spec maybe not to your high standards but most certainly not spec.

"The DPs were designed to be identical, with fake differences from car to car" I guess ignorance realy is bliss, i really think you need to look up the deffinition of spec, IROC was spec, Indy car has a spec chassis, maybe the regulations for DP's closer than you may want but the only thing spec is the rear wing and the ECM.

"We don’t want to draw incorrect lessons from the past. Grid sizes is not the issue"
Really! so it what killed GTP then? It's like the chicken or the egg with these things, what came first lack of cars or lack of fans. In IMSA's case the fans stoped going when the cars stopped coming. So what is the correct lesson to be learned from that?

"And please notice that None of the teams who pulled out of ALMS went to Rolex as a better alternative. There was no RoI there either, which is why NASCAR had to subsidize teams."
I guess if you mean actually paying a purse, No one is or has been subsidized by GA.

"This is what happens when people keep trying to defend their favorite series: they draw bad conclusions, which will lead to bad decisions in the future."
So if I make the conclusion that I'm going to give USCR a fair chance then I might make the bad desission to go to a USCR race? It's only a bad decission if the experience is bad and in 30 years of going to IMSA, ALMS and GA races GA is the only one i can say i've never had a bad experience at. If that changes and the experience is not enjoyable then i will stop going, based on past experience they have earned my willingness to give them that opertunity.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

There are lot of people seemingly very unhappy with some people's tastes. Personally, I will pay attention to the new prototype class and I will find it more interesting than the farcical situation of watching just two cars fighting it out for an overall lead for three hours. Though I'm sure I will be told it is wrong to think this.

I really didn't think this merger was about GA vs ALMS but some fans appear to be making this the case. Both series were going the same way. The ALMS was a shadow of what it used to be and GA, in truth, never really took off. In hindsight, with the precedent set by NA single-seaters, this sort of merger was inevitable.

I do not think I would call it a "lot of people", they just seem to beat the drum very loudly and with great tempo. I agree that it was quite evident a/the change was needed for the sport to carry on.







L.P.

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

What?????

Seriously, do you think all ALMS fans are going to start watching Grand Am just because there are two P2s on the grid?

Seriously, what will save USuCkR for the first two years is GTLM alone. People who were happy watching three P1s and three P2s aren’t going to be all excited because a dozen DPs have been added—the DPs are just another filler spec class like PCs in that context.

That's an assumption that every ALMS diehard here is making, and I would dare say it is not accurate. Firstly, there won't be two P2s - I figure it will be two ESM, two Level 5, at least one Dyson, one Pickett and perhaps more. So, six at the minimum. Against a dozen or so DPs and perhaps the Deltawing. The problem here is what, again? They watch for their favorite cars, and if they are that diehard and can't stand the Daytona Prototypes that much, they root for their favorite cars and root against the others. The problem here is what, again?

As far as GTLM saving it, again I'm sorry, this is a bias based on some people here clearly and obviously despising Grand Am. You don't seriously think that the cars are that different, do you? You're making an assumption about GTLM being the series everyone watches because you hate the DPs, nothing more than that. Nobody has ever done any surveys over who loves what cars the most, you're basing off your opinion and that of the ALMS fans here who are biased against Grand Am because of misconceptions about the DPs being spec cars run by NASCAR, when neither is true.

Originally Posted by Maelochs

ALMS fields are on par with Rolex grids, just ALMS has more PCs (their equivalent of a DP, except modern and quicker) then P1s or P2s, but very good GT fields. And even with half-a-dozen top-tier prototypes, the fans turn out.

The “Problem” is not just having enough cars on the grid—it is having cars the fans want to see. Adding more cars fans Don’t want to see is not a “solution.”

You have absolutely no idea how that will turn out, and I don't either. You are extrapolating the people here despising the Daytona Prototypes into thinking that most ALMS fans hate the DPs, which we have no idea if that is true or not. To be honest, I'd bet against that being the case anyways. Those "top-tier prototypes" will still be there anyways, no?

Also: “The DPs were designed to be cost-controlled and competitive. That was their reason for existence from the start.”

Originally Posted by Maelochs

No. They were designed to be spec racers. The Design isn’t what kept them “competitive” (How “competitive” is one team winning almost every race in one season, and four championships in a row?) The Rules which allow no mods, no tweaks, no Development from season to season—what you aptly call “managed mediocrity”—is what prevented any one team from being dominant—supposedly. I guess we have seen how that works out, though. Let's drop that myth that Rolex always has "Close Racing." That is pure advertisement.

The DPs were designed to be identical, with fake differences from car to car—basically a difference in name only. They were designed to be cheap, but they were not particularly cheap to operate. I mentioned the Last Turn Club series on The Cost of Racing—operating costs are always the biggest part of the budget: hiring, transporting, feeding and housing crew, hiring drivers, transporting cars, tires, fuel, etc. A P2 might cost a little more (or not) but running one costs about the same.

Take it from someone who has been a follower of the Daytona Prototypes since the day they were born - THEY ARE NOT SPEC CARS. Yes, they are much more managed than the ALMS prototypes, but they are not spec cars with fake differences. There are different designs by different manufacturers, not designed to a spec. Yes, the cars cannot be much developed over the course of a year for cost control reasons, but the initial chassis are all different, designed in different ways and with different features and built by different manufacturers. It's a rather big difference from the identical to each other PC cars, so let's get rid of this spec car idea, shall we?

Originally Posted by Maelochs

We don’t want to draw incorrect lessons from the past. Grid sizes is not the issue, it is the presence or lack of quality cars. Neither series had enough, and still won’t, once combined.

You can make that argument, but I think a rather large number of people will disagree.

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Also, cost of the P1 cars might have been an issue in ALMS, but [B]only relative to RoI.[B]

Keep in mind ALMS had plenty of quality prototypes, factory and private, until about 2010—even after Porsche, Audi, and Acura pulled out. The problem came when teams needed to find new sponsors or buy new cars—it no longer made sense to buy a P1 or a P2 because the teams couldn’t find sponsors, not because the cars cost too much.

Recall please that Highcroft bought a brand new 2011 HPD ARX-03a P1 just for Sebring, but couldn’t afford to run it for the rest of the season. So the cost of the car wasn’t the problem, it was the lack of sponsors caused by the poor RoI.

And please notice that None of the teams who pulled out of ALMS went to Rolex as a better alternative. There was no RoI there either, which is why NASCAR had to subsidize teams. Adrian Fernandez pulled out after winning the P2 championship—he didn’t go to Rolex, he shut down his team. Highcroft won the ALMS championship a couple times and then shut down the team—they didn’t go to Rolex.

Adding spec cars didn’t help ALMS in terms or RoI for the series as a whole even though it filled the grid because fans didn’t care about spec cars. Plenty of teams entered PC, and found it to be a cost-effective way to go racing—quicker and cheaper than DPs, and because they are modern, high-downforce cars, the driving experience is a better development tool for moving up to real prototypes.

However, the series didn’t gain, because fans don’t like spec cars. ALMS fans who showed up or tuned in did so because of the P-cars and GTE.

Same with Rolex. Plenty of cars on the grid, but no one cares about spec cars.

The problem here is that neither series offered enough money to go racing as a business. ALMS had no TV, Rolex had no fans. The problem is not and never has been small grids, just a low number of exciting cars on the grid.

This is what happens when people keep trying to defend their favorite series: they draw bad conclusions, which will lead to bad decisions in the future.

BOTH SERIES FAILED. Neither had a working business model. ALMS attracted a lot more fans, but that wasn’t enough, but Rolex didn’t attract fans—and No Fans, No Series.

Trying to promote DPs is like trying to promote PCs—cost-effective, cheaper to race, and they do nothing to help the series stay alive.

You obviously can't be convinced to reconsider your assumptions so I won't waste my time trying, but you are mistaken if you think RoI is the only problem. The cost of running an ALMS prototype for a year is in the millions. If you have a good series image and you can be competitive in that field, you can make that work, and for a while ALMS did, but the cost of running the cars is a real problem, and with the economy the series has to live with now will make sure the problem is not just RoI.

[Canada ALMS fan]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

The cost of running an ALMS prototype for a year is in the millions.

And what is the cost of running a DP? Roughly equal to a P2, or a top GTE team for that matter. Point is, why force DP on us when there are plenty of options at similar cost that HAVE proven to be very popular with fans, and in the case of GTE - popular with manufacturers too, something DP has failed at.
Why is that those in the GA camp repeatedly refuse to hear and accept the opinion of the MAJORITY of the fans? Forcing Daytona's vision won't work...

[962]

Originally Posted by Canada ALMS fan

And what is the cost of running a DP? Roughly equal to a P2, or a top GTE team for that matter. Point is, why force DP on us when there are plenty of options at similar cost that HAVE proven to be very popular with fans, and in the case of GTE - popular with manufacturers too, something DP has failed at.
Why is that those in the GA camp repeatedly refuse to hear and accept the opinion of the MAJORITY of the fans? Forcing Daytona's vision won't work...

Yes the initial cost is about the same for DP,P2 but thats it, Peter Barron and Enzo Potoliccio have both said that it's the added costs of running P2 cars not the initial car cost that makes the difference. think you mean the majority of fans on Ten Tenths, but then again the majority here also think the only reason DP's exist is because of some kind of subsidy that doesn't even exist. I don't think DP's have been forced on anyone, if they were that unpopular at an equal cost why would'nt all those teams running DP's have just left for the much more lucrative GTE and P2 ranks. I think the folks in Daytona have a little more going for them and their vision than you do with yours.

[Fogelhund]

GAINSCO has been spending roughly $3 million a year, and was just above that in their last championship season.

That is more than Dyson, more than a P2 team costs to run.. unless you are L5 and bring a rolling circus.

I really wish people would educate themselves before spouting out nonsense.

A privateer GT team has been cheaper in the past... all of the numbers are out there, and have been for years. Obviously factory entries spend more.

Understand that dislike isn't despise. People don't really like No-name prototypes as lead cars. This includes LMP2, LMPC and DP. It isn't despise, it's just that the cars sell, and people don't particularly lineup to see Lolas, HPDs, Orecas, Rileys or Coyotes. If you are stuck with them, it is true that people prefer cars with technology over those that don't. Again, it is a preference, not a despise thing. Compare fan attendance for ELMS vs. WEC for example. ELMS will get a handful of fans, WEC considerably more. (though both are rather pathetic in most cases). Dyson vs Muscle Milk isn't an interesting story. L5 vs. whomever isn't interesting, except maybe everyone hating on Tucker. LOL GAINSCO vs. Ganassi vs. Taylor isn't an interesting story. Porsche vs. BMW vs. Corvette vs. Ferrari vs. Viper is an interesting story. It is, and always has been about the cars. If you take the cars out of the equation, you can also take most of the fans, and this forums fans in particular out of the equation.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by 962

Yes the initial cost is about the same for DP,P2 but thats it, Peter Barron and Enzo Potoliccio have both said that it's the added costs of running P2 cars not the initial car cost that makes the difference.

Comparing WEC vs. Grand Am... yes.

Comparing Grand Am vs. ALMS no.

Unless somehow the numbers have changed in the last four years, and the newer P2's are drastically more expensive to run than the old ones... and how would that be?

[FordCosworthPanoz]

One could argue outside of Le Mans looking at attendance and the (lack therefore of) viewing figures the WEC with big name prototypes isn't that popular either. Le Mans, supposedly one of the biggest races in the world (and In my opinion it is) barely registers a television audience with numbers like 200k viewers in Germany and 47k in Great Britain with a peak of 162k.

Are people just generally uninterested in sportscar racing?

[joeb]

Originally Posted by FordCosworthPanoz

Are people just generally uninterested in sportscar racing?

You watch your mouth!

But yes, currently racing of all types is becoming less popular in the US. Can't comment for the rest of the world.

[962]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

GAINSCO has been spending roughly $3 million a year, and was just above that in their last championship season.

That is more than Dyson, more than a P2 team costs to run.. unless you are L5 and bring a rolling circus.

I really wish people would educate themselves before spouting out nonsense.

A privateer GT team has been cheaper in the past... all of the numbers are out there, and have been for years. Obviously factory entries spend more.

Understand that dislike isn't despise. People don't really like No-name prototypes as lead cars. This includes LMP2, LMPC and DP. It isn't despise, it's just that the cars sell, and people don't particularly lineup to see Lolas, HPDs, Orecas, Rileys or Coyotes. If you are stuck with them, it is true that people prefer cars with technology over those that don't. Again, it is a preference, not a despise thing. Compare fan attendance for ELMS vs. WEC for example. ELMS will get a handful of fans, WEC considerably more. (though both are rather pathetic in most cases). Dyson vs Muscle Milk isn't an interesting story. L5 vs. whomever isn't interesting, except maybe everyone hating on Tucker. LOL GAINSCO vs. Ganassi vs. Taylor isn't an interesting story. Porsche vs. BMW vs. Corvette vs. Ferrari vs. Viper is an interesting story. It is, and always has been about the cars. If you take the cars out of the equation, you can also take most of the fans, and this forums fans in particular out of the equation.

That sounds about right for what a top tier DP team costs, however everyone I've ever talked to has said that it cost an easy 1m more to run 1 P2 than a DP, but then again Dyson was using Duct Tape to hold his car together last year so I guyess you could cut some costs here and there.

[Purist]

Brent, it isn't blind hatred of DPs.

As Maelochs pointed out, ALMS fans haven't been terribly happy with the PC and GTC classes. Heck, sometimes we have outright panned even the LMP2/675 class, for lack of reliability, and for not being inspiring and attention-grabbing enough compared to the P1s or the GTs. Right now, I would say that there is modest support for LMP2, but if it is perceived by the ALMS fans to be neutered, in order to allow the DPs to keep up, that support will become lukewarm at best.

Brent, you are the one focusing so much on the DPs, to the exclusion of the other SEVEN classes. The Delta Wing isn't especially popular either, along with the two Challenge classes in the ALMS, as I already pointed out. One of the major issues is, there is little passion for ANY of the cars in Grand-Am. A lot of us have issues with running tube-framers in the same class as GTs with an actual production basis. Also, the modified GT3s look de-fanged and de-clawed next to the standard GT3s running all around the world, much less the GT2s that they will be running on the same track with come 2014. (The GX class is tiny, and looks to be a Cayman benefit for the foreseeable future. It really should be absorbed into the GA GT class in 2014.)

No, DP and GA GT are not technically spec, but the DPs ARE designed to, as much as possible, make the design, fabrication, tuning, and development (if there is any) of the cars as irrelevant as possible. The cars are meant to be as identical as possible; we'll see how the EcoBoost turbos go, hopefully, but GA hasn't seemed too concerned that all they have had in DP for some time now is 5.0-litre, atmospheric V8s, which are forced to run very standard, limited aero, and virtually identical power/torque curves.

I think one of the critical problems that is a turn-off for Sportscar fans when it comes to GA is that Grand-Am may have succeeded in coming up with something that is WORSE than a spec class, at least in some respects. That is, the chassis/body interchangeability, among other things, is such that, the DPs, and the tube-frame GTs, have no identity. Is that an RX-8, a Corvette, a Camaro, an M3, an M6, a GXP.R, or a GTO.R? Is that a Riley, a Ford, or a Corvette? Is that a Riley, a Coyote, a Dallara, or a Lola?

The DPs DO look too similar to one another, even the Riley compared to the "Corvette". My father, who has been around sports cars pretty much since he was born, walked in on me watching the Glen Six Hours last year. There was a mix of cars on-screen, including both body styles of DPs. I told him what I was watching, and said they were Daytona Prototypes. Even after looking for several seconds, on a large screen, he asked, "Are those all spec cars?" with regards to the DPs. He knows his stuff as an engineer and mechanic, and has worked on racing cars, racing sailboats, powered aircraft, and all manner of sailplanes. There is a BIG problem when someone as knowledgeable, experienced, versatile, and hand-ons in his work cannot tell, at a glance, the difference in the DP bodies!

Your statements about grid size are incorrect. Once the older generations of cars (WSC and '90s GT1) were winnowed out, ALMS had its largest grids in 2002-03, a time when the Audi dominance was at its height. It hit a low over the next few seasons, then came back in 2006-08. Those years also saw the greatest depth, in terms of how many cars could run up front overall. The overall series low point was 2009, and it has risen since then. If grid size was THE driver, the ALMS would have been acquired in the 2009/2010 off-season.

Running a competitive DP program costs millions a year as well. It sounds like $2-4 million isn't uncommon, and Ganassi is spending $5 million or more a season. If the earlier comment about the Gainsco budget being larger than Dyson's is true, that's kind of mind-blowing, and it means that Ganassi must be spending still more.

I think, without the Le Mans break, and it does NOT have to be two months, the major teams concerned will sooner join the WEC than skip Le Mans. Losing TWO, major, AMERICAN works teams would be a SERIOUS blow to the USCR! I think the series can get by with a four-week break. Have one race two weeks before Le Mans, and the next race two weeks after. The Sportscar racing world is going to be concentrated on Le Mans anyway, so it will just seem like two, two-week breaks between races during the season, and that's not going to be a big deal. You are also forgetting that it is NOT JUST the teams taking cars over to Le Mans that are impacted. A substantial portion of the USCR field will be sending drivers over to run in other teams' cars.

As for race attendance, it's easy to tell when the stands at an oval are full or not. Figuring out how full the hillsides around a road course are is rather more difficult, especially when some areas may simply be off limits altogether. Also, as an extreme example, Bristol has 160,000 seats, but you'd be hard-pressed to fit more than 35,000 in around Lime Rock Park. A lot of road courses aren't going to have the same capacity, at least not in the same way, as a number of the really built-up oval speedways. It's not good or bad, but just different. Also, 60,000-80,000 at Road America is quite a nice crowd. It's sizable, while not being jam-packed. This means you can still get around well enough, and generally find an occasional gap to slip into right on the fence at some of the more choice viewing spots.

The record crowd figures (and I'm not going to argue validity of those figures here) for Petit Le Mans put its best attendance in the realm of the seating capacities at California Speedway (91,200) to Kentucky Speedway (107,000). The best attendance figures for Sebring put it in the realm of the seating capacities of Daytona (167,785) and Talladega (175,000). Le Mans attendance can get up into the range of Indianapolis seating capacity (well over 200,000). BTW, last year's Daytona 24, a major anniversary year, was acknowledged as the best-attended Rolex 24 in quite some time, and the figure given there was 75,000, the same as the seating capacity at Darlington.

Finally, some balancing is necessary in order to keep competition "reasonably close". For some not insignificant portions of the American population, that simply won't fly, and so it will have to be accepted by the series that the series will be unmarketable to those who are intractable in their demand for a purer form of competition. There is also a rather strong bent in the US that "we're the best" and "we're number one", which won't be terribly accepting of something that is seen as particularly "less than" LMP1, or whatever their benchmark category is. So, the series will have to accept that the USCR may be unmarketable to them as well. The question will be, how much of the reachable audience will be aamenable to what the USCR will be offering.

Personally, I can probably deal with two years of this less than ideal setup, but I NEED to have some confidence that things WILL get better in that 3-5-year window, and most definitely before a decade has passed!

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by 962

That sounds about right for what a top tier DP team costs, however everyone I've ever talked to has said that it cost an easy 1m more to run 1 P2 than a DP, but then again Dyson was using Duct Tape to hold his car together last year so I guyess you could cut some costs here and there.

The question is where were they talking about? These were guys running in WEC, or L5, who overspend.

We interviewed multiple teams, over a period of years to get budgets. I did multiple sponsorship proposals for teams over a six year period. LMP1 was $5-6 million, GT1 was the same, LMP2/675 was $3 million. In knowing where all the costs are, down the minute details, I don't know how it suddenly got so expensive last year alone.

http://lastturnclub.com/index.php?op...=600&Itemid=88

[FCYTravis]

I feel like this is just rehashing the same old round-and-round arguments as before. They're irrelevant now.

Purist, it sounds like basically what you want is for everything ALMS was, except now with NASCAR money. If what the ALMS was doing had been working, we wouldn't be talking about this now.

IMSA is not going to disenfranchise the investments made by current Rolex DP owners who are running more than a dozen top-tier prototypes in favor of a prototype class that is on perpetual life support.

Nor is IMSA going to disenfranchise Rolex GT car owners by telling them to either spend a boatload more money to compete in GTE or go home.

As for the silhouette thing, those cars have been part of American GT racing for decades. I'm not sure why a Z4 with an engine never offered in the stock model hooked to a not-remotely-stock transaxle should be considered "pure" and acceptable in GTE while, say, the tube-frame Nissan 300ZX Turbo of GTO days is an unacceptable, "non-pure" car. Neither one has much more than a shred of a connection to the showroom car.

The fraction of fans who will stop watching GT racing because there are silhouette cars is so infinitesimally small as to be unnoticeable. As far as I know, nobody significantly complained about them during the GTO/GTU days.

I'm pretty sure the DeltaWing is in there as a sop to Panoz. Once it's clear that nobody's interested in buying or running them, I'm thinking they can quietly drop the thing.

Ditto with GX - Grand-Am just launched this class and they can't very well tell the team owners that their brand-new investments (one with significant factory backing) are now unraceable. But my guess is that they'll find a way to fold it into the Rolex GT class sooner rather than later.

I agree with you with regards to the LMPC cars and I hope those get phased out as well. But again, my suspicion is that the ALMS side of the equation didn't want to shut out those team owners and tell them to buy new equipment or go home. Hopefully they can phase it out at some point, or turn it into a more open "Prototype Lights" category.

[FordCosworthPanoz]

Petit Le Mans RECORD was 4 day attendance of 131,400.

Sebring RECORD (since it was recorded) was for 50th anniversary of 2002 at well over 200,000, again for four days. Typically it's been 160-185k.

Rolex 24 was 75,000, again over 4 days.

Mosport the last time they announced attendance announced a weekend crowd of 80,000 and raceday crowd of 40,000.

Keep in Mind here, 'four days' figures are complete garbage as people you're counting many people, including campers 4x over. Kjos and many other people with marketing and promotion backgrounds typically realized that for four day attendance you can divide the four day total in half and a little more is the answer. Attendance figures around the world back this up as do the ex-Mosport numbers.

This means that race day attendance is likely:

Sebring: somewhere between 80-100k

Petit Le Mans: 65k-70k (Road Atlanta in it's current spectator configuration probably couldn't fit 100k)

Daytona 24: 35-50k

Grand Am Austin: Over 10k



Numbers like "165k", "130k" and "80k" sound good but if NASCAR recorded attendance in the same way:

Daytona four day 'Attendance': 369,000
Bristol Night three day 'attendance': 283,000
Texas three day 'attendance': 273,500


ALMS still tromps Grand Am attendance though.

[Purist]

Travis, I'm not happy with the fins on the LMP1s and LMP2s either. That is to say, that model certainly isn't absolutely perfect. However, I definitely want to see something come along for the top class in 2016 and beyond that is markedly more exciting, interesting, and engaging than the DPs we have and have had since 2003. Wanting some improvement is not wrong.

I'm also hardly the only one who thinks that the GT3s in Grand-Am should be of a more standard specification relative to what is running in a dozen or more GT series around the globe right now. Asking manufacturers to build yet another version of a customer GT car for one, limited market just isn't going to be a really enticing proposition for them. It also hurts potential participation from those outside, who might like to bolster the grid for the signature North American endurance races.

Finally, I made no mention of the history of American GT racing, and silhouettes in it. I'm simply saying the obvious, which is that there are difficulties in trying to mix purpose-built racecars that just look like road cars with cars that actually have some road-going basis. As for the Z4, yeah, I'd like to see a production V8 Z4, but I'm not going to say that they should be kicked out now that they're in. If the engine and transmission are in their road-going line (just not in that specific model right now), I feel better about that, not great, but better. Honestly, are there any GTE cars other than the F458 that do NOT have a whole load of "waivers"?

Please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say in my posts anything about the relative purity of silhouettes compared to GTs with some production basis. I am concerned about trying to equitably balance the two types in the same class.

A large portion of the annoyance with Grand-Am and its GT class is that it was used to bring in several models of car that weren't even remotely in the same class as the usual GT offerings. The BMWs weren't so bad, but the Pontiacs didn't even pretend to look like the GTO and G6/G8 sedans, and would have been too big, blunt, and heavy to compete if they used the road cars as a basis. The Mazda RX-8, even with a fairly low weight and not massive frontal area, still isn't a sleek ship next to a Corvette or F458, and is comparatively anemic on power and torque next to everything else that has been in the class.

Silhouettes would be MUCH more acceptable with two things.
1. Make them their own class if you're serious about them being a major part of the series.
2. Make them more along the lines of Trans-Am, old GT1, or Group 5/GTX, where they're real attention-getters. Silhouettes should be more of the wild and crazy variety than the "we didn't have a proper, high-performance model to begin with, so we're doing this merely to get our car in" sort of thing. Now, that's NOT to say that you can't badge your car as a Celica or something, as long as it's going to be one of those outwardly "extreme' silhouettes.

Unfortunately, Travis, I think they may feel as though they need the PC class around to provide a Prototype category for which they can keep a "gentleman driver" requirement.

FCP, there's a reason I used "attendance" when talking about the Sportscar events, and "seating capacity" when talking about the ovals. Also, if the IndyCar figures from Barber were anything to go by, with a three-day event, roughly 2/3rds of the attendance was on Sunday for the "main event". Of course, the math gets more complicated with four-day events.

Back to Brent for a second, and it is probably the case that Dyson would run a P2 or equalized P1 going forward. Pickett, however, I'm not so sure that he won't just jump ship to the WEC with his HPD P1. That might be a way for Honda to do a works-backed team relatively easily.

[FCYTravis]

If the silhouette cars are confined to the GT-Daytona class, then there doesn't need to be a worry about BoPing them with the GT-Le Mans cars, because the GTE-spec cars should be handily faster. I am in full agreement that IMSA should maintain the GTLM class in cooperation with the ACO in order to allow crossover, and not slow those cars down.

Originally Posted by Purist

A large portion of the annoyance with Grand-Am and its GT class is that it was used to bring in several models of car that weren't even remotely in the same class as the usual GT offerings.

So what? The Audi 90 quattro was hardly a "usual GT offering" and yet it was ridiculously awesome in GTO before it was banned for being too damn awesome. The Pontiac Fiero wasn't a "usual GT car." Ditto for the Olds Cutlass Supreme, Chevy Beretta, Merkur XR4Ti, Mazda RX-7, etc. etc. etc. All those cars were stalwart parts of the Camel GTO/GTU grids and I can't fathom why that kind of racing shouldn't be welcomed back. Plain and simple, I don't accept the argument that a car has to be "exotic" to be a GT car. Honestly, how exotic is a Porsche 911 anyway?

[Canada ALMS fan]

Originally Posted by 962

I think the folks in Daytona have a little more going for them and their vision than you do with yours.

Not really, there is a World Championship for ACO reg cars now.
Is that why they (NASCAR) have to stoop so low as creating user profiles on internet forums to create support for their series by spreading misinformation regarding costs and insulting the ALMS and its' fans? (when was your profile created?) Fear mongering about a spending war is not a good way to endorse spec racing. They may have bought the better series with the fan base but we will not stay if it is dumbed it down to become the NASCAR of sportscars, which DP is. The GT class, minus prep 2 is fine as a secondary GT class, much better than GTC was.