USCC (leave your axe outside)

[Purist]

Both would have to come up with an LMP1 engine, and I could certainly imagine the French manufacturer finding the big race in their backyard to be a stronger pull that in might be for the Japanese maker.

Also, just because VW is going to have both Audi and Porsche out there doesn't mean that other companies are going to have the same policy regarding running multiple divisions in LMP1 at the same time.

And now that I double-check which thread this is, there has another thought bouncing around in my head concerning USCR. I don't think there is a great deal of chance that this will crop up, but who knows. I wonder whether those on the GA side of management may be hesitant to run high-altitude circuits with the introduction of turbos into the top class.

[Koenigsegg]

Originally Posted by Purist

Both would have to come up with an LMP1 engine, and I could certainly imagine the French manufacturer finding the big race in their backyard to be a stronger pull that in might be for the Japanese maker.

No they don't have to. Renault or Alpine (or Caterham) can use the Renault F1 Engine. Nissan can do that also, but they might label it into an Infiniti engine.

But Nissan wants to race electric, so yes, they do need a new engine for that.

[Purist]

Remember, factory LMP1s for 2014 are required to use hybrid systems of some kind. Also, I wouldn't assume that either the 2.4-litre, atmospheric V8, or the 1.6-litre, turbo V6 will be competitive.

I wonder if Dyson will try to use the AER for the first season in LMP2. It would be a real pain to have to switch engines right away. Of course, the 2.0-litre, turbo four-banger could well be at a torque disadvantage to the newer, LMP2-specific engines.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Purist

Remember, factory LMP1s for 2014 are required to use hybrid systems of some kind. Also, I wouldn't assume that either the 2.4-litre, atmospheric V8, or the 1.6-litre, turbo V6 will be competitive.

I wonder if Dyson will try to use the AER for the first season in LMP2. It would be a real pain to have to switch engines right away. Of course, the 2.0-litre, turbo four-banger could well be at a torque disadvantage to the newer, LMP2-specific engines.

Coincidentally, SuperGT are going to 2 liter turbos (2014) with hybrid power in the next 2-3 years.

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by Livininthinair

Change will always be met with some/major resistance (I feel myself being torn between allegiance to the familiar and the exciting prospects of the future)..

The rules makers have a heavy task before them with all of us watching every move. It will be hard to let everybody play on the same footing.

The need to balance perfomance so smaller teams are not overwhelmed. While at the same time giving the teams that want the chance to race against the giants of the sport (Audi/Porsche/Toyota ect.) the chance to do so. Sportscar racing has always been dominated by "the big boys" but at its true essence gives "the little guys" the very real chance to show up a manufacturer on the track. Keep in mind you have to seek out and try to keep major teams without blowing every one else out of the water - quite the tapdance... If the final answer is to create an entirely new formula for north american racing then I guess that is the best answer, but someone will always feel left out in the cold. I am not old enough to have been involved in Can-Am racing but would love to see a new "run what you brung" racing series but once again the manufacturers will always have the upper hand. You could make the Manufacturers only race against themselves but then smaller teams would loose out on the opportunity to beat them. Make Manufacturers sell the same cars they use - at what price, with what technical support?

Change can be good or bad, but thanks to you all for the shared passion enough to care what happens in the end!!!

I think we all have the shared passion, it's just a matter of what passion and what we love about it.

The whole balancing the series so that the privateers can go take on the factories forgets the fact that every single time that has been tried it has miserably failed, in any series, NASCAR included. You can't take on a major car company with a multi-million-dollar effort, you will eventually get swamped unless you keep the balance, either by periodically speeding up the privateers or slowing down the factories. IMSA learned that the hard way in 1990-93, just as Can Am did in 1972-74, just as ALMS did from 2008 to now. It's also not coincidence that those dates line up with recessions, too.

A bigger problem is the WEC - I see the ACO and FIA's lavish support of it, as well as the number of factory entrants lining up to go in (Audi and Toyota in now, Porsche and Renault on the way) as a sign that when 2016 comes around, they aren't gonna give a rat's backside about sportscar racing in America, and they'll probably have given up on the Asian Le Mans Series idea by then, too, so the focus for them will be Le Mans and the WEC and that's it. USCR won't factor into the equation, and while we'll be able to use those rules and perhaps get automatic Le Mans entries for P2 and GTLM, but that does little good on this side of the Atlantic, does it?

The combination of all of these is such that trying to get factories to sell cars to privateers, particularly with how complicated and expensive the P1s are now, to USCR is a lost cause. If you can make the P1 privateer rules cheap enough for USCR to run them with good grids, great - but nobody here is dumb enough to take that bet, particularly since the ACO has made it clear that they consider P1 to a factory/semi-factory class. How can you get such people here? Answer: You can't. You might get them for Daytona and Sebring and Petit Le Mans, but having the big factories only show up to the big races and hand everybody else their backsides, again, does no positive thing for the series and could potentially be harmful. The USCR should be prepared to leave the ACO behind and go their own way, including making up their own rules and telling the WEC guys that if they want to run at Daytona and Sebring and Petit Le Mans, make cars to our rules. And on top of that, the first priority as far as teams concerns go should be the guys who have been here racing for a long time and have shown real commitment in good times and bad. Forget what Audi and Toyota and Porsche think of the new rules, what do Dyson and MSR and Pickett and Taylor and ESM and Starworks think? They matter more, because they have earned that consideration through many years - in Dyson's case, nearly thirty years now - of tearing up the tracks in sports car racing. The factories can come play by our rules, and if they don't like it, to heck with them.

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by TF110

Coincidentally, SuperGT are going to 2 liter turbos (2014) with hybrid power in the next 2-3 years.

So is DTM, and potentially DTM America.

[Koenigsegg]

Originally Posted by Purist

Remember, factory LMP1s for 2014 are required to use hybrid systems of some kind. Also, I wouldn't assume that either the 2.4-litre, atmospheric V8, or the 1.6-litre, turbo V6 will be competitive.

We don't know if they're competitive. They might change it a little and then use it as an P1 engine and use an updated KERS system. Only time will tell if there's going to be a team which uses an F1 engine.

The whole point about Nissan being in Garage 56 next year is about trying to change the rules. Nissan is not allowed to compete with an all electric engine within the 2014 rules. So they want to prove it's doable and competitive. Hopefully the rule makers will rethink their rules.

[Dodge_Swinger]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

I think we all have the shared passion, it's just a matter of what passion and what we love about it.

The whole balancing the series so that the privateers can go take on the factories forgets the fact that every single time that has been tried it has miserably failed, in any series, NASCAR included. You can't take on a major car company with a multi-million-dollar effort, you will eventually get swamped unless you keep the balance, either by periodically speeding up the privateers or slowing down the factories. IMSA learned that the hard way in 1990-93, just as Can Am did in 1972-74, just as ALMS did from 2008 to now. It's also not coincidence that those dates line up with recessions, too.

A bigger problem is the WEC - I see the ACO and FIA's lavish support of it, as well as the number of factory entrants lining up to go in (Audi and Toyota in now, Porsche and Renault on the way) as a sign that when 2016 comes around, they aren't gonna give a rat's backside about sportscar racing in America, and they'll probably have given up on the Asian Le Mans Series idea by then, too, so the focus for them will be Le Mans and the WEC and that's it. USCR won't factor into the equation, and while we'll be able to use those rules and perhaps get automatic Le Mans entries for P2 and GTLM, but that does little good on this side of the Atlantic, does it?

The combination of all of these is such that trying to get factories to sell cars to privateers, particularly with how complicated and expensive the P1s are now, to USCR is a lost cause. If you can make the P1 privateer rules cheap enough for USCR to run them with good grids, great - but nobody here is dumb enough to take that bet, particularly since the ACO has made it clear that they consider P1 to a factory/semi-factory class. How can you get such people here? Answer: You can't. You might get them for Daytona and Sebring and Petit Le Mans, but having the big factories only show up to the big races and hand everybody else their backsides, again, does no positive thing for the series and could potentially be harmful. The USCR should be prepared to leave the ACO behind and go their own way, including making up their own rules and telling the WEC guys that if they want to run at Daytona and Sebring and Petit Le Mans, make cars to our rules. And on top of that, the first priority as far as teams concerns go should be the guys who have been here racing for a long time and have shown real commitment in good times and bad. Forget what Audi and Toyota and Porsche think of the new rules, what do Dyson and MSR and Pickett and Taylor and ESM and Starworks think? They matter more, because they have earned that consideration through many years - in Dyson's case, nearly thirty years now - of tearing up the tracks in sports car racing. The factories can come play by our rules, and if they don't like it, to heck with them.

I think the solution is to require factories to sell and support one customer car for every factory car. The rules would stipulate the price the cars would have to be sold for. I posted earlier $3 million USD for a factory P1, spares package and use of factory engines for the season. At each race, the factory would bring an engine and ECU for each factory and customer car plus spare engines. Prior to the first practice, the factory would lay out the engines and have a lottery to draw an engine for each car. This would ensure that the factory was providing the same engines for all. Any aero development would be up to the teams unless the factory decided to share the data. $3 million might be steep, but if we're talking about an Audi R18, Porsche or Toyota P1 with spares and use of a factory massaged engine for the season, it might not be too off the mark. By requiring the factories to sell a car for each car they campaign at a set price, it might be an incentive to curb crazy spending. 3 million for a car that can legitimately win overall at Le Mans or anywhere else they run P1 doesn't sound too bad. That's just a figure I pulled out of my rear and the actual figures would be set by folks with more insight into real costs. After the first year, the customer engines would be leased from the factory at a rules-capped price.

I would also make the factories pay a significant annual entry fee for the series and require at least a three year payment UP FRONT before the season starts. I think a million USD per year wouldn't drive Audi, Porsche or Toyota away. Assuming those three manufacturers fielded two cars each, that would mean at least 12 P1s for the season.

I think if manufacturers knew they had to sell a customer car at a fixed price, it might curb them spending so much. Or, if they don't care, it would at least ensure several cars on the grid. By leaving aero and other development up to the individual teams, it would maintain the possibility for innovation by team engineers.

It wasn't long ago that I saw FOUR Cadillac LMPs, four or five Panoz LMPs, several Audi R8s, and various Zytecs, Domes, Riley and Scotts, and Lolas on the grid at Le Mans. A lot of those were customer cars. The only customer/privateer cars around now are Lolas of some sort. What happened? If I won the Powerball, would it even be possible at any price to buy an Audi R18 or Toyota to run as a privateer?

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by Dodge_Swinger

I think the solution is to require factories to sell and support one customer car for every factory car. The rules would stipulate the price the cars would have to be sold for. I posted earlier $3 million USD for a factory P1, spares package and use of factory engines for the season. At each race, the factory would bring an engine and ECU for each factory and customer car plus spare engines. Prior to the first practice, the factory would lay out the engines and have a lottery to draw an engine for each car. This would ensure that the factory was providing the same engines for all. Any aero development would be up to the teams unless the factory decided to share the data. $3 million might be steep, but if we're talking about an Audi R18, Porsche or Toyota P1 with spares and use of a factory massaged engine for the season, it might not be too off the mark. By requiring the factories to sell a car for each car they campaign at a set price, it might be an incentive to curb crazy spending. 3 million for a car that can legitimately win overall at Le Mans or anywhere else they run P1 doesn't sound too bad. That's just a figure I pulled out of my rear and the actual figures would be set by folks with more insight into real costs. After the first year, the customer engines would be leased from the factory at a rules-capped price.

I would also make the factories pay a significant annual entry fee for the series and require at least a three year payment UP FRONT before the season starts. I think a million USD per year wouldn't drive Audi, Porsche or Toyota away. Assuming those three manufacturers fielded two cars each, that would mean at least 12 P1s for the season.

I think if manufacturers knew they had to sell a customer car at a fixed price, it might curb them spending so much. Or, if they don't care, it would at least ensure several cars on the grid. By leaving aero and other development up to the individual teams, it would maintain the possibility for innovation by team engineers.

It wasn't long ago that I saw FOUR Cadillac LMPs, four or five Panoz LMPs, several Audi R8s, and various Zytecs, Domes, Riley and Scotts, and Lolas on the grid at Le Mans. A lot of those were customer cars. The only customer/privateer cars around now are Lolas of some sort. What happened? If I won the Powerball, would it even be possible at any price to buy an Audi R18 or Toyota to run as a privateer?

The idea of a factory being forced to sell cars to privateers is an interesting one, but its a (considerable) extra cost to them and to the teams to be supplying privateers, and multi-million-dollar up-front entry fees, while again a solid idea if you want to keep them around a while, would be another cost.

The bigger problem is the WEC. With such restrictions, what point is there to spend the money to go to USCR now with the WEC in full swing, and there being no way in heck that the FIA would enforce such rules on the factory teams there. Why bother going to USCR when you can run the WEC, and not have to deal with the restrictions in the process? I'll say it again - the factory teams are nice to have, but you cannot control them with such rules restrictions, and if they get control they will invariably drive the privateers out of the series, and then when they go you've had your series wrecked. That's where the ALMS is at now, no? Pay attention to the 2016 rules, by all means, but if they don't work for privateer entrants in America ignore them and do your own thing. And I'd wager money that if there are factory prototype teams in 2016, it will be because USCR will have allowed them to do their thing, and we'll be right back here by 2020 or so. That cycle has got to get stopped, and as much as people here hate it, Grand Am stopped that cycle. That's why I harp on and on about keeping costs at a sane level, so that we don't have problems keeping the private entrants in the series, factories or not.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

The idea of a factory being forced to sell cars to privateers is an interesting one, but its a (considerable) extra cost to them and to the teams to be supplying privateers, and multi-million-dollar up-front entry fees, while again a solid idea if you want to keep them around a while, would be another cost.

The bigger problem is the WEC. With such restrictions, what point is there to spend the money to go to USCR now with the WEC in full swing, and there being no way in heck that the FIA would enforce such rules on the factory teams there. Why bother going to USCR when you can run the WEC, and not have to deal with the restrictions in the process? I'll say it again - the factory teams are nice to have, but you cannot control them with such rules restrictions, and if they get control they will invariably drive the privateers out of the series, and then when they go you've had your series wrecked. That's where the ALMS is at now, no?

No. Restrict the costs, and then you don't have the money issue. BTW, let me repeat again, it was never the costs that hurt the ALMS, rather the management.

Pay attention to the 2016 rules, by all means, but if they don't work for privateer entrants in America ignore them and do your own thing. And I'd wager money that if there are factory prototype teams in 2016, it will be because USCR will have allowed them to do their thing, and we'll be right back here by 2020 or so. That cycle has got to get stopped, and as much as people here hate it, Grand Am stopped that cycle. That's why I harp on and on about keeping costs at a sane level, so that we don't have problems keeping the private entrants in the series, factories or not.

Grand AM stopped THAT cycle, by promoting the same one Can Am II, and PSCR did... the one has also always failed, and done so in a shorter time than the unlimited spending, without much fan support.

This is not a black and white world, and you need to stop thinking about this in such black and white absolutes. Somewhere in there is a shade of grey that might work.

[Fogelhund]

Manufacturers aren't evil, they are necessary... Makes me wonder how NASCAR of all places came to this conclusion, with their reliance on manufacturer participation.

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

No. Restrict the costs, and then you don't have the money issue. BTW, let me repeat again, it was never the costs that hurt the ALMS, rather the management.

Fine, but the management of the ALMS allowed Audi to run over the series, and we all saw the results. When Audi went away, the series' prototype fields had been whittled down to nothing and they had trouble getting sponsorship at all, which for the ALMS shouldn't be a problem, should it? It's a simple fact - the prototype costs got out of control, thanks almost entirely to Audi's nine-figure prototype budgets, and it ran the privateers out. If costs were not the issue, why does Grand Am have a sizable DP field and ALMS only have Dyson and Pickett, especially considering the ALMS is supposedly so successful? It's not adding up, is it?

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Grand AM stopped THAT cycle, by promoting the same one Can Am II, and PSCR did... the one has also always failed, and done so in a shorter time than the unlimited spending, without much fan support.

This is not a black and white world, and you need to stop thinking about this in such black and white absolutes. Somewhere in there is a shade of grey that might work.

I am looking at a grey world, and while we all have differences, my thesis goes like this. Series gets popular, draws in the big-money manufacturer efforts, which then drive the budget skyward in a hurry, which when combined with the utter impossibility of beating a nine-figure-budget factory effort by a privateer, drives the privateer teams out of the category if not the series. The series then sinks in popularity as it becomes too stale, the manufacturers withdraw having lost their ROI (Cadillac, BMW, Panoz) or done everything they came to do (Audi), leaving the category in tatters. Sound familiar? It should - Can-Am, IMSA GTP and ALMS all went through this stage. ALMS has in fact gone through it twice, the first time with the GTS/GT2/GT1 category, where Corvette, after vanquishing first the Vipers, then the Prodrive Ferrari 550s and then the Aston Martins, drove everyone else out of the category. This all is pretty logical, no?

This paradigm, of series being broken by these huge-money manufacturer efforts, has to stop. It's bad for the teams, sponsors, drivers, fans, pretty much everyone except for the manufacturer efforts. How many times can we reinvent this sport so that a Penske Porsche or Nissan GTP or Audi R10/R15 can destroy it? Sure, that may well be managed competition, and I know how much the purists despise that idea. But the ALMS is now going out of business because it not only did not break that paradigm, they did not really try to do so. We now see the results. That's not a black and white world, that's cold, hard reality, it's what the ALMS faces now, it's why there will be 12 or 14 DPs next year and maybe six P2s. How hard is this to see?

I have no issue whatsoever with the factory entrants - but they must, I repeat MUST be kept on the level with the privateers. If that means USCR slows Audi down so that a Dyson or MSR or Pickett or Ganassi beats them, so be it. There is no grey areas on this one at all, because history has shown over and over again that if you let the paradigm continue, you get a wrecked series as a result. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing multiple times and expecting a different result. All arguing on the cars aside, why are you guys expecting the results to be different this time?

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Manufacturers aren't evil, they are necessary... Makes me wonder how NASCAR of all places came to this conclusion, with their reliance on manufacturer participation.

The same reason as Indycar - they have dedicated teams that will be there hell or high water, and those teams are not driven out by the manufacturers. When Ford and Chrysler pulled out of NASCAR in the early 70s, life went on. There are no more real big manufacturer efforts in Indycar, life went on. That has not happened to the ALMS because all of the good privateer teams race in Grand Am. (bolded for emphasis.) Combine the two, you get more cars, no? They are not necessary, at all, and the series cannot act that way or it will one day be to their immense loss. They are a luxury, a great thing to have but they cannot be necessary for the series. Too many times sports car racing has suffered from this mindset.

[Scooter185]

Indy and Nascar use bespoke rules and are the two biggest races in the US, hell indy is part of the triple crown. I think USCR can create something similar, they certainly have the tracks for it. The key is making the cars interesting and something that the fans want to see. GA and their DPs didn't do the best job of that. Even with rules that don't allow the cars to race anywhere else, if the cars and races draw fans, they will draw sponsors, which will draw factory interest. For the teams keeping things fair is a priority, something alms wasn't the best at, and what needs to happen is to strike the balance between fair and interesting. I think that's what GT3 has been really good at, it has diversity but also is pretty even.

[Purist]

Sorry, Brent, but Dyson, MSR, Pickett, Taylor, etc are NOT marketable entities in and of themselves. The manufacturers ARE marketable entities in and of themselves. It's just that simple. If you want a popular, prosperous series, you NEED factory involvement at a meaningful level. Having Draconian rules that dictate to the factories will cause them to say "F-U" to your series.

I am okay with telling the factories that I will speed up the privateers to keep them close. I would also hint at the factories that, if they don't want someone else's car in privateer hands potentially hounding them, they might consider offering customer cars themselves. At least make an effort to dangle some carrots before bringing out the sticks.

Again on the marketability, here are some examples. What became well-known was McLaren CHEVROLET, Dyson PORSCHE, Group 44 JAGUAR, Sauber MERCEDES, Momo FERRARI, and so on and so forth. It's not all that dissimilar to F1 history. You had Cooper MASERATI, Brabham FORD, McLaren HONDA, Lotus RENAULT, and Sauber BMW.

The GA-type model is NOT marketable on its own merits; NASCAR has had prop it up, even to the point of PAYING top privateers (Gainsco for one) to NOT race in the ALMS. It might be sustainable for teams, in theory, but it won't draw crowds, or sponsors, or TV based on its own appeal. And if it can't draw those other things, the series is, in fact, NOT sustainable over the long term.

Having several factory teams fighting it out is NOT stale. Having a few set chasses and engines, with no outwardly apparent changes to the cars, for several years (DP anyone?) IS as stale and stagnant as it gets! Your sequence of events is incorrect, at least in terms of what happened to IMSA. The racing was dynamic, though a number of the privateers were gone. The problem became evident when the factories started going at it with each other, and those not willing to spend quite as much started to waver. That's when things really started to go.

Brent, you also overlooked the point that individual privateers are no more consistent than individual factory teams; having a large pool of teams doesn't change the actual success rate. HUGE swathes of privateers have fallen by the wayside, all on their own, over the decades. Many privateers of the WSC/SRP era just up and disappeared from Exxon IMSA, PSCR, USRRC, and GA by the time DPs came around. Audi had NOTHING to do with those teams going away!

IndyCar is floundering, and in need of a coherent, positive direction going forward. There is also talk that Ganassi, Andretti, an Penske might leave for/ consolidate USCR efforts in the coming years. IndyCar is hardly a blip on the radar compared to the days of CART, with healthy crowds, teams, sponsors, and factory support. NASCAR wasn't anything like the national presence it is now back inthe early '70s. It would crumble without the factories (and their couple hundred million dollars a year) now.

NONE of us WANTS factories to run amuck and wreck things! That should be clear to you at this point. Factories will need SOME reining in. That much is also clear. However, the series CAN'T be marketable, or attain any measurable popularity or prosperity, without some factory participation. This much is also PROVEN over DECADES of Sportscar racing history. This fact cannot reasonably be denied! Therefore, as Fogel says, a middle ground (a grey area) MUST be found, in order to provide a measure of stability, along with suitably exciting cars and nameplates that will draw fans and sponsors, and create a profitable and prosperous series.

Dodge, price caps can only work IF the prices are realistic. IndyCar has been finding this out. If what you're asking for costs more than your demanded price, you have a problem.

I'm not sure that $3 million for a factory LMP1, with spares, isn't low-balling it by some noticeable amount. Also, given the power restrictions on the cars, the aero is where the factories WILL (and already do) make a killing in terms of pace, and your proposal leaves that door wide open for them to continue to stomp on everybody else.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

Fine, but the management of the ALMS allowed Audi to run over the series, and we all saw the results. When Audi went away, the series' prototype fields had been whittled down to nothing and they had trouble getting sponsorship at all, which for the ALMS shouldn't be a problem, should it? It's a simple fact - the prototype costs got out of control, thanks almost entirely to Audi's nine-figure prototype budgets, and it ran the privateers out. If costs were not the issue, why does Grand Am have a sizable DP field and ALMS only have Dyson and Pickett, especially considering the ALMS is supposedly so successful? It's not adding up, is it?

No, it doesn't add up.

Did the ALMS allow Audi to run over the series? Did Audi scare away all the privateers. Actually, the answer would be no.

From 2000 here is a list of privateer prototype teams.

Dyson - still there.
Fields/Intersport - money issues
Konrad - went back to Europe when ELMS was started
Rafanelli - went back to Europe
Johannson - went back to Europe
Autocon - The money tree dried up.
Highcroft - became factory team, went away when the factory $ went away.

Actually, the ALMS modified the rules, until privateers could win, which Dyson did a number of times with the MG/Lola.

So, much of the field went back to Europe upon the introduction of ELMS, and none of the others went away at any point due to Audi, and were actually all still around after Audi left.

The bigger question is, why haven't more teams joined along the way? The only new team in recent memory is Cytosport/ Muscle Milk.

But, if we looked at Grand Am, we'd see the exact same trends. DP's went from high twenties in entries, down to about a dozen, with most of the field requiring subsidies to be there. Despite the argument about Audi being dominant, it is easy to see that two teams have won the last seven DP championships. Dwindling fields, hardly any new teams at all over a long period of time.

To directly answer your question, why so many DP's... subsidies from Grand Am.

Going further, the ALMS has also cannibalized itself by creating multiple classes. Most of the new teams went to LMPC, and GTC...

The reality is, neither North American series was attracting enough new teams to replace those that left due to natural attrition. Those North American teams that left, did so well after Audi had gone in the ALMS.

I am looking at a grey world, and while we all have differences, my thesis goes like this. Series gets popular, draws in the big-money manufacturer efforts, which then drive the budget skyward in a hurry, which when combined with the utter impossibility of beating a nine-figure-budget factory effort by a privateer, drives the privateer teams out of the category if not the series. The series then sinks in popularity as it becomes too stale, the manufacturers withdraw having lost their ROI (Cadillac, BMW, Panoz) or done everything they came to do (Audi), leaving the category in tatters. Sound familiar? It should - Can-Am, IMSA GTP and ALMS all went through this stage.

This paradigm, of series being broken by these huge-money manufacturer efforts, has to stop. It's bad for the teams, sponsors, drivers, fans, pretty much everyone except for the manufacturer efforts. How many times can we reinvent this sport so that a Penske Porsche or Nissan GTP or Audi R10/R15 can destroy it? Sure, that may well be managed competition, and I know how much the purists despise that idea. But the ALMS is now going out of business because it not only did not break that paradigm, they did not really try to do so. We now see the results. That's not a black and white world, that's cold, hard reality, it's what the ALMS faces now, it's why there will be 12 or 14 DPs next year and maybe six P2s. How hard is this to see?

I have no issue whatsoever with the factory entrants - but they must, I repeat MUST be kept on the level with the privateers. If that means USCR slows Audi down so that a Dyson or MSR or Pickett or Ganassi beats them, so be it. There is no grey areas on this one at all, because history has shown over and over again that if you let the paradigm continue, you get a wrecked series as a result. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing multiple times and expecting a different result. All arguing on the cars aside, why are you guys expecting the results to be different this time?

1. Your theory that Audi drove out Privateers has already been proven false.
2. McLaren and Porsche didn't drive out entries in Can Am.. McLaren had a long period of dominantion, didn't drive out competition.
3. Ganassi has won three championships in a row, four of the last five. Is this a demonstration of a broken formula? They have the highest budget, grids have dropped since they won their first championship, so it must be due to dominance right?
3. The ALMS hasn't become less popular in at track attendance, it has actually grown each year.
4. The ALMS allowed privateers such as Dyson to compete on speed with Audi. We saw Intersport with basically a unrestricted car. Your story premise is false.
5. The series was broken by manufacturers, it was broken by incredibly poor management. It was broken by incredibly poor management. I'll repeat in case you missed it here before, or the other half dozen times I've posted it before. It was broken by incredibly poor management.
6. The Cheap answer, the DP's, saw dwindling grids, just like Can-Am II and PSCR, and a fraction of the fans that the more expensive versions did. Each of these cheaper series had shorter runs than their most expensive versions did, why are you expecting it to be different this time? History shows, you get a wrecked series as a result of no real interest in the series.

ALMS has in fact gone through it twice, the first time with the GTS/GT2/GT1 category, where Corvette, after vanquishing first the Vipers, then the Prodrive Ferrari 550s and then the Aston Martins, drove everyone else out of the category. This all is pretty logical, no?

No, this is in fact the ultimate fail.

Where did the Vipers go? Dropped by Chrysler.
Where did the Ferraris go? Dropped by Prodrive to race Astons.
Where did the Astons go? Well, to Europe mostly

Then GT1 became a category that really didn't interest manufacturers and it was agreed to be dropped... Did Corvette Racing somehow kill the FIA GT1 series too?

-------------------

The single biggest issue that has affected not only ALMS, but LMES, WEC and Grand Am as well, has been the poor global economy since 2008.

There has very few new entries in any of these series over this five season period, because there just hasn't been the money. Add in to this poor rules and series management by the ACO, ALMS, and you've got a problem.

By the way, the ALMS is out of business because it's owners sold it, not because if failed. Grand Am is out of business, because they knew they couldn't continue to subsidize their series with falling grids, and needed control and the fanbase the ALMS had.

What strikes me most is that you wish to continue to perpetuate old, tired and factually incorrect arguments.

What made Grand Am successful, was that anybody could buy the same car the best teams had.

The best years of the ALMS, there were multiple teams running the best cars. You could buy a Porsche Spyder, and the right teams could buy an Acura. In the Can Am days, you could buy a McLaren, or a Porsche. In IMSA GTP days, you could buy a Porsche 956/962.

The guiding premise for the future needs to be that everybody can purchase the top cars, if they can cover the cheque.

If you want fans, they have to have manufacturer plates on these cars, that has been demonstrated multiple times.

Costs have to be contained.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

The same reason as Indycar - they have dedicated teams that will be there hell or high water, and those teams are not driven out by the manufacturers. When Ford and Chrysler pulled out of NASCAR in the early 70s, life went on. There are no more real big manufacturer efforts in Indycar, life went on. That has not happened to the ALMS because all of the good privateer teams race in Grand Am. (bolded for emphasis.) Combine the two, you get more cars, no? They are not necessary, at all, and the series cannot act that way or it will one day be to their immense loss. They are a luxury, a great thing to have but they cannot be necessary for the series. Too many times sports car racing has suffered from this mindset.

The Indycar teams are there, because they make enough money to be there, otherwise they'll be gone. They have sponsors, because enough eyeballs watch the Indy 500... the rest of the season barely justifies the costs. They've marketed themselves, and done a decent job managing their series, after they just about buried Open Wheel. Still, they've need manufacturer dollars and involvement, which they've had in every season.

NASCAR very much lives on Manufacturer dollars, dont' fool yourself. It's survived at times without it, but it would be a heck of a challenge now if they all pulled all their dollars.

All the good privateer teams race in Grand Am? Don't be ridiculous.

By the way, I'll agree with the statement that Ganassi, Gainsco, Dyson and Muscle Milk aren't marketable entities.

It sounds like you just want Grand Am to continue, and it shouldn't. If it does, fair enough. The dozen or so fans who talk about it on Tommy's board can have at it and enjoy it. The rest of us will move on to something else.

Meanwhile, the rest of us who have been Le Mans style racing fans have been talking for YEARS, about what is wrong with what we like. Believe it or not, we actually know what the issues have been, and don't need to make up nonsense such as has been written above. It's been dead simple to us what the issues are. We are NOT asking for this to be like ALMS, and marketed by NASCAR. We know where it is broken and why. You seem to not be reading this correctly, or are so focused on making your points, that you aren't reading at all. I'm not sure what it is. You do understand that every formula has been boom and bust, including Grand Am... right?

A major issue with Le Mans style racing right now, is there really isn't anywhere to buy a car from anymore in LMP1. The suppliers have all gone away. Of course the ACO screwing up the rules for years hasn't helped any, but with new Made in America rules, that should get changed in a hurry, and we should be able to be the tail that wags the dog.

You do understand we dont' HATE DP's right? We just don't find them particularly interesting. Just like we don't particularly like LMPC, LMP2 or what LMP1 is in the ALMS now. In order to be marketed, it needs to be marketable.

Here is the key, what Grand Am is now, will NEVER be popular. That doesn't mean that there aren't some things that shouldn't be learned from it.. as there is. The engine control, choices and management has been excellent. I'm not a fan of spec tires, but I do believe that all entrants should have access to any tires entered in the series, and a maximum price. BoP is controversial in any series, but both the ALMS and Grand Am have done a decent job with it.

I can only hope that decision making isn't governed by how certain peoples in charge are getting their pockets lined, as it has been the last half decade.

Brent, here is where the big problem in this discussion is. You are still trying to say mine is better than yours because... There really is no need to continuously go in circles about the past, except you keep bringing it up. You have to learn from the past, but from ALL of the past.

The rest of us have been discussing for years what is wrong with current racing, and actually understand it. We would like to move forward, and discuss what needs to happen to make things work in a more stable enviroment, and have fans that are interested.

1. Manufacturer Prototypes.
2. Available for all to purchase.
3. NO manufacturer entries
4. Cost capped, and controlled... not just to sell, but to build as well.

If you say no to any of the above, you are going to have another cycle. Which one you remove, determines the length.


By the way, if everybody could buy an Audi R18, or a Toyota in the same spec that the factory team has, for a million bucks, how many would there be running across the globe right now?

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by Purist

Sorry, Brent, but Dyson, MSR, Pickett, Taylor, etc are NOT marketable entities in and of themselves. The manufacturers ARE marketable entities in and of themselves. It's just that simple. If you want a popular, prosperous series, you NEED factory involvement at a meaningful level. Having Draconian rules that dictate to the factories will cause them to say "F-U" to your series.

I'm not up for draconian rules. I'm up for telling them up front that if you dominate the series, we will speed up the privateer teams to keep up with you, and if you don't like it, tough. Any ALMS fan knows how frequently Audi complained to the ACO and IMSA early and often. They did that in 2007-2008 entirely because they felt that the P2 Porsche RS Spyders weren't fair to them - we've spent how many millions here, we deserve to be winning everything in sight seemed to be their attitude. I am in favor of tamping down the factory squads because of the points I have made here ad nauseum, that being that if you don't ratchet them down to a point where the privateers can beat them, they will eventually drive them out as has happened several times before. That's not draconian rules, that's a reality that USCR has to do and the Grand Am DID. Yes, nobody here likes that fact, clearly, but if you don't want to be back to this point again in six or eight years regardless of how successful the series is you'll have to do this.

Besides that, the WEC will make them ignore the USCR no matter what they do. Do you think that now that they have a big, competitive series in Europe that Audi or Toyota or Porsche or Renault are gonna spend their money here? I highly doubt it, even if you don't demand they sell customer cars.

Originally Posted by Purist

I am okay with telling the factories that I will speed up the privateers to keep them close. I would also hint at the factories that, if they don't want someone else's car in privateer hands potentially hounding them, they might consider offering customer cars themselves. At least make an effort to dangle some carrots before bringing out the sticks.

Not laying out the rules early on is gonna be a problem. Again, I don't have any problem with any of this, but if nobody is offering customer cars - and aside from Porsche, nobody in the ALMS era did (I don't count Audi because they kept a tight leash on the Johansson, Champion and Kolles teams and only sold them R8s so that they could have more cars at Le Mans to challenge the other factories - Peugeot did the same thing with the 908s used by Pescarolo and Oreca) and with the WEC, the USCR is gonna be an afterthought if that much. Dangling carrots is a good idea, but you want to have the sticks ready. If you can get Porsche to commit to the idea of USCR teams running their cars, the idea would work, but I highly doubt Renault, Audi or Toyota would go for that.

Originally Posted by Purist

Again on the marketability, here are some examples. What became well-known was McLaren CHEVROLET, Dyson PORSCHE, Group 44 JAGUAR, Sauber MERCEDES, Momo FERRARI, and so on and so forth. It's not all that dissimilar to F1 history. You had Cooper MASERATI, Brabham FORD, McLaren HONDA, Lotus RENAULT, and Sauber BMW.

And that won't be different here. Right now, it's Dyson MAZDA, Pickett HONDA, Taylor and Action Express CORVETTE and engines in the Rileys from BMW and FORD. It's just that the cars are run by privateer teams, not factories. That's usually with the ones above, too - the Momo Ferrari was a privateer entrant with some factory support, not unlike how the above teams are operating now. Group 44 wasn't all that different. McLaren used big-block Chevrolet engines for a convenient, cheap and reliable power source. You'll still be able to claim in the USCR involvement of some of the greatest automakers in the world - Corvette, Ferrari, Porsche, Audi, BMW, Honda/Acura, Mazda, Ford.

Originally Posted by Purist

The GA-type model is NOT marketable on its own merits; NASCAR has had prop it up, even to the point of PAYING top privateers (Gainsco for one) to NOT race in the ALMS.

You got proof of that? Considering that the Gainsco Bob Stallings team is one of Grand Am's best squads and has been for years, I don't buy that one bit. I think this is more "The Frances are trying to destroy the ALMS!!" garbage.

Originally Posted by Purist

It might be sustainable for teams, in theory, but it won't draw crowds, or sponsors, or TV based on its own appeal. And if it can't draw those other things, the series is, in fact, NOT sustainable over the long term.

Then why is Grand Am buying the ALMS? Why isn't the ALMS successful? Why is Grand Am having no real trouble with grid sizes? They have two classes, the ALMS has five, and they are roughly getting the same grid sizes. I don't think either one of them is particularly successful.

Originally Posted by Purist

Having several factory teams fighting it out is NOT stale. Having a few set chasses and engines, with no outwardly apparent changes to the cars, for several years (DP anyone?) IS as stale and stagnant as it gets! Your sequence of events is incorrect, at least in terms of what happened to IMSA. The racing was dynamic, though a number of the privateers were gone. The problem became evident when the factories started going at it with each other, and those not willing to spend quite as much started to waver. That's when things really started to go.

But how do you intend to get the factory teams without tailoring the series to themselves from the off? Like I've said repeatedly, work on the series from the perspective of the guys we know will be racing there and are enthusiastic about racing there, not somebody who may be gone three years from now if they come at all. Yes, Daytona prototype rules are restrictive, and I agree that they are perhaps too much so. But the ALMS has not got that right either, and so they need to find a balance between the two extremes.

Originally Posted by Purist

Brent, you also overlooked the point that individual privateers are no more consistent than individual factory teams; having a large pool of teams doesn't change the actual success rate. HUGE swathes of privateers have fallen by the wayside, all on their own, over the decades. Many privateers of the WSC/SRP era just up and disappeared from Exxon IMSA, PSCR, USRRC, and GA by the time DPs came around. Audi had NOTHING to do with those teams going away!

This is true, but there were teams to replace them and turnover in terms of entrants always happens. No, individual teams are not any more consistent, it's just when you have a good series and they can run in it, there will always be somebody who will take the plunge - just like sports car racing after IMSA GTP, when some teams held on (Dyson, most notably) and other newcomers came. That isn't happening now in the ALMS, is it? Why?

Originally Posted by Purist

IndyCar is floundering, and in need of a coherent, positive direction going forward. There is also talk that Ganassi, Andretti, an Penske might leave for/ consolidate USCR efforts in the coming years. IndyCar is hardly a blip on the radar compared to the days of CART, with healthy crowds, teams, sponsors, and factory support. NASCAR wasn't anything like the national presence it is now back inthe early '70s. It would crumble without the factories (and their couple hundred million dollars a year) now.

1) Penske has been an Indycar team since the 1970s, Ganassi since the 1980s. They won't go. Penske was in ALMS and isn't now, because Porsche stopped paying him to do so. Ganassi will be part of USCR. Michael Andretti is a big Indycar race promoter in addition to a three car team owner. Why would he toss away that kind of investment? Yes, Indycar is a management train wreck, and you can thank the morons at 16th and Georgetown for that, firing Randy Bernard when he was starting to do some good work. Nothing's coming down the pike from there any time soon, at least not anything more than now.

2) NASCAR would hurt badly if the factories all ditched tomorrow, but it would not collapse, and many of the teams that are there now would still be there. Grand Am can say that, too. ALMS can't. And that's a problem.

Originally Posted by Purist

NONE of us WANTS factories to run amuck and wreck things! That should be clear to you at this point. Factories will need SOME reining in. That much is also clear. However, the series CAN'T be marketable, or attain any measurable popularity or prosperity, without some factory participation. This much is also PROVEN over DECADES of Sportscar racing history. This fact cannot reasonably be denied! Therefore, as Fogel says, a middle ground (a grey area) MUST be found, in order to provide a measure of stability, along with suitably exciting cars and nameplates that will draw fans and sponsors, and create a profitable and prosperous series.

I don't disagree that the grey area must be found, but the factories should be in at our discretion, not having us beg to them. The WEC fundamentally changes the relationship between sports car racing in Europe and in North America. Why would Audi come now? Why would Toyota? Why would Alpine? Why is Porsche going there rather than telling the ALMS before the merger announcement that they were coming, or saying so now so that the combined series keeps the P1s? Why did none of that happen? Because the factories aren't coming - they are going to the WEC. And why wouldn't they? By 2016, the Asian Le Mans series idea will be dead, Le Mans will be part of the European-dominated WEC for real and nobody at the ACO or FIA will care a lick about the USCR, and as such will have little concern for American factory entries. This is a real issue for the USCR, as before the ALMS was the standard bearer for big-time sports car series. It isn't any more, and its going to show in how much factory interest there is.

The nameplates will be here. Somebody has to produce the cars that the privateer teams will race with, no? And what are the odds that those are big names? Pretty certain. You're not seeing the gap between a nameplate car with a big badge run by a privateer team and a true manufacturer-run factory effort. The former should be encouraged. The latter is quite alright, in fact quite good, but has to be managed carefully to avoid the mistakes of the past. I'm not saying directly that the USCR should use Gen5 DPs, I'm saying that the rules need to favor the people we know are here. Get the base in order, then start expanding.

[Maelochs]

Why doesn't this dead horse run faster? I keep beating it!

(Oh, by the way ... read the available literature. Gainsco has been subsidized for a while and a couple years back threatened to pull out if it didn't get as bigger subsidy. I am sure Google can help ith that.)

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Why doesn't this dead horse run faster? I keep beating it!

(Oh, by the way ... read the available literature. Gainsco has been subsidized for a while and a couple years back threatened to pull out if it didn't get as bigger subsidy. I am sure Google can help ith that.)

Heck it was even in interviews last year given by Peter Baron who stated publicly that there were only three cars on the grid that weren't subsidized. By the way, can't find it, but Baron also suggested it was cheaper to run WEC P2, than Grand Am. It was an interview with Hindy.

GAINSCO who were ready to leave Grand Am, to run Corvette's in the ALMS, told me themselves that Grand Am money kept them in the game.

[Canada ALMS fan]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

The Indycar teams are there, because they make enough money to be there, otherwise they'll be gone. They have sponsors, because enough eyeballs watch the Indy 500... the rest of the season barely justifies the costs. They've marketed themselves, and done a decent job managing their series, after they just about buried Open Wheel. Still, they've need manufacturer dollars and involvement, which they've had in every season.

NASCAR very much lives on Manufacturer dollars, dont' fool yourself. It's survived at times without it, but it would be a heck of a challenge now if they all pulled all their dollars.

All the good privateer teams race in Grand Am? Don't be ridiculous.

By the way, I'll agree with the statement that Ganassi, Gainsco, Dyson and Muscle Milk aren't marketable entities.

It sounds like you just want Grand Am to continue, and it shouldn't. If it does, fair enough. The dozen or so fans who talk about it on Tommy's board can have at it and enjoy it. The rest of us will move on to something else.

Meanwhile, the rest of us who have been Le Mans style racing fans have been talking for YEARS, about what is wrong with what we like. Believe it or not, we actually know what the issues have been, and don't need to make up nonsense such as has been written above. It's been dead simple to us what the issues are. We are NOT asking for this to be like ALMS, and marketed by NASCAR. We know where it is broken and why. You seem to not be reading this correctly, or are so focused on making your points, that you aren't reading at all. I'm not sure what it is. You do understand that every formula has been boom and bust, including Grand Am... right?

A major issue with Le Mans style racing right now, is there really isn't anywhere to buy a car from anymore in LMP1. The suppliers have all gone away. Of course the ACO screwing up the rules for years hasn't helped any, but with new Made in America rules, that should get changed in a hurry, and we should be able to be the tail that wags the dog.

You do understand we dont' HATE DP's right? We just don't find them particularly interesting. Just like we don't particularly like LMPC, LMP2 or what LMP1 is in the ALMS now. In order to be marketed, it needs to be marketable.

Here is the key, what Grand Am is now, will NEVER be popular. That doesn't mean that there aren't some things that shouldn't be learned from it.. as there is. The engine control, choices and management has been excellent. I'm not a fan of spec tires, but I do believe that all entrants should have access to any tires entered in the series, and a maximum price. BoP is controversial in any series, but both the ALMS and Grand Am have done a decent job with it.

I can only hope that decision making isn't governed by how certain peoples in charge are getting their pockets lined, as it has been the last half decade.

Brent, here is where the big problem in this discussion is. You are still trying to say mine is better than yours because... There really is no need to continuously go in circles about the past, except you keep bringing it up. You have to learn from the past, but from ALL of the past.

The rest of us have been discussing for years what is wrong with current racing, and actually understand it. We would like to move forward, and discuss what needs to happen to make things work in a more stable enviroment, and have fans that are interested.

1. Manufacturer Prototypes.
2. Available for all to purchase.
3. NO manufacturer entries
4. Cost capped, and controlled... not just to sell, but to build as well.

If you say no to any of the above, you are going to have another cycle. Which one you remove, determines the length.


By the way, if everybody could buy an Audi R18, or a Toyota in the same spec that the factory team has, for a million bucks, how many would there be running across the globe right now?

Anytime the GA vs ALMS bickering fires up again (and it will) we just revert to this post as it sums up all that basically needs to be (and has been one hundred times) said. As you said, let's try to move forward. Also, to anyone who doesn't think the lack of an LMP1 level class won't lower the stature of the new series, see the ELMS event this weekend.

[TF110]

Yeah. With the WEC in town it takes a (big) back seat. What will be telling is the crowd that will show up at Austin this year for the WEC race vs. who shows up for the other sports car events that race there. GA, ALMS and V8SC included. Though ALMS will be the day before the WEC, so maybe it will help with the turnout for both.

[Scooter185]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

Besides that, the WEC will make them ignore the USCR no matter what they do. Do you think that now that they have a big, competitive series in Europe that Audi or Toyota or Porsche or Renault are gonna spend their money here? I highly doubt it, even if you don't demand they sell customer

the factories will go where there's money, especially in the NA market. Audi has its hands in a lot of pies, and will show up to race if it's of benefit to them. Don't think that just because the WEC exists there's not money to be made here

[nevertrustamidget]

Interesting information coming out of an interview this week. It looks as if the second WTR Corvette DP will be making an appearance later this season. When you add in the second 8 Star entry that should be up and running by the first part of June. That should raise the total DP entries for the year to 19. Possibility that the two teams may run the remainder of the season which would bring the field up to 15 DPs per events for the remainder of the season. With the announcement that Marsh is testing a Coyote DP later this season then 20+ DP for next season should be all but a given.

I would like to see the articles that so many have said exist to show that the DP field is subsidized by Grand-Am. I have seen Sponsors contengency plans in place when give the team a chance to make a few thousand each race. But have not seen any direct subsidies. I do know that Grand-Am is paying a much larger purse than ALMS. The DP purse alone at the 24 pays more than the entire 5 class purse at Sebring.

The manufacturers pay out heafty contengecy payment to the team running in their car. Mazda can potentially pay out $40,000 per event. They have a fairly decent program set up.

http://www.grandamerican.com/Competi...ContactIn.aspx

[FCYTravis]

Originally Posted by Canada ALMS fan

Also, to anyone who doesn't think the lack of an LMP1 level class won't lower the stature of the new series, see the ELMS event this weekend.

Please explain what three LMP1s would bring to the new series besides the ability to start-and-park for podiums. P1 is dead in the United States and has been for most of the last decade. Whatever you want to argue about the merits of both series, you cannot argue that a top class with three cars is in any way viable.

I generally agree with Fogelhund that the key is availability of equipment.