IMSA Balance of Performance Changes

[dbk]

http://sportscar365.com/imsa/iwsc/imsa-sets-sebring-test-bop/

GT adds 10kg and gets a boost decrease
C7R adds 10kg and a 0.4 mm smaller air restrictor
911 RSR loses 10kg
M6 GTLM gets a boost increase

:bored

 

[STORMCAT]

bummer.. penalized already.. Someone told me IMSA supplied lap timing eqpt that also secretly had other data recorders so the could see if someone was sandbagging...

 

[Awsum GT]

This really seems to go too far. Not in the first 5 or 6 and still penalized!

 

[Mike Mosing]

Dare I say we live in an entitlement era?

 

[Cobrar]

Using segment data gained from the race to generate a predictive (cumulative) result; then applying it relative to its competition.

Apparently IMSA actually embraces the Forza BS gaming world of virtual racing relative to the real world.

The real concern is that it reveals a huge weakness in the Ford Team - need for immediate improvement in the entertainment of the sanctioning body. Employ 'lessons learned' here with the French ACO right away to mitigate the penalties.

 

[Awsum GT]

Dare I say we live in an entitlement era?

Exactly!

 

[RALPHIE]

I continually believe that such "balancing" stifles engineering. To penalize in order to equalize says - "build a better machine and we will penalize you for being innovative and thus superior." Why make something new and better, if you will be penalized to a make you equal to a poorer design.

Years ago, engineering a racing car was intended to improve the breed, the results of which would be leveraged into a manufacturer's road machines to make them both better and safer. Are we at the point where yesterday's designs cannot be improved upon?

Watching the Rolex 24 at Daytona, I was very impressed by the performance of the Delta Wing - an innovative design that showed that superior performance can be achieved at much lower power levels. Yet, because it proves that better designs are achievable, it gets penalized further because other makes are poorer designs. As a past engineer of sorts, I find this appalling! Competition should improve the breed, not stifle innovation.

 

[dbk]

IMSA seems to be substantially worse than the FIA WEC BoP process. Overboard on the tinkering.

At the end of the day, these series believe that nobody is interested in watching a Formula 1-style "parade lap" race, where one car hits the first corner off the start and you can take a nap until the podium interviews. To some degree, that's probably true, so they try and make the racing competitive.

They also do what they have to in order to keep the manufacturers participating. Manufacturers spend big money to participate in the series for the exposure. IMSA and Fox have already done an unbelievably piss poor job managing the television viewing experience (internet is great), and if you get a manufacturer out there getting whooped on, good luck keeping them around. With the astronomical costs involved, it's easy to shelve a race program (Nissan).

I'm not that concerned about it. The guys at Ford I talked to didn't seem fazed.

 

[Cobrar]

For sure! Both F1 and IndyCar used to have rule books which outlined overall specs and interpretation of same by the respective team owners, led to some of the greatest innovations and competitive advantage. Great examples such as, Jim Hall's aero friendly Chaparrals, the 1994 Penske pushrods engine - 200+ HP advantage and of course our own 1967 Ford GT - all banned from competition.

While we all long for those days, innovation costs huge $$, and it effectively concentrated competitve advantage in the hands of the largest budgets. This is the pendulem swinging the other direction in order to keep enough cars in the field.

IMSA has a great product, potentially. It needs to show some restraint and instead, let innovation enjoy a period of exclusivity if you will. Agree, penalizing innovation is contrary to long term best interests and staying relevant to the public. Ask NASCAR.

 

[dbk]

Are you heading up to Pasteiner's? I'm on the way in a minute.

 

[fjpikul]

Boy, I sure am glad I never competed against you guys in pinewood derbies.

 

[SteveA]

All that money and time spent on design and engineering to build maybe the most beautiful single purpose but yet homologated rase/street car ever just to have BMW inter a box that they plan to sell 10's of thousands be as fast on the track? Ford should have "entered" the Focus and demanded the field be dumbed down.

 

[sr71]

I wonder if Ford is pushing the envelope by producing a street car with active aero, thus justifying pressure to allow it on future race cars? And why was it ever banned from racing?

 

[twobjshelbys]

That's a surprise. A friend of mine who until this year was one of the pit watchers for IMSA and had done Daytona for a while (but this year is in a different area) expected the GT would get more boost and less weight.

 

[BAT]

Where do they add the weight?

 

[PL510*Jeff]

Ask NASCAR. "?":rofl

IMSA is Nascar. Road tracks vs Ovals.

Many of the same Mfrs, owners, tracks, drivers, etc. etc. etc.

Nascar is now using digital dash boards with their same "back door" as IMSA. Coincidence. I think not.

To me always interesting but not perfect.

 

[dbk]

Where do they add the weight?

Ballast box in the passenger seat.

 

[twobjshelbys]

From the FIA spec:

The weight of ballast and its fixations must not be greater
than 50 kg. It must be secured in the cockpit in the front
passenger's location and according to the specifications of
the Article 253.16 (Appendix J) concerning dimensions and
characteristics of the fixations.
The securing system must allow the fixing of seals by the
scrutineers and must be designed such that tools are
required for its removal.
Any movable ballast system when the car is in motion is
forbidden.

 

[Cobrar]

Start training female drivers or Kentucky Derby jockies just to carry the implied 50kg worst case scenario? :facepalm:

 

[Cobrar]

Are you heading up to Pasteiner's? I'm on the way in a minute.

Now, today was remove 1500sqft of wood flooring day.