AU N EGL

Or relegate the ALMS race to second tier on the card

93Polo

I had rather watch these than a GT3 cup race

RacePro Engineering

Probably the wrong thread for this sidetrack discussion, so apologies in advance to Mr. Smoke.

It is difficult to say what, if anything, would have kept the Can Am alive - everything has its life-cycle. But I am certain that Penalize-the-Winner type rules would not have done the trick then, anymore than it does now. We are speaking of PROFESSIONAL racing - Group 7 – Unlimited formula. At the time, Can Am was the pinnacle of what America and Canada had to offer on the road courses. Was it exclusive? Of course!

Philosophically, to a racer, it is losing that makes the entire field step up their game. If one wins consistently, there is no burning drive to improve. Losing, or the prospect of losing, drives innovation, as you point out in the remainder of your post. But, maintaining rules that ensure the winners will be “dumbed down” sends a different message to the rest of the field: “Just wait a while, and everyone else will be as slow as you are.” I am not certain that makes for an exciting series, or one that will live for long.

You are finishing up here with my very point. If the Can Am series had not allowed (encouraged) bold innovation (unlike “spec” racers, or tightly controlled formulae), we probably would not even remember Jim Hall. If his high-in-the-air rear air foil was rewarded with weight penalties, or forced removal of such devices, then what would have been the point? If Porsche had not been embarrassed by the McLarens, we probably never would have seen Penske’s 917.

Winners like to be rewarded. Losers tend to innovate, and step up. It is natural racing mentality.

Ed

Zoxxo

This is all wonderful theory on paper BUT, the sanctioning bodies are in this to provide:

a. Racing that the participants enjoy and can AFFORD TO PAY FOR
b. Racing that the spectators enjoy and can AFFORD TO PAY FOR
c. Racing that sponsors can AFFORD TO PAY FOR

They are in the entertainment business as much as anything else.

History has shown that racing series that don't control costs will quickly die as "he with the most dollars wins." Maybe not right away but pretty darned quickly. If no one can afford to race in your series, said series is dead meat.

While you're arguing for allowing unlimited tech and unlimited budgets, others here in this very thread are saying "another rich guy racing series while we're left out in the cold." You can't have it both ways.

Racing has always been, and always will be, expensive. Top end pro racing insanely so.

IMSA has to balance entertainment, participation, sponsorship, costs, manufacturer interest, etc., etc. to keep things alive and kicking. Even Formula One has agreements in place re: spending limits (!) as even they understand that they will quickly have NO series if they allow one manufacturer to just outspend everyone else. So, the question becomes what methods to employ to balance out everyones' interests (fans, sponsors, manufacturers, racers...?)

I fully understand the frustration of all of this but it's a direct result of the transition from club racing and gentleman's racing to sponsored professional racing. Once you have access to large bank accounts the game changes. Wishing it wasn't so won't reverse the flow of time and history. The Genie is out of the bottle and it ain't going back in. The best that can happen is the balancing act that IMSA and others try to maintain.

Btw, Porsche was never embarrassed by the McLarens. Porsche turned their attention to North America after the euro rules were changed to maximum 3 liter engines to counter Porsche's domination of Euro racing with the 917! The 917-10 and then the 917-30 were designed and built specifically to trounce the McLarens. They did so and with all the privateers in Can-Am already running for "best of the rest" honors against the McLarens (semi privateers themselves) and occasionally the Chaparrals, everyone cried "uncle!" soon after the Porsches came in and that was the end of that. So, while we can all agree that the original Can-Am was wonderful while it lasted, the fact remains that the unlimited nature of the thing was the source of its downfall. Without some sort of control on the thing it was doomed from the start.

Sanctioning bodies the world over have learned from this experience. (IMSA had to learn from the GTP series - another wonderful series that died for much the same reason.)

Z//

AU N EGL

allow the Grand Am DP cars to run.

93Polo

It would be awesome if FIA GT and ACO could agree to one rules book

93Polo

Well thought out reply. The 50s/60s were an interesting and a great time for racers.

R&D and Fabrication costs, skills, and required technologies were such that privateers had the ability to compete in many areas. Also the performance levels while dangerous were much more limited by technology.

The umlimited formula could work for the most part. As long as teams could get access to a powerplant that had competitive packaging and power teams could build the chassis.

It is also interesting that factory support was more less at the indirect level for Can Am up until Porsche. Yes Chevy did supply motors to Chaparral and McLaren under the table before Porsche. Porsche dominance signaled the end of an age. The unlimited formula will never really exist again.

RacePro Engineering

Z -

ALL series come and go - with the possbile exceptions of Indy and F1, which seem to have found some secrets to longevity. To us, sitting on the outside, it is not as important HOW LONG something lasts, or HOW economically SUCCESSFUL it may have been, how well balanced it was, how fair to privateers, or even WHAT KILLED IT.

Since ALL SERIES DIE eventiually, what is important to us is the lasting contributions they made (make) while they were active. "History has shown" that the all-time biggest hits (mid-engines, monocoques, aero, deformable structures) have come from series where rules encouraged innovation, rather than stifled it.

There will always be huge disparities between the richest and poorest in any series. The real question is, will the richest BE ABLE to use its extra money to improve the sport? Legislating pseudo-equality in any racing series creates a "dead zone" of improvement. In the long run, who will remember GT3 racing? Spec Miata?

We remember Can Am because it was BOLD, not because it was equal.
Ed

Zoxxo

Yes, but all of those things were done by folks at a time when you welded tubes together, or riveted sheet aluminum together, used motorcycle engines or fire truck water pump motors - all of which could be done by clever folks in their workshops for relatively small amounts of money. No more.

I totally agree with everything you say (except that the jury is still out on IndyCar - they're hanging on by their fingernails. Only the cash cow of the 500 each year keeps it going.)

And I remember the Can-Am because it was a glorious spectacle with all of the world's most famous drivers participating. It was fast and LOUD and thundering and just way too excellent a sensory experience - something only a Formula One standing start brings to the table these days.

I do disagree with the underlying premise that there will forever be the kind of grand experiments with grand results that carry forward ad infinitum. There are limits to what you can safely and sanely do with X pistons, four wheels, two seats, etc., on a closed course. And those limits get brought down to Earth even more if you intend to have spectators anywhere in the vicinity.

I also disagree with the idea that racers are in it for "improvement". They are in it because it's fun and challenging. The improvement bit comes about as a side effect of the competition but it's generally not the reason for doing it. Manufacturers can certainly go racing "to learn" but it's very rarely for the purpose of improving X component and much more often to give their engineers a crash course in reality.

Look, big time racing no longer exists in its own vacuum where everyone shows up just to have a good time. Sprint car racing is probably the last real show that comes close (and calling it big time OR professional is kind of borderline at best.) As I said before, pro racing is now an entertainment business, plain and simple. The sanctioning folks have to do their best to make *everyone* happy, not just the racers.

Fans want someone to root for. They want to root for a driver, a car brand, a team, etc. And they want to see their team/driver/brand *win*. So do the sponsors of said teams/drivers/brands. It's all about sales and brand awareness and brand loyalty any more. Am I happy about it? No indeed. These days I go to the ALMS races to see the cars up close, watch practice and maybe an hour of the race, and then I leave. The racing bores me (especially now that they have inserted *mufflers* in them. Wtf??

And, last but not least, I could argue that the racers who are dealing with the "more weight because you won" problem should be doing precisely what you are arguing in favor of - improving the car in ways that minimize or moot the penalty. Instead of crying about it, deal with it and win anyway. Look at what the F1 egineers do - the FIA imposes new restrictions every year and every year the cars get faster...

It is what it is, my friend. You're preaching to the choir. I just understand what's happened and why and I sympathize with those trying to balance all the competing interests and still have something left that's worth bothering with at all.

Z//

Zoxxo

To run in ALMS? They'd definitely have to add some weight to a lot of the ALMS cars to get them slow enough for the DP cars to compete.

Laguna Seca 2011:

DP pole = 1:20.429
LMP1 pole = 1:13.927

Z//

sundiego

A Canam McLaren with some history runs about 250K.

http://www.race-cars.com/carsales/mc...05621860ss.htm

A championship car is more.

They were built to be rebuilt between race weekends, and best described as "a beer can with a big block".

They are expensive to maintain properly, and few have the *****/stupidity and skill to drive them, and those factors keep the prices down.

Oscar is one of the great characters around. He is energetic as an 18 year old, even now.

AU N EGL

Nope. Gande AM DP bodies, with different engines.

I think BUYING the car is the big challenge for the teams. The engine not so much

73-84 IMSA Widebody

watching/hearing old iron/fiberglass running hot sure makes me smile

63Corvette

BOTH are offered as "continuation" cars. Are ya buyin?