# Audi in St. Pete(rant)?



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

Although Audi has publicly said that they'll run the entire ALMS schedule, I found this: http://www.mariantic.co.uk/lmp/. If you go to the first link on this page and read the artlcle, you can understand why I'm so PO'd right now. I hope the article is crap, but it seems to reinforce what's wrong with sportscar racing right now.
My main point is this: If Audi want's to stay in the ALMS, then stay. If they want to leave, then leave and get it over with. And to the IMSA guys: If you want to adopt the ACO's regulations, adopt them in full. If not, just split from the ACO and make up your own rules please!
I'm starting to get fed up with this crap. How hard is it for Audi to run in the LMS? And how hard is it for IMSA to get out of their deal with the ACO. Believe me, the ACO would probably be more than happy not to partly pay for IMSA's races. And Audi would probably be more than happy to spend their money on somthing else.
I've had enough with politics in racing. It's ruined NASCAR for me, and it's ruining sportscar racing. I have a hard enough time putting up with everyday politics. And anymore, with all that's been happening over the past few weeks(me working, me trying to get a better job, my mom having breast cancer and being in the hospital and out of work, among others), I have better things to do.
I'm sorry if I offended anyone, but I've about had enough of this BS. If I wanted bullcrap, I'd watch NASCAR or F1.


----------



## R10_Telemetry (Feb 19, 2007)

*Re: Audi in St. Pete(rant)? (chernaudi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_Although Audi has publicly said that they'll run the entire ALMS schedule, I found this...

Therein lies the problem; one person's words dictate reality? I think not. Unless you hear it from Audi, don't believe it. See you in St. Pete.


----------



## Tanner74 (Jul 28, 2003)

*Re: Audi in St. Pete(rant)? (R10_Telemetry)*

What R10_Telemetry said.


----------



## 16v (Aug 4, 1999)

*Re: Audi in St. Pete(rant)? (chernaudi)*

I should start a rumor blog


----------



## Tanner74 (Jul 28, 2003)

Like Audi got sold to Ford? LOL


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: (Tanner74)*

First of all, didn't I say that I hope the article is full of crap. And secondly, I wish that the ALMS' problems would get fixed. I don't like the current prototype rules. I think that it hurts the LMP1 field. I mean, why run in LMP1 when you can spend the same money and run in LMP2 and perhaps have a shot for overall wins, and have the consolation prize of class wins/podiums.
I'm with the ACO, and the factories need to get out of LMP2. But short of threatening to kick Porsche out of the ALMS(which they won't, because they bring in too much sponsor money), there's really nothing much that can be done about it. At least Acura has said that they want to run in LMP1 soon.
And also remember this. There have been rumors(although unproven, at least as of yet) that one of the big three American auto makers may be pulling out of NASCAR in the next couple of years. My bet would be on Ford, as they have the most to gain by pulling out. The field the fewest cars, and possibly have the smallest buget among the NASCAR manufactures. In my perfect world, Ford would pull out of NASCAR, take Jack Roush and Robert Yates with them, and take the Acura route by building a car based on a customer chassis, and run LMP2 as an R&D deal, and moving up to LMP1 after a couple of seasons. But it's an absolute pipedream, as Ford also has the most to gain by staying in NASCAR(the quality of their teams, and they always have at least 1 or 2 drivers running for the championship).
And its even more worth remembering this fact. Audi has complained about unfairness and inconsistency in the rules for about 8 months now. But the American Le Mans Series was founded by Don Panoz after he had accused former IMSA owner Andy Evans(probably due to his NASCAR ties) of trying to screw his team over through rules changes. Maybe Dr. Don should remember what he did almost 10 years ago.
I'm just disapointed that IMSA feels that the LMP2 cars need to compete for overall wins, when it was never really the intent(yes it was initially the case for LMP 675, but the cars were too slow or unreliable, usually both). I mean, Panoz Motorsports owns Indy car builder G Force, who helped Williams build the BMW LMR and builds the new CART Champ Car chassis. And the Courage LC70 can be adapted to several different engines and Xtrac and Ricardo gearboxes, and from what I've been able to gather from the Le Mans Series testing at Paul Ricard, the problem with Dyson's Lolas was the AER engine, as the Judd powered LMS cars are considerably faster. I say help out the guys who want to run LMP1 first, then bump up the power on the LMP2s if that fails.


----------



## 16v (Aug 4, 1999)

*Re: (chernaudi)*

5 paragraphs and there's yet to be validity to this??


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: (16v)*

I'm trying to say that the current rules have really messed up the prototype ranks. I think that it's too appealing for a big manufacture to run LMP2 full time, instead of like Acura, who are using it as R&D for an LMP1 effort. Porsche needs to be in LMP1, but they've said that they're gonna stay in LMP2 until: 1) the rules start to favor gas engines, or 2), someone makes them move up. Intersport moved to LMP1 because of the factory presense in LMP2. It also doesn't help that the cars all cost about the same either.
I wish someone would buy an LMP1 car and run it full time. If had the money and the know how, I'd build one in my back yard, but as I don't have enough of either, it's entirely out of the question.
And I'd like to know what could be done to fix this. Should IMSA adopt the whole of the ACO regs? Should IMSA dump the ACO? Should Audi leave the ALMS aside from the endurance races? What should be done? Should anything be done?
I guess that I'm most PO'd about is everyone trying to politicize everything. Politics suck, period, and don't belong in motorsports. And if it weren't for political horsecrap, IMSA and Grand Am probably wouldn't have split. The same is true about CART and the IRL.
So, to me, IMSA either needs to distance the classes, or combine them, but not what they're doing now.


----------



## Tanner74 (Jul 28, 2003)

I hate saying this but as much as I like Audi, Audi has no competition in the P1 class. To keep the sport interesting and I agree with them on this, they need to mix it up between the P1 and P2 class. Okay chernaudi, you might not like this but as a spectator, the only thing that's making it exciting for the R10 are the passes of the other cars in the other classes.
The other thought here I have is, why would anybody even want to go up against Audi? Audi has a huge budget for this program, and for somebody to be a worthy competitor and to make it also worth their time, a lot of resources would be needed, something I don't think others have compared to Audi. Audi entered to win and to prove their technology on the track. I wouldn't mind seeing Peugeot come in but unfortunately it doesn't make sense for them to race in North America as their cars aren't sold here so there's no point for them on a return on investment.
Besides, what sport DOESN'T have politics involved. Why even worry about it when it's out of your hands right? Just watch the races and enjoy. Even if Audi wasn't in the race, I'd still watch the series.


----------



## R10_Telemetry (Feb 19, 2007)

*Re: (Tanner74)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Tanner74* »_Besides, what sport DOESN'T have politics involved. Why even worry about it when it's out of your hands right? Just watch the races and enjoy.

My thoughts exactly. And for all the speculators and rumour prone fans, AUDI AG Kommunikation released the following this morning:
Ingolstadt, 27 March 2007
New challenge for the Audi R10 TDI 
· Diesel sports car to contest its first race on a street course 
· Second round of American Le Mans Series in St. Petersburg 
· Audi confirms US commitment with TDI Power 

The LM P1 prototype was developed for the circuit at Le Mans, which is one of the world’s fastest tracks featuring long straights and quick corners. The average speed per lap at Le Mans is more than 230 kph, while the medium speed in St. Petersburg is expected to be less than 160 kph. 

The roughly 150 kilogram lighter Acura/Honda and Porsche LM P2 sports cars which, due to a change of rules, are allowed to compete in the American Le Mans Series with more engine power than at Le Mans, were already nearly equal to the Audi R10 TDI in the Sebring season opener on account of the regulations. On the slower street courses, such as St. Petersburg, their benefit from the 150 kilogram weight advantage in the LM P2 class will even be greater, as it affects acceleration, cornering speeds, braking distances and fuel consumption considerably.

Still worse for Audi, the Audi R10 TDI – as a diesel sports car – has to compete with a fuel tank that has been reduced by ten percent: instead of 90 litres, the fuel tank contains no more than 81 litres in 2007. At Sebring, this restriction already resulted in the Audi drivers having to refuel up to five laps earlier than the LM P2 cars – despite the low consumption figures of the diesel engine. In St. Petersburg, the situation will be similar. 

Despite these serious handicaps AUDI AG decided to continue its commitment in the American Le Mans Series to give as many American spectators as possible the opportunity to witness the revolutionary Audi R10 TDI on the race track. After all, the "whispering revolution”, as fans are calling the R10 TDI because of its quiet diesel engine, heralds a major diesel campaign by Audi in the United States.

The city race in St. Petersburg on Florida’s Gulf coast will be staged in conjunction with the North American IndyCar Series. For the teams of the American Le Mans Series, it will be a two-day event. Before qualifying on Friday afternoon, the teams will have only two 60-minute free practice sessions. The race will start late in the afternoon on Saturday, at 5:05 p.m. local time (11:05 p.m. in Germany), and continue into the hours of dusk. 

For Audi Sport, St. Petersburg is by no means unknown territory: In 1988 St. Petersburg provided the venue for the finale of the TransAm Series, in which Audi triumphed with the 200 quattro. That race in St. Petersburg was won by two-time World Rally Champion Walter Röhrl. It was Audi’s last appearance in the TransAm Series before – in 1989 – Audi changed to the IMSA GTO Series due to a change in the regulations.

Quotes before the race in St. Petersburg

Dr Wolfgang Ullrich (Head of Audi Motorsport): "The diesel racing commitment in the American Le Mans Series is important for promoting diesel engines in America. That’s why we decided to continue competing in the American Le Mans Series. We know, however, that in view of the current technical regulations, it will be very difficult for us being successful in the upcoming races. Audi is accepting this challenge nevertheless. We’ve had some positive discussions with the management of this racing series concerning the future developments of the rules.”

Dindo Capello (Audi R10 TDI #1): "Generally, I like city circuits, Houston – with the R8 – was a great race for us last year. But we know that street courses are not optimally suited for our Audi R10 TDI. It was developed for long straights and quick corners like the track at Le Mans. For me, the lighter LM P2 cars are the favourites in St. Petersburg. But we want to win the championship. This means that we also have to be competitive on circuits that are less suitable for our car.”

Allan McNish (Audi R10 TDI #1): "None of us has been in St. Petersburg before – apart, unfortunately, from some of the Acura/Honda drivers who know the track from having raced IndyCars there. But with a sports car, St. Petersburg is new territory for them as well. A street circuit brings in a lot of factors we normally don’t see. You have to drive even more precisely because the walls are unforgiving. Apart from this, the car has to be able to handle the bumps and different road surfaces. So far we’ve always managed doing a pretty good job of setting up the R10 TDI for various circuits – this is also proved by our 100-percent record of success. But I’m convinced that the LM P2 cars – thanks to their weight advantage and the engine power they’re allowed to use at the moment – will occupy the front row of the grid, and perhaps the second as well. The 150 kilograms of weight difference are particularly notable when braking and cornering in hairpins.”

Emanuele Pirro (Audi R10 TDI #2): "I’m very much looking forward to St. Petersburg. Sebring was a great race and showed us the strength and high level of the competition. As a racer I’m really excited about this – even though we’ll be having a difficult time on a city circuit like the one in St. Petersburg. At Sebring, 50 percent of our focus was still on preparing for Le Mans. From now on, we can concentrate on the championship 100 percent. That’s exactly what we’re going to do, and we’re going to give our best to score as many points as possible.”

Marco Werner (Audi R10 TDI #2): "Actually, I like city circuits, and I’m looking forward to racing on one again. With the Audi R8, I was very successful on city circuits in 2003 and in Monaco I won in Formula 3. Such tracks suit me well. But looking back on Sebring and analysing the R10 TDI’s advantages, I realise that we’ll be having extreme difficulties in the future, particularly on city circuits.”

Dave Maraj (Team Director Audi Sport North America): "At Sebring, we saw how fast the new LM P2 cars are. They’re lighter and thus very agile. Acura/Honda impressed me in particular. They were competitive straight away. They’ll be giving us a hard time in St. Petersburg.”

The schedule in St. Petersburg

Friday, 30 March
08:15 – 09:15 Practice 1
13:10 – 14:10 Practice 2
14:50 – 15:10 Qualifying (LM P1 / LM P2)

Saturday, 31 March
11:50 – 12:15 Warm-up
17:05 – 19:50 Race


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: (R10_Telemetry)*

There are actually a few things going on here with the Audi complaining and I dont think they are doing anything positive for their image with all this complaining, and frankly, I dont think they really have the right to complain either. Lets look at their complaints, with two major ones in this latest press release, the smaller tank and the LMP2 rules.
Is Audi mad at the ACO or IMSA?
The smaller fuel tank was mandated by the ACO, NOT IMSA. So that is a rule that they will face even at Le Mans, so complaining about IMSA and throwing that in there like its their fault is not really fair imo. If Audi has a problem with the fuel tank size, they need to take it up with the ACO, not IMSA.
Secondly, the P2 rules for air restrictions. While the ACO has mandated a smaller restrictor for the P2 cars in order to slow them down a bit and keep a wider separation between the classes, Audi built their car to the rules established a couple years ago and currently the P2 cars are racing to those EXACT rules as when Audi built their car. So yes, the P2 cars should be a little slower this year, however, they are NO SLOWER than Audi should have expected when they built their car.
So again, this is a complaint that I see falling on deaf ears. You built a car with a certain expectation in rules for both P1 and P2 and right now IMSA is using those EXACT rules.
So Audi, imo, simply wants the wins handed to them. They dont want to race to the rules that were established when they built their car, they want the new "artificial" rules that slow down the other classes.
Audi put in their recent press pack that there is now an "Artificial Class Battle" out there. Well, it could easily be argued that it goes the other way and that the current rules make for "artificial wins" for Audi since they slowed down the other cars to make sure P1 can stay out front.
They are racing right now to the exact rules they raced with last year in regards to class speeds. Suck it up and race. If Porsche could make their car faster for '07, then Audi can do, and has by the look of things at Sebring. Why all the complaining? Race.
It seems that Audi has already set up the excuses for losing to a P2 car this year through its press materials and their press releases. What would they have done if the ACO handnt CHANGED the rules for this year?
Everyone also knows that IMSA has the right (with the ACO blessing btw) to alter the rules as they see necessary. So that shouldnt have been a surprise to Audi either.
Bottom line, ACO changed some rules, be upset with them. IMSA kept some rules the same, so its a base line that they already should have been able to plan for.
At this point, just shut up and race. Or dont, its Audi's choice. They know their options and have the right to do whatever they want. I cant see why they are getting so upset over rules that actually DIDNT change.
All that said, personally, I would have preferred to just see IMSA keep the ACO regs exactly and call it a day, but they didnt and that is their right. However, like stated above, Audi built a car with the speed of the P2 cars under the current rules, why all of sudden the bitching?
Lets hope from here on out everyone just shuts up and races.


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: (.:RDriver)*

Well, would Audi complain if I ran a Ford based 5.8 liter V8, like what Panoz ran? I'd be taking advantage of a loophole in the rules that the ACO and IMSA share: bigger restictors for 2 valve a cylinder OHV engines. And by putting it in what ever car that I want, and just by choosing to run such an engine, I'm taking advantage of probably the biggest loophole in the regs: building/assembling a car any way that I want within the regs. That's a right reserved to all competitors. If Audi, Acura and Porsche can build cars like that, why can't anyone else. And Acura has shown how simple it is: just buy someone else's customer chassis, and rebody it, and put in your perfered engine/gearbox combination.
And as I've said, if IMSA wants the classes to be so close, why not just combine them? They did it before, in 2004. Why not again. 
Or if they don't want the classes combined, distance/distinglish them some how other than the class sticker/color of the car number and 1-2-3 lights? I wish that they'd do one or the other, not the half baked setup they have now.
I think that everyone involved caused this mess(Audi, IMSA, ACO, FIA, Porsche, etc., even the fans). And everyone should work on a compromise to get us out.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to cause this mess, and it shouldn't take one to fix it. And I think that I have a solution: Just combine the current LMP1 and 2 classes. Give the LMP2's slightly larger air restictors and a slight weight increase, and we'd be set. And create a new LMP2 class similar to IMSA lights. I mean, why not-it worked in '04, and Audi didn't complain at the time either.


----------



## 16v (Aug 4, 1999)

you'd be uncompetitive so I doubt they'd complain


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: (16v)*

See, that's exactly what I mean. And I don't see a LMP2 car being driven 10/10s as much different. I highly doubt that Acura was pushing very hard at Sebring. That's why the got all their cars to finish without major problems. Meanwhile, the Porsche guys drive the guts out of their cars. They beat a relatively crippled R8 only once doing it. What makes them think that they can beat the R10 driving like that?
And I guess the big question I want to ask Jimmy is why Audi didn't complain when the R8 was becoming more and more resticted, but they cuss and moan a storm when IMSA declares rules stability between LMP1 and LMP2 with the R10?
And Dr. Ullrich says that they've had some positve disscussions with IMSA about the rules. What does that mean? I wish that everyone would shut up and race and forget about this-Audi, the LMP2 guys, IMSA, the ACO, and the fans.


_Modified by chernaudi at 1:37 PM 3-27-2007_


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: (chernaudi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_Well, would Audi complain if I ran a Ford based 5.8 liter V8, like what Panoz ran? I'd be taking advantage of a loophole in the rules that the ACO and IMSA share: bigger restictors for 2 valve a cylinder OHV engines. And by putting it in what ever car that I want, and just by choosing to run such an engine, I'm taking advantage of probably the biggest loophole in the regs: building/assembling a car any way that I want within the regs. That's a right reserved to all competitors. If Audi, Acura and Porsche can build cars like that, why can't anyone else. And Acura has shown how simple it is: just buy someone else's customer chassis, and rebody it, and put in your perfered engine/gearbox combination.

I wouldnt call that a loophole at all, its just THE RULES. 2V engines generally dont have the same capabilities as the multi valve engines and therefore have the larger restrictor in order to help them out and make them competitive. The option is there for anyone that wants to run a 2V head, its not a loophole and therefore Audi and no one else would complain.

_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_And as I've said, if IMSA wants the classes to be so close, why not just combine them? They did it before, in 2004. Why not again. 

When did they combine classes? There have always been separate prototype classes.

_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_Or if they don't want the classes combined, distance/distinglish them some how other than the class sticker/color of the car number and 1-2-3 lights? I wish that they'd do one or the other, not the half baked setup they have now.

Why is this a problem all of a sudden? It hasnt been till now. How do you propose making them more obviously different?

_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_I think that everyone involved caused this mess(Audi, IMSA, ACO, FIA, Porsche, etc., even the fans). And everyone should work on a compromise to get us out.

I dont see this as a _problem_. You have rules that have been in place, remember they didnt all of a sudden change, they kept them the SAME. Why werent people complaining last year that P2 was too fast. This whole argument and complaining is silly.

_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_It doesn't take a rocket scientist to cause this mess, and it shouldn't take one to fix it. And I think that I have a solution: Just combine the current LMP1 and 2 classes. Give the LMP2's slightly larger air restictors and a slight weight increase, and we'd be set. And create a new LMP2 class similar to IMSA lights. I mean, why not-it worked in '04, and Audi didn't complain at the time either.

That doesnt do anything for anyone. Do you think Audi would be happy with that? NO, its the same thing except that if they lose they REALLY lose, at least now they still win their class.
It also defeats the entire purpose of allowing people to run ACO spec cars in racing in the US other than just Le Mans. Right now all that is different is that if the P2 cars want to go to Le Mans, they put in a slightly smaller restrictor, nothing else. If you combined classes they would have to be running completely different cars. P1 and P2 are designed to completely different specs and it doesnt make sense to combine them. However, if a P2 can beat a P1, then that is just good engineering under the rules.

_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_See, that's exactly what I mean. And I don't see a LMP2 car being driven 10/10s as much different. I highly doubt that Acura was pushing very hard at Sebring. That's why the got all their cars to finish without major problems. Meanwhile, the Porsche guys drive the guts out of their cars. They beat a relatively crippled R8 only once doing it. What makes them think that they can beat the R10 driving like that?

What makes you think they are actually trying?
It seems the only ones concerned with this are the P1 cars and the Audi fans. I would bet that Porsche and Acura are sitting back and just letting things happen and they are going to race to their own rules. They are simply out to win P2, sure they'll take an overall if given to them, but they have bigger fish to fly and that is the P2 crown. They will race each other and let Audi do what it thinks it needs to. I would bet if IMSA put in the current rules, they would just say ok and continue to race each other. Its IMSA's idea, not Porsche or Acura to keep he same rules as last year.

_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_And I guess the big question I want to ask Jimmy is why Audi didn't complain when the R8 was becoming more and more resticted, but they cuss and moan a storm when IMSA declares rules stability between LMP1 and LMP2 with the R10?

Why would they complain, they were given HUGE rules breaks to simply be able to run the car. Remember, that car was totally illegal under ACO specs and IMSA granted them the rules breaks to be allowed to race here. It suited Audi ok for IMSA to make their own rules when it allowed the R8 to continue to run, but now that they are trying to put on a show with P2 cars, Audi complains.
"Hey IMSA, thanks for taking care of us the last couple years, BTW, we're mad at you for not living by the rules now that it suits us better."

_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_And Dr. Ullrich says that they've had some positve disscussions with IMSA about the rules. What does that mean? I wish that everyone would shut up and race and forget about this-Audi, the LMP2 guys, IMSA, the ACO, and the fans.


The ONLY ones causing any ****storm is Audi. IMSA laid out the rules, which again, are no different than last year when it comes to power, Acura, Porsche and others are simply running to those rules. Audi is the only one complaining and causing problems.
This has turned into far more than it needs to be thanks to the Audi fans jumping on the bandwagon and causing problems. But all Audi needs to do is sit back and race now that they have said they will and stop complaining and everything will be just fine.


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: (.:RDriver)*

Well, I was a Panoz fan when Audi first came in, and I didn't complain that Audi handed their butt's to them 80% of the time.
And the big thing I'm concerned about is why have two classes, when they're so close together right now. And IMSA did combine elements of the LMP900 and LMP675 classes in '04-why would Lola B160 AERs(LMP675 cars) run against the R8 in the same class?
And I think that the fans in general are part of the problem. They got PO'd with the Audi domince status quo, then they b****ed when IMSA tried to do something about it. I guess that the sanctioning body can't win either way. I guess that I can't win either, as I'm just one person and Audi, IMSA, the ACO, and the LMP2 teams probably don't give a damn about what I have to say anyways. You can't fight city hall, you know.


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: (chernaudi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_
And the big thing I'm concerned about is why have two classes, when they're so close together right now. And IMSA did combine elements of the LMP900 and LMP675 classes in '04-why would Lola B160 AERs(LMP675 cars) run against the R8 in the same class?

They didnt combine them. When there was the P675 and P900 classes they were two different means to an end and the ACO hoped that the P675 cars could compete overall with the P900 cars. So there were some cars built to P675 rules that were very close in performance to the P900 cars.
When the P1 and P2 rules took effect in 2004, the rules were supposed to make a clear difference between the two. So the highly built P675 cars, those with carbon tubs and built to the highest extent of the rules, were put into P1 since their original design parameters were meant to make them compete with the top class cars. So logically, they should be in the same class since the new P2 rules were more restrictive than the P675 rules and therefore they couldnt leave those cars in the P2 category.
So the two classes were not combined, cars built to the old spec were put into the higher class since that is what they were designed to race against.

_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_And I think that the fans in general are part of the problem. They got PO'd with the Audi domince status quo, then they b****ed when IMSA tried to do something about it. I guess that the sanctioning body can't win either way. I guess that I can't win either, as I'm just one person and Audi, IMSA, the ACO, and the LMP2 teams probably don't give a damn about what I have to say anyways. You can't fight city hall, you know.

No, its two different groups bitching. Those that are Audi fans and those that arent. Before it was the guys sick of Audi winning complaining. Now its those that dont want Audi to lose complaining. Again, not justified in my opinion. The rules didnt change they are the same as last year and they are what Audi built their car to go up against. Live with it.


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: (.:RDriver)*

I'm getting to the point that I just want to tell Audi to accept IMSA's rules stability, the LMP2 guys to be content to go for class wins, and the ACO and IMSA to drop their infighting. Because I feel that everyone has more important things to worry about.
Audi should worry about winning races, not the current rules. Porsche should worry about an LMP1 car if they want to go for overall wins on a constant basis. And IMSA and the ACO need to worry about developing a consistant, fair rules package that they can agree on, because the ACO even recently has said that they and IMSA aren't 100% on the same page. And many insiders say that IMSA should worry about marketing their series, and improving their product, more than making coanstant rules changes in search of a short term on track fix.
If Audi wants to race a factory, wait until Acura comes to LMP1 in a couple of years. If Porsche wants the diesels pegged back, get the balls to build a customer LMP1(just like how I feel that Audi has the resources to beat the LMP2's, Porsche has the resouces to build a competive LMP1). And if the ACO and IMSA can't agree on a rules package, just live and let live, and agree to disagree.
Which is probably the best thing that can happen right now.


----------

