Conclusions and Calendars

Conclusions

The very long 2014 endurance racing season (Jan - Nov) finally came to a close. We saw the ELMS complete a highly successful season; their short-weekend, five 4hr race format is a winner. In the WEC, we welcomed Porsche into the LMP1-H ranks along with Rebellion and (briefly) Strakka into the LMP1-L. In North America we witnessed the first season of the merged former ALMS and GrandAm in the TUSCC.

The WEC and ELMS had mid-season breaks that were uncommonly long, to the point of forming nearly two separate seasons. Something needs to be done to tighten up those calendars.

In TUSCC, the "balance of performance" (BoP) came much closer to the objective of shoe-horning diverse cars into both the Prototype class and the GTD class than I expected. While I concede they did an amazing job with BoP, the differences between the cars, especially in Prototypes, still doesn't make the former LMP2 cars and former DP cars equivalent. I don't think it can be done while being scrupulously fair. We'll have to await the 2017 season and new regulations to finally have a single Prototype class in TUSCC.

The loss of LMP1 and the attrition in LMP2 teams from ALMS competing in TUSCC has taken a toll on my enthusiasm for North American endurance racing. Driving standards and the proclivity to call for full-course-yellow (FCY) flags have also subtracted their share of my excitement. I am willing to believe that the organizers will make significant efforts to improve things in their second season, but there is no assurance that those efforts will be adequate. I'll have to wait and see.

With the recent retirement of Tom Kristensen and Howden Haynes from Audi, the "dream team" that included Allen McNish, Dindo Capello, TK and "H" has completely left the scene. Their exploits in the ALMS and especially in Le Mans 2008 were real high points for me. Their absence adds to my ennui. Truly an end of an era.

So, what can we look forward to in 2015? New teams in LMP1 in WEC. New LMP2 coupes from HPD and Oreca in ELMS, WEC and TUSCC. Oh, and another long season ....

Calendars

Here is a handy summary of the 2015 endurance events:

So that makes 20 hours of racing in the ELMS, 66 hours for the WEC, and 68.8 hours in the TUSCC. There are 52 hours in the 4 rounds of TUSCC's North American Endurance Cup (NAEC) alone.

As I have done in the past, I am making public two Google calendars. The first is called "ACO Racing" and contains the ELMS and WEC calendars. The second is called "TUSCC Racing" and holds the North American endurance calendar. Here are the links:

ACO Racing links : HTML XML ICAL
TUSCC Racing links: HTML XML ICAL

Keep in mind that there are no events until January 24th (TUSCC Racing) and April 11th (ACO Racing).

As in previous years ...

These can be used directly from a browser, in Apple's calendar program, in Thunderbird/Lightning, and other calendar applications. You can find instructions for use of Google calendar with several popular applications here.

As more detail is provided by the organizers, these calendars will be updated to include event times, coverage etc. For those who are already using the calendars I published previously, those links are being re-used with new names. Last year's "ACO Racing 2014" becomes next year's "ACO Racing" and last year's "TUSC Racing 2014" becomes "TUSCC Racing" (since TUSCC no longer conforms to ACO rules).  As always the times will be for U.S. Eastern Time, with race local times included along with other details in the "Description" field.

Lap Times and Ligiers

This last weekend saw two endurance races at the Circuit of the Americas (COTA). This supplied the opportunity to compare similar cars in two different race series: the FIA/ACO World Endurance Championship (WEC) and the IMSA Tudor United Sports Car Championship (TUSCC) on the same track on the same day (Sep. 20th 2014).

My primary interest was in the LMP2 class in WEC, and I was curious on how the LMP2-based cars in the TUSCC series compared with those in the WEC. The Extreme Speed Motorsport (ESM) team fielded their TUSCC #1 HPD Prototype as the #30 LMP2 in the WEC series, and continued to run their #2 HPD in the TUSCC series. This allowed a pretty close comparison of nearly identical cars in the two series. Additionally OAK racing debuted the new Ligier/HPD coupe in the TUSCC series, and G-Drive has a comparable Ligier/Nissan coupe in the WEC. The biggest differences between these series in Prototype/LMP2 classes are that in the WEC you have to run with a Pro-Am driver lineup and the tire formula is open.  Here are the fastest race-lap times for these four cars:

The first thing to notice is that the ESM and G-Drive cars were very close in pace, despite the differing power-trains and body styles. ESM deserves credit for their maiden WEC outing in nearly matching the fastest race lap (set by G-Drive) in the LMP2 class.

The next thing to notice is the 2.702 sec. difference between the TUSCC and WEC ESM cars. The top "suspect" in this difference is the tire choice. TUSCC Prototypes run on a spec. Continental tire, while the WEC ESM LMP2 was running on bespoke Dunlop tires (as do most of the WEC LMP2 field). This is consistant with the 2.052 sec. difference between the two Ligiers.

A Look Back

I was curious about how the former ALMS/LMP2 and Grand-Am/DP  lap times compare with the TUSCC and WEC lap times, to get an historical perspective for the COTA track. So here are some fastest race-lap times from last year and this year.

The first thing to stand out for me was the stunning lap time set by the #26 Oreca/Nissan LMP2 in 2013. I am at a loss to find a ready explanation for the 2.726 sec. difference between the two years.

The only car in these comparisons that was actually faster than last year were the Grand-Am Daytona Prototype derived cars. The explanation for that difference is pretty obviously the additional 100bhp and added down-force they gained last winter in going from Grand-Am to TUSCC. The LMP2 derived cars from ALMS in the TUSCC series went from off-the-shelf Michelin tires to the spec. Continental tires and lost nearly two seconds. 

A Look Forward

Next year it is expected that there may be no open-top cars in the TUSCC Prototype class. ESM expects to take delivery of brand-new HPD coupes in November. Krohn Racing will field a Ligier coupe in 2015. HPD expects to sell another three coupes for TUSCC in 2015 to un-named teams (vapor-ware so far). Speculation is that ESM will not be running a full TUSCC season, concentrating on the four North American Endurance Championship (NAEC) rounds, as well as running some of the WEC rounds, including Le Mans. Tequila Patron is the sponsor of the NAEC as well as ESM.

Personally, I am glad to see new LMP2 chassis competing in TUSCC. It is a preview of what we might see in 2017 when the DPs will finally be retired.

Odds and Ends

The Limits of BoP

Much has been made of how well IMSA has managed to balance the performance of the former Daytona Prototypes (DP) with the former Le Mans Prototype 2 (LMP2) cars. I'll admit they have come closer than I had thought they would, but there are still significant differences between those two formulae that have direct impact in head to head competition. Even though on most tracks, the lap times of the two cars are similar, as has been pointed out many times, they get those lap times in different ways. Generally the DPs have the advantage in speed, while the LMP2s have the advantage in handling and braking. A bit more subtly, the DPs accelerate more quickly and bring their tires up to operating temperature more quickly than the LMP2s. This makes starts and re-starts a big problem for the LMP2s. The greater torque also helps the DPs in traffic, and makes it easier for them to defend a lead. It cost LMP2 cars wins at Sebring and at Watkins Glen this year. In both races an LMP2 car was leading the race until there was a final Full Course Yellow (FCY) near the end of the race. The advantage of quicker acceleration of the DP meant that on the re-start after the FCY doomed the LMP2 to defeat. In the case of Watkins Glen that final FCY was certainly called for, so that was the luck of the draw. The case at Sebring is less clear; in my opinion that last FCY was not called for and cost the Extreme Speed #1 the win. Those results affect the outcome of the four-round North American Endurance Cup race.

I don't know that much can be done at this stage to mitigate the "acceleration gap" between formulae without compromising the degree of lap time balance that IMSA has achieved. There are a couple of things that might be done to mitigate that other advantage (tire temps). If the pit-stop regulations were to revert to the ACO rules, where fueling and tire changes must be done separately, then there would be a greater premium placed on double-stinting tires and the lighter weight (less tire wear) of the LMP2 might be able to make up for their taking longer to come up to tire operating temperature. I don't expect to see this change, but I would welcome it.

Laguna Seca Lap Times

Another bit of information about BoP can be illustrated by looking at recent lap times around Laguna Seca. Both the Grand-Am DPs and ALMS LMP2s ran separately there in 2013 and together in 2014. The major differences in the DPs between those years was an increase of downforce and an increase in horsepower. The major differences in the LMP2s in those years were the change in tires.

 In 2012, the LMP2 cars ran on bespoke Dunlop LMP2 tires. In 2013, due to a pull-out of Dunlop from ALMS the teams were forced to source different tires and went to off-the-shelf Michelin tires for 2013. In 2014 the LMP2 teams were required to use the same spec Continentals as the DPs have run in recent years. A peek at the lap times for the most recent 3 years tells a tale.

Fastest Race Laps

The increased power and downforce gained 2 seconds for the DPs, while the required tire changes for the LMP2s cost them significant time in both years since the Dunlop pull-out and the switch to Continentals. This difference will show up when LMP2 cars from IMSA and the WEC are compared at the Circuit of the Americas in September.

How Do You Define "Endurance"?

This year the Laguna Seca round of the TUSCC was divided into two races: one for the "Pro-Am" classes (PC and GTD), and one for the "Pro" classes (P and GTLM). Each of these races were two hours long. In the past the shortest endurance race at Laguna Seca was two hours forty-five minutes and have been as long as six hours as recently as 2012. I understand why the street races (Detroit, Long Beach, Baltimore etc.) are shortened-up; they share a tight schedule with other organisations, but when your organisation controls the feature events as at Laguna Seca, that is disappointing. In a two hour race the GT-class cars need only one pit stop, and for all classes it is a sprint race.

New Prototype Class Announced by the ACO

A few months ago there was talk about a new prototype class to replace the aging LMPC cars. At that time the thinking was that an evolution of the FIA CN class would be the basis of a new lightweight prototype class. Now the ACO have annouced the basic specs for a proposed LMP3 class and it is not the new ligthweight class I was so excited about, but an apparent evolution of the LMPC cars. A good description of what is known about this new class can be found at RaceCar Engineering.

Instead of being a ~600KG chassis with a ~375bph V6, the ACO basically want what would be an LMPC coupe with a shark fin. Rather than a completely spec car, the chassis and bodywork will be set by regulation with a spec engine, tire, transmission, and ECU. The engine hasn't been settled upon yet, but it will be a V8 of 420bhp. That is exactly what the current LMPC runs: a 6.2L pushrod Chevrolet V8 . This is to be a cost-capped formula. As of yet no constructor has announced a product for the new class. I can't think of another V8 420bhp crate engine that would be less expensive than the Chevy, and with the cost-cap I would be surprised if another engine were chosen for this class.

In the LMP1-H regulations there was a conscious effort to appear "green" by requiring a hybrid powertrain. Why not move the new LMP3 to a lightweight formula that could also appear more "green"? I am a bit disappointed.

Online Endurance Race Coverage

Variations on Coverage

Since I am on a small island in the Caribbean and my local cable monopoly doesn't carry any of the channels that cover multi-class endurance racing, I am dependent on online coverage of those sporting events. This year there have been changes in the online media coverage of the Tudor United Sports Car Championship, the World Endurance Championship and the European Le Mans Series. I discuss the online coverage offerings from my own island perspective, those in Europe and elsewhere may have a wider selection of options for following their sport.

ELMS - Best bargain in multi-class endurance racing.

The online coverage of the ELMS rounds in 2014 are the same as last year: free full streaming coverage via Dailymotion.com of the race with Radio Le Mans commentary plus live timing and scoring on their website. As always, audio commentary with live forum participation was available on the Radiolemans.com website. Folks complain that they can't see the race in HD, and there are occasional net congestion glitches, but overall a good online package. Luckily for me, the live stream is available through the Dailymotion.com channel on my Roku 3 TV set-top box, making it very simple to watch the race on the larger screen. The ELMS does not publicly archive the full race videos, which is a shame, only short clips of various aspects of the race. Without a U.S. TV package, the ELMS does a good job for their online fans that would otherwise not be able to see races without going to the track. If they would add online Archives to the mix, it could attract an even wider audience.

WEC - You get what you pay for.

Last year the WEC rounds (other than Le Mans) were pretty much the same as the ELMS online coverage. For 2014, the WEC decided to charge a subscription fee for all rounds (other than Le Mans). This was a last minute surprise for those of us dependent on online coverage and at first even the live timing and scoring would require subscription. At the last minute T&S was made freely available. Like the ELMS, Radiolemans.com provided full live audio commentary of the WEC (including Le Mans) from their website. I bit the bullet and paid the 19.99€ price for the streaming coverage; it was similar in quality to that provided free by the ELMS with Radiolemans.com commentary and standard definition video. While I watched the race on my desktop computer, there are also FIAWEC "apps" for Android and iPad as well (subscription required). Like the ELMS, there is no public archive of the full race videos. Personally I don't mind paying the nominal fee for video, it beats paying a cable TV provider monthly for a bundle of channels I don't want at a much higher fee just to watch the races I want, even if that were an option (which for me it isn't). While not free, offering streaming video with excellent commentary is a key element in growing the fan base. About that commentary: there are some changes coming, so I will probably supplement the streaming video with a separate Radiolemans.com audio stream.

TUSCC - How to lose fans and (negatively) influence people.

For the first three rounds of the TUSC Championship there was free full live video streaming with commentary by Fox Sports, echoing the Fox Sports TV coverage in the U.S. combined with timing and scoring on the IMSA website. It came as quite a surprise to find out that live video of the TV broadcast of the Laguna Seca rounds were not available to me at all. The only live video I could get were from several on-board cameras with nothing but the ambient sounds in the cars. Live timing and scoring was available on the IMSA website, and audio commentary could be had on the MRN.com website. In previous years the ALMS worked with ESPN/ABC television in the U.S. and in addition provided free, full-race live streaming video with commentary supplied partially by John Hindhaugh and Jeremy Shaw (who are normally heard on Radiolemans.com). The switch to Fox Sports (in the U.S) meant that fewer people could actually watch the race on TV (Fox Sports is less available in cable packages), and with the elimination of free live streaming even fewer fans can watch live than last year in the ALMS (Grand-Am never had live online streaming). This loss of online streaming can't do anything but discourage the fan base; it is another example of TUSCC shooting itself in the foot. The elimination from North American endurance racing of the excellent audio coverage provided in the past by Radiolemans.com compounds this error. The only good thing in the TUSCC online coverage package is that full races and qualifying sessions are publicly archived on the IMSA website and on YouTube. My Roku 3 TV set-top box has a YouTube channel, so I can watch full races on the larger screen, once they are posted (1-2 days after the race), but it's better than listening to MRN live. Oh yes, and the archives are available in 720p HD. BTW, the ALMS and Grand-Am channels on YouTube have those complete races archived there too.

Final Thoughts

The ELMS and WEC should really archive their race videos. If the WEC need to protect their subscription revenue, they could post them long after the race is run, or at the end of the season. Those archives are an historical record and could serve to grow their fan base. Charging a subscription fee, especially on coverage that was previously available for free, is tricky. On the one hand the revenue can be used to improve coverage and delivery, on the other you may price yourself out of favor with your existing fans and you will be restricing your contact with potential new fans. Personally I don't mind paying a nominal fee, it is far better than what TUSCC has done with their live online coverage. What TUSCC has done right is providing archives of full races and qualifying sessions (with commercials edited out!) for on-demand viewing. I would like to see live race streams available as channels for TV set-top boxes (e.g. Roku, AppleTV, Chromecast etc.) preferably for free, but as a paid channel as a last resort. This would make the viewing experience easier for those who can't follow these races on broadcast/cable TV or afford going to the track. All three series need to do a better job of publicizing their online offerings. The last minute and un-announced changes are really not on; there is no excuse for them. There should be a well-designed web page that concisely describes the online coverage that should include answers to questions like: Will there be a live video stream? Is their a separate audio-only stream? Will it be free? Will it be geoblocked? Is their and app or TV set-top channel? What devices are supported? What time and dates are the races? Will qualifying be covered? How about timing and scoring? Will the videos be archived? You can find most of this information on the current websites, but not always in one place, and sometimes not in a timely manner. There is a need to make this information more timely, complete, clear and concise, and easily navigated.

Useful Links

ELMS Live Stream on Dailymotion:
 http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xpl59v_european-le-mans-series-2014-live_auto

TUSCC Channel on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC58em84jwiyM20qR-iqBDZw

Sebring 2014

I think fans of both the former ALMS and Grand-Am series have been curious about how the new TUSC series competitors would fare on the two iconic Florida tracks: Daytona and Sebring. In January we saw ACO-rules cars at Daytona for the first time in decade and a half. In the prototype class the Daytona Prototypes were expected to dominate, and for the most part they did; the nature of the track and the 2014 BoP measures assured that outcome. At Sebring the outcome was less certain. What I saw at Sebring this year was that IMSA did a remarkable job in equalizing the lap times of the DP and LMP2 within the prototype class. As we saw at Daytona, those two car types attained their respective lap times in very different ways. The LMP2 cars give up about 100hp to the DPs, so on the straights and accelerating through traffic, the DPs had the advantage, but in the braking zones and high-speed corners the LMP2s showed their pedigree.

The Sebring race itself was marred by too many full-course cautions. There were 11 safety-car periods and 1 red-flag period. In 2013 there were only 4 full-course cautions. The final safety-car period determined the outcome of the overall (and prototype class) winner. The #01 Gnassi Riley-Ford DP's last pit-stop came immediately before that last yellow, and had there not been a safety car period just then, it would have had to make an additional stop for fuel, which would have taken them out of contention. Meanwhile, the #1 Extreme Speed Oreca-Nissan LMP2 pitted later and would have been able to see the checker without an additional stop had the race remained green until the end. Unfortunately for the Extreme Speed team, that final yellow meant that the #01 DP would not have to make any further stops, and the frustratingly long (28min) safety car period did not leave enough green flag racing to catch Marino Franchitti in the #01. In trying to catch the leader, Ryan Dalziel in the #1 set the fastest lap of the race. But that is endurance racing; luck always plays a role.

My take on the DP vs. LMP2 race is that the LMP2 cars did much better the longer the green-flag stint. In the first half of the race, there were barely any full-stint green flag periods. The DPs gained an advantage from the abbreviated stints and from the re-starts that accompanied them; their greater torque meant better acceleration, which also helped in traffic. In the latter stages of the race things calmed down somewhat with regard to caution periods and the greater green-flag running allowed the LMP2 cars to show their stuff and they traded leading the race.

The playlist (pre-race show, race broadcast in 3 parts, and short highlight video) of the official TUSC Sebring race is on YouTube. My screenshot of the timing screen at the finish can be seen here.

Records?

According to the unofficial results of the Sebring race, a new track record was set by Ryan Dalziel in the #1 HPD prototype. Well, I guess since this is the first race of the TUSC series at that track, it is a record. But let's look at some other lap times to see where that time fits in:

Fastest Race Lap Times

The LMP1 class is no longer included in the 12 Hours of Sebring, so I guess that time could be excluded. In 2008, the LMP2 cars were not cost-capped and ran racing engines, so they can be excluded too. Finally last year's LMP2 car, running to the same basic regulations as 2014, was just beaten out by Ryan in the HPD, so yes it is a new record. This is pretty remarkable, since last year LMP2 ran an open tire formula (though with Dunlop having pulled out of the ALMS, the teams were stuck with off-the-shelf Michelins), while this year for the first time they ran on Continental spec tires. There were some restrictor breaks given to the LMP2-derived prototypes.

The Problem with Caution Periods

Beyond affecting the outcome of the race, numerous caution periods also frustrate teams and the enthusiasm of the fans. They also make bad video and the on-air commentators run out of things to talk about. There is no doubt that caution periods often are needed to assure the safety of drivers, corner workers, and fans. But other organizers and other tracks have found ways to reduce the impact on races and reduce the duration of these safety periods.

By designing and equipping strategic run-off areas with "snatch-tractors" or winches, an otherwise undamaged or slightly damaged car can be retrieved and returned to the track under a local yellow, no need for a safety car if a competitor spins or otherwise gets trapped in the kitty litter.

Another more radical innovation in safety periods has a name: Code 60. This was pioneered by the Creventic organization, which sponsors a series of 12 and 24 hour endurance races worldwide. Code 60 has also been adopted by VLN the organizers of the Nurburgring 24 and other races. Under Code 60 purple flags (and/or lights) are deployed and cars must slow to 60km/h (37mph) no matter where they are on the track, and no passing is allowed. This is the same speed that the pit-lane speed-limiters are set for, so maintaining that rate is simple. With no safety-car, the pits open sooner and there is no need for the elaborate "wave by" before the end of the safety period; their duration is shortened considerably. Had Code 60 been in place at Sebring, the time spent under caution would have been substantially reduced. We still would have needed at least 3 safety car periods and the red-flag period; repairs to the track and removal of extensive debris would require it. Purple flags don't stop fires.

 Not too long ago the  European Le Mans Series went for an entire season (5 6-hour races) without a full course caution. Of course, this was partly due to high driving standards as well as doing more under local yellows.

The Prototype Challenge class was involved in the major collisions of the race. One collision in particular pointed out the need for greater discretion among the drivers. The #87 PC car of Gaston Kearby made the most dangerous track re-entry from a spin I have seen in quite a while. It was "t-boned" by the #08 PC of Alex Tagliani at speed. Once the bad decision to re-enter the track was made, Alex could do nothing to avoid the collision. I'm curious about the fallout, if any, from this incident. This and another high-speed collision of PC cars proved the safety of the carbon-fiber tubs of the FLM09 chassis the hard way; all four drivers walked away from those collisions. Beyond the two collisions, it seemed that every time the race went green, another PC car was spinning off the track and were sometimes the cause of the safety-car periods when they became stuck in the runoff areas and had to be towed out.

Media Coverage

Prior to the race weekend it looked like U.S. coverage of the race would be restricted to 3 hours at the start of the race to live TV coverage on Fox Sports, with the remaining 9 hours streamed on IMSA.com for those outside the Fox coverage areas. On March 12th, there was an announcement on the IMSA web site that a new site had been established (http://www.fanschoice.tv/schedule) that would stream live video of some of the TUSC races, including Sebring. At the time it was unclear what restrictions there might be (geoblocked?). As it turned out, there seemed to be a last minute decision to stream the entire 12 hours of  Sebring live from the IMSA.com web site, and there didn't appear to be any geoblocking. The stream was clean, solid and supported up to 720p HD resolution. My only real complaint is that IMSA should have made this decision earlier and advertised it more widely. Oh yes, that new site did not appear to actually stream the race. I appreciate the improved streaming coverage, but the way it came about confused many fans.

The audio coverage of the Daytona race on MRN was, to be kind, disappointing. For the remainder of the TUSC season, MRN has added Greg Creamer and Ryan Eversley to the broadcast team. This is a major improvement and a step in the right direction. The problem was that in a 12 hour race, you need more than one competent team of commentators. For the shorter TUSC races (all but Watkins Glen and Petite Le Mans), this new team should prove a big win for MRN. I still miss the coverage we used to have from Radiolemans.com however.

These two steps (expanded streaming coverage and upgraded commentary) shows that IMSA is trying to make things better for the fans. They need to keep up the good work and do a better job of keeping everyone informed of the changes in a timely manner.

Officiating

I don't have the heart to discuss the officiating. I don't think anyone has expressed the problem better than Graham Goodwin of DailySportscar.com: http://www.dailysportscar.com/?p=25310

Daytona 2014: The Start of an Era

Well, it finally happened. The inaugural race of the new U.S. endurance racing era, the 52nd running of the "Rolex 24 at Daytona" by the Tudor United SportsCar Championship (TUSC) has been run. As I write this (Jan 28) the official results have not yet been posted but you can see the results in a screen-shot of my browser at the end of the race here. In the third hour of the race, fans were horrified by a bad shunt between Memo Gidley's Corvette DP and Matteo Malucelli's Ferrari 458 GTLM which put both drivers into hospital, Matteo suffering a serious concussion, and Memo requiring surgery for broken limbs and back. Let's all hope they recover fully.

After all the balancing of performance done over the last year and the testing at Daytona and Sebring during the off-season it might be interesting to take a look at some lap times:

Fastest Race Laps by year and class

So after some new aerodynamic upgrades, an extra 50hp and other allowances, a Daytona Prototype managed to cut just about 2 seconds (1.997) from last year's fastest lap. The DPs had to forego their new front splitter for safety reasons, but we may see them again on other tracks. The GTD class (last year's Grand-Am GT class) managed about a 1 second (0.947) improvement over last year; in both years it was a Ferrari 458 setting the pace.

I feel justified breaking out the DPs from the P2s and the Deltawing because these are really three very different cars running in a single class. On lap times it would appear as if TUSC had done pretty good job of balancing the performance of the cars in the Prototype class. If you had seen them on track, it would seem somewhat different. The P2 cars were very much slower on the long straights, being passed by GTD cars routinely, only to catch and pass them on the infield road course. The 3 car types within the prototype class get their lap times in different ways. The DPs have about 100hp and a much higher top end advantage over the lighter P2 cars, which have an advantage in the twisty bits and under braking. The Deltawing was very fast in the straights, but couldn't match the P2s in the corners. Daytona, and other power tracks will favor top-end speed, while more technical tracks should favor the more nimble cars. Let's hope that TUSC doesn't cripple the P2s in favor of the DPs; let their overall performance allow each their advantages to shine on the appropriate tracks. The P2s did better than I had expected: there was 1 in the top 5, 2 in the top 10, and 3 in the top 15. If the Morgan-Nissan hadn't had that alternator failure (lost 16 laps), there may have been 2 in the top 5, but that's endurance racing.

The new Mazda SkyActiv diesel prototypes were two of the slowest cars on the track, and they didn't make it to the finish. I think it was a brave effort to bring out such a radical car in so public a forum for what amounts to extended testing. I have my doubts about how much they can improve, but such guts deserve our patient understanding.

The end of the race was marred by controversy. At the checkered flag Level 5's 1st place GTD Ferrari was assessed a penalty for avoidable contact with the 2nd place Flying Lizard GTD Audi thereby giving the win to the Lizards. There was no contact between the two cars. Some 3 hours later, the ruling was reversed, returning the win to Level 5. This kerfuffle shows two things. The bad thing was they robbed a team of their public victory on the podium. The good thing was that TUSC eventually did the right thing. In the NASCAR-centric world the wrong would probably not have been righted; once the fans have left the stands, the race is done and no changes to the outcome would take place. So, I am optimistic that TUSC will continue to evolve and adopt those values that the ALMS exemplified.

About the Coverage

The Daytona 24 is one race that I have never been able to watch "live" in the past due to the fact that Grand-Am only ever televised it live on Speed, which my local cable monopoly never carried. Now Speed has become Fox Sports, and I still can't see it. I was able to see the first 2 hours of the race this year on the basic cable Fox channel. The only legitimate streaming video that I could have seen was between the hours of 9PM and 7AM  EST (10PM to 8AM AST) at IMSA.com, but the start of that stream experienced technical difficulties, so I went to bed. I got up at 5AM AST (4AM EST) to watch the last 3 hours of the streaming coverage, which ended early BTW.  I was at least able to watch any of several on-board cameras for the entire race (thank goodness). The audio commentary of Bob Varsha, Dorsey Schroeder and company was very good for the 2 hours on Fox that I could watch. I can't say the same for MRN commentary that was my only option for the other 22 hours.

I realized I was in for a hard slog when the MRN announcer stated that this year's PC class was known as LMP2 in last year's ALMS (face palm). No, afraid not. Last year the PC class was known as LMPC for "Le Man Prototype Challenge" in the ALMS. What made the error more glaring was that last year's ALMS LMP2 was actually running in this year's TUSC Prototype class. That was just a taste of the inadequate MRN commentary. Let's put it this way, much of the time I just listened to the car noises from the on-board videos and turned MRN off altogether. When I did listen to MRN, they seemed to cover the overall race leaders almost exclusively, even when some of the best racing was often in the GTLM or GTD classes. I have never missed Radio Le Mans more than for this race, but I fear that they will be missed on every round on the TUSC calendar. I think it a travesty that the voice of the ALMS has been lost to fans of U.S. endurance racing. My only hope is that in future races there will be a live stream (that I can actually get) that has the Fox Sports commentary team and/or members of the RLM team.

Beyond the audio and periodic video coverage, there was live timing and scoring that allowed me to follow the race. Back in the day I followed many races (ALMS, ELMS, Le Mans) with only RLM commentary and live timing and scoring. I would rather have decent commentary and good T&S, than mediocre commentary with video. I found a source for live timing and scoring that was (IMHO) better than, and certainly easier to follow, than that supplied by IMSA.com.

Live T&S: http://www.livescoring.us/scoring.php

The screen-shot of the results referenced at the top of this posting utilized this site.

Before the start of the season it was claimed that archived race video would be available on IMSA.com 24 hours after broadcast. It has been over 48 hours and I'm still waiting to see when it gets posted. Welcome to the future.

UPDATE: The Daytona race video archive was posted in 4 parts today (Jan 30th). So far a total of about 10-11 hours of the race. Fortuitously these videos are being archived on the Tudor Championship channel on YouTube and YouTube recently became available on my Roku 3, so by subscribing to that channel I can now watch the race archives conveniently on my LCD TV in up to 720p resolution. Oh yeah, and the commercials are edited out.