PC Teams Weigh in on Entry Caps, Schedule Changes

IMSA President and COO Scott Atherton said he understands some of the frustrations from PC team owners.

“I think it’s a natural reaction to any potential cap or restriction,” Atherton said. “I’ve looked at how our car counts have played out this year. PC has been a very successful category for us and there has been a lot of interest in it. I think that will continue.

“If some teams that are currently looking at PC now have a reason to pause, I would rather that be the case on October 11 than January 11. That’s why we moved as quickly as we could once we had the information available to us.”

Atherton has not ruled out possible changes in the pipeline, stressing that the car capacity guidelines remain tentative.

“If we do find ourselves that situation, I’ll be the first to say that we’re going to leave the option open to come back and correct or to modify again,” he said. “I don’t think we’re going to be there. I believe the information we’re working with is factual. But a lot can happen between now and when this all officially breaks cover in January.”

Gentilozzi believes there still could be further changes in the schedule and is hopeful that Canadian Tire Motorsport Park will return to the PC calendar. The former IMSA and Trans-Am champion suggests having split Prototype and GT races at circuits where car capacity is an issue.

He feels the decision to split the races at Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca between Prototype/GT Le Mans and Prototype Challenge/GT Daytona does not make financial sense or follow with the IMSA tradition.

“I think culturally, socially and for the best result for the sanctioning body, we’re far better off having two important races with factory participation as we had in IMSA for 20-plus years,” Gentilozzi said. “That’s what it was like. We went to Daytona and everybody raced together. We went to Watkins Glen, everybody raced together. But when we went to the Miami Grand Prix, you had a Prototype race and a GT race.

“I guess I don’t understand how you load the deck. You have 60 cars with a global economy of $75 or $80 million, competitors are going to spend that much money. To get maximum value for that expenditure, why do you want to have the 30 best cars in one race and the 30 other cars as filler? I don’t think that’s how you do it. That’s not how the tradition of IMSA was about.”

While IMSA anticipates fully subscribed fields at most of the races next year, 8Star’s Colangelo does not believe the Prototype class, tentatively capped at 19 entries for most events, will meet those numbers, no matter the alleged attempt to limit the number of PC entries.

“Limiting the number of PC cars only achieves two things and that’s fewer options and fewer cars,” he said. “There are a number of DP teams who simply can’t afford the extra costs involved in running a DP next season. The decision does not force people to continue to run their DPs, it simply eliminates their ability to race in a class that just makes sense. It will ultimately lead to less cars in the championship.”

In the wake of the new guidelines and schedule changes, it’s unknown what the PC class will look like heading into Daytona in January. However, some teams, including current championship leader PR1/Mathiasen, which is tied with CORE autosport, haven’t lost the faith in the category’s formula.

“The reason that I think it’s a great category, and I will continue in it, is largely because I believe in it,” Oergel said. “In two years’ time, if they decide to chop the category, I think there’s other places that would probably pick it up. The next two years are what I’m focused on. We’re fully committed moving forward.”

Pages: 1 2

John Dagys

John Dagys is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of Sportscar365. Dagys spent eight years as a motorsports correspondent for FOXSports.com and SPEED Channel and has contributed to numerous other motorsports publications worldwide. Contact John