BMW Seeking Dialogue Over Daytona Penalty

BMW has been ‘disappointed and very frustrated’ by IMSA’s decision to strip all manufacturers’ points in GTD Pro and GTD following the Rolex 24 at Daytona and is looking to engage in dialogue with the governing body about the reason behind the decision.

BMW M Motorsport director Andreas Roos told Sportscar365 that the manufacturer is working to “investigate and understand” why its M4 GT3s were determined to have violated expected performance levels in the Florida endurance classic.

The German manufacturer, along with Ferrari, on Friday was hit with a penalty removing all manufacturers’ points in both the IMSA WeatherTech SportsCar Championship and the Michelin Endurance Cup.

Both brands also received a fine of $25,000 USD, although the race results and points for the drivers’ and teams’ standings have remained unchanged.

The document issued by IMSA detailing the penalty declared that “demonstrated performance in the Daytona 24 Hour Race exceeded IMSA’s expectations as shared in the GT manufacturers technical working groups.”

The opening round of this year’s WeatherTech Championship acted as the first race for a new Balance of Performance system in the GTD Pro and GTD classes.

A key part of the revised system is that manufacturers are required to declare their own BoP parameters and performance windows as part of technical working group meetings, a process in which BMW participated.

Roos argued that the German brand played an open role throughout the new process and was taken aback by the penalty, and is seeking clarification from IMSA about how its cars fell foul of the new parameters.

“Firstly, we are disappointed, to be honest, to get a penalty like this,” Roos said.

“From the December test over the Roar and the race, we basically showed transparent what our car can do and we’re always open in the discussion with IMSA.

“This is why for us it comes, to be honest, a bit unexpected. And when we’re honest, our car is known for the last two years we were competing.

“Maybe we were not in the best window due to the BoP in the last two years, but I think our car from the baseline is known and in the third year, our car should be the reference in the baseline, basically, to have this.

“This is what we discussed all the time with IMSA and always played it fair and transparent for them to have our car more or less somewhere in the middle as a reference.

“This is how we worked and this is how we worked together. At the end, this penalty was, for us, unexpected. We are disappointed because at the end, we don’t know where it comes from and what the base is.

“What we’re doing at the moment is investigate it for sure from our side. We are in discussion then with IMSA to discuss how we see it, how IMSA sees it, how we see it.

“Because we have clearly a different standpoint because for us, the car is in the window where we expect it to be.”

Roos suspected that IMSA’s data, which he says has yet to be made available to BMW, would likely show some discrepancy to that gathered by the manufacturer themselves.

However, he remains puzzled by where exactly the difference lies and also expressed frustration over the fact that the decision is not up for appeal.

“This is what they say, but we can’t see it on our side,” he said. “So this is what we have to investigate and understand.

“For us, we can clearly say that we were open, transparent from the beginning until the end. This is why we are at the end very disappointed, to be honest, to get a penalty like this.

“This is why we are for sure not happy at all and we have to investigate and start a discussion now to see where something like this comes from.

“For sure it’s a bit, let’s say, also harsh that at the end the penalty comes out [and] we have no chance at the end to intervene or to discuss it in detail.

“And then on the bottom line it’s written that at the end you also can’t appeal or do anything. So at the end it’s a bit frustrating to be honest.”

The document issued on Friday states that decisions “regarding BoP are conclusive and not subject to protest or appeal” as part of attachment 2.2.7 of the WeatherTech Championship sporting regulations.

Roos indicated that BMW was notified a day before the publication of the penalty that its cars had been determined to be outside the performance window.

He said the brand is now urgently seeking to engage IMSA in further discussion about the BoP process before next month’s Mobil 1 Twelve Hours of Sebring.

“We will try now to prove and convince IMSA that there was no mistake on our side that we expected,” Roos said.

“Maybe there is something what we don’t know, but at the moment we don’t know. This is why we can at the moment clearly say we didn’t do anything wrong.”

Sportscar365 reached out to Ferrari about the penalty but the Italian manufacturer declined to comment at this stage.

IMSA, meanwhile, also declined to comment regarding the statements made by Roos.