With IMSA’s resources focused on conducting first season of the TUDOR United SportsCar championship, legacy projects like the DTM in America were moved down the list of immediate priorities. More than a month removed from the season finale at Petit Le Mans, however, IMSA CEO Ed Bennett provided a number of updates on the topic for RACER, starting with the current state of talks with DTM (above) sanctioning body ITR and the Japanese Super GT organization GTA that will use the DTM’s “Class One” regulations beginning in 2017.

“We’ve had three different steering committee meetings now between ITR, Super GT and IMSA, since all this was put together, and this opportunity existed in each market, Europe, Japan/Asia, North America. We’ve had three different steering committee meetings, the first was in Germany, the second at the Rolex 24 this year, and then we recently had one on Sept. 29 that was around the Super GT race in Japan. We’ve broken the talks up between the territories,” Bennett said.

“The general thing is to get alignment and I think it works to our benefit. The idea is to get alignment on the technical specifications where the regulations would begin in 2017. It’s not as pressing for us necessarily to have an answer on whether there manufacturers that want to do it now, because the regulations are still being developed. In my own mind, I think about it happening no earlier than 2017.”

Class One regulations call for some of the current DTM rules to be utilized – a spec carbon-fiber tub, for instance – but new, 2-liter, turbocharged 4-cylinder engines and a few other changes will be implemented to give manufacturers a common formula to use across both series. Provided talks with IMSA reach the point of establishing an American championship, manufacturers would have a third outlet for Class One machinery.

“The idea of everyone being aligned in DTM; that’s Audi, BMW, Mercedes, they’re real bullish on this, and then in Super GT; Honda, Toyota, Nissan, they’re really getting there. There’s a lot of cooperation about alignment. It’s a lot of massaging on different philosophies and principles. But for the most part, they’re pretty aligned: Going to a 4-cylinder turbo, maybe as high as 600 hp, with the monocoque and everything based on what today is kind of the DTM specification, all FIA crash tested,” Bennett explained.

With an interesting assortment of European and Japanese manufacturers already committed to Class One regulations, Bennett has been tasked with opening the door for their possible participation in America, and to gauge the interest of other marques, including domestic brands.

“It continues to be a manufacturer platform opportunity for us, as it is with the DTM,” he said. “For sure, the German OEMs have always had interest. We’ve made a proposal and all the Japanese OEMs are aware of the opportunity, and we’ve been the same with the American OEMs as well. At this point it’s been more about keeping them up to date with where things are headed. Letting them ask questions and providing their input and giving them a voice even though there’s not necessarily a commitment and we haven’t asked for a commitment of the U.S. OEMs. Our goal is to make them a part of the process where hopefully it’s more interesting for them to potentially give it serious consideration.”

Bennett confirmed the Big 3 have been presented with the latest developments on the American Class One opportunity.

“We had a meeting in Detroit in August where DTM came over – [ITR boss] Hans Werner Aufrecht and a couple of his people, where we met with the three U.S. OEMs, GM, Ford and Chrysler, and really took them through the philosophy, where things stood, let them ask a lot of questions in a nice open forum and really get their thoughts. So we’re, as a group, trying to build this common technical specification.”

Discussions on how IMSA’s Class One car count would be comprised has evolved, moving from a small number of manufacturers sharing the majority of a grid – akin to what takes place in the DTM – to possibly having a greater number of brands involved to reduce the financial burden of supporting six or seven cars apiece.

“The question remains we are probably getting to the point where we want to have a regulation that actually gets finalized and it will become time, if you’re going to do it or have an opportunity to do it in 2017, to try to see if you have enough manufacturers that actually want to support the platform. You probably need 18 to 20 cars on the grid to have a reasonable field and a reasonable show for the spectators,” Bennett noted.

“Doing the math, if you had five OEMs, some doing three, four cars each, as opposed to the original idea a couple of years ago where what if we just started this thing with three German OEMs but there was always a desire to get more. But when you do the math on that, everyone has to put in at least six. The mathematics of that, the economics of that, were too much to continue all the other programs that they were doing.”

Bennett hopes to have buy-in from manufacturers in the DTM, Super GT (above), and those in America in order to give Class One the green light. 

“But there are still, for sure, strong entries from the German OEMs, they’d like populated cars on the Super GT grids and they’d love to see this thing come together and be an opportunity for them as well. It is just a question of you need some combination of, not just the German OEMs, but you need some Japanese and at least hopefully one U.S. OEM that would want to sign onboard.”

Looking at possible schedules, Bennett envisions something shorter than the 10-race calendar for the TUDOR Championship classes. He also sees an IMSA Class One championship running with other series on a more frequent basis – something the TUDOR Championship intentionally avoids.

“With all the things that we’ve had on our plate where the regulation hasn’t been finalized, we haven’t had to, and it’s also not been appropriate, hey, here’s the opportunity, here’s eight or so races, a field of 18 to 20 cars in combination with IMSA, maybe some IndyCar – never would rule out a NASCAR event if it made sense for it.  The concept has kind of been laid out and I think some ranges of what the investments look like to the best of our abilities to bring it to fruition,” he said. 

Even with the planning that’s been done, Class One is still being presented as a concept, rather than an American series with a definite go-live date. However, as the concept develops, more details emerge.

“We’ve gone just short of actually saying, ‘Based on what you know today, would you be interested in signing up?’ Because it just seems premature, but I think as the regulation gets finalized it’ll be entirely appropriate with each OEM because there is a universe of potentially nine that you could speak with. And the whole idea of them rebranding the regulations – not just as DTM regulations but class I regulations – was to make it more agnostic so that Super GT, you don’t say, yeah, we’re using the DTM regulations, because it really isn’t about DTM branding,” Bennett said. 

“They really just want three different large market uses of the same regulation so they came up with this generic phrase, it’s one of the things that came out of the Sept. 29 steering committee is to refer to them as Class One regulations. It wouldn’t operate under the DTM brand, just like Super GT is not going to change their brand. So the idea is a separate, standalone, sprint race format opportunity, 70 to 75 minutes. But it would have its own brand.”

IMSA has an impressive number of manufacturers involved with the TUDOR Championship and its Continental Tire Series (above), yet when the DTM in America was first floated, the immediate concern turned to whether it would take money, entries and manufacturer support away from the existing series. Depleting IMSA’s current manufacturer base to seed Class One racing is still a cause of unease, according to Bennett.

“I think it’s a great point: It’s certainly something we think about as we talk internally about when we have touch points and meetings. In my mind, with manufacturers who are currently doing things within the IMSA series, I think the single-make series are a little different; but for the TUDOR Championship and for the Continental Tire Series, it has the potential to redirect some of their focus and attention and investing, if this Class One series became a reality. But it’s so premature to know what that looks like. 

“I think the good news, generally speaking, for the manufacturers on the Pro-Am side, is they have customer programs where this could work, but I think where you have the most sensitivity is the GTLM manufacturers.  We’re thinking through that. It wouldn’t affect what Aston does or doesn’t do; I don’t think it would affect what Corvette does and doesn’t do. Would BMW potentially want to do both? Hard to say. I would think it would be difficult. For Porsche, it’s not really relevant to them.”

One interesting aspect to come from the Class One regulations is move to the “Global Racing Engine” concept of using small-displacement turbos in place of larger, naturally-aspirated V8s. With Class One committed to GREs, manufacturers could find other avenues in IMSA to use those engines in the TUDOR Championship, for example.

“We’d certainly be open to it because it would be a very efficient thing for the manufacturers to be able to use engines in more than one platform. Even if it’s global, if it was in different styles of cars, I think you’d always want to be open to that with your manufacturer partners, instead of having to have two, if you only had to have one, and you could use it in more than one type of car, you’d want to be open to that,” Bennett remarked.

Asked if he viewed Class One as purely a standalone series or if he’d see it included as a TUDOR Championship class at select events, Bennett says the would lean in one direction but would not count out a blend of both scenarios.

“I think the idea is to have separate series rather than a class within the TUDOR Championship or the Continental Tire Series, but never say never. Maybe it makes sense to mix it with some other specification and have two classes as a creative way to have a proper field. It’s an idea. I don’t know how the manufacturers will feel about that, but it’s an idea. You wouldn’t want to mix that, I don’t think, with a bunch of other classes but potentially you could mix it with one more,” he said.

There’s a lot of work left to be done by Bennett and his IMSA staff, not to mention the need for a multitude of manufacturer agreements to make Class One a reality in America. IMSA has the rights to a championship and the willingness to continue developing the concept. Just as the TUDOR Championship is preparing for a move to a unified Prototype class in 2017 where Daytona Prototype and P2 entrants shift to a common chassis, IMSA’s Class One could add an interesting dimension to the domestic sports car racing scene at the same time.

“Our arrangement with ITR is a licensing and cooperation agreement around developing the specifications, but also a 10-year ability to leverage in North America, U.S., Canada and Mexico. And we have, I think, thankfully, the exclusive opportunity in that territory, and this continues to be an open and active project,” added Bennett.

“It’s another exciting option in the next phase and evolution of building up sports car racing, in my mind, in North America. Beyond the series itself, it’s the relationship with folks at DTM, sharing best practices, even Super GT, and the involvement IMSA has with the ACO and the FIA. I think we’re living up to the ‘International’ part of our sanctioning body’s name. We race locally, but we think globally.”​