Home Mobile Forum News Cookbook FaceBook Us T-Shirts etc.: Europe/Worldwide. eBay Motorsport Links Advertising Live Chat  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Saloon & Sportscar Racing > Sportscar & GT Racing > ACO Regulated Series


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 4 Nov 2017, 06:11 (Ref:3778483)   #5206
HORNDAWG
Veteran
 
HORNDAWG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
United States
Oregon
Posts: 8,900
HORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by TF110 View Post
Imo, there's quite a bit of bias in that article. If the manufacturers want to do Le Mans and Daytona, they may be the catalyst to like rules between the WEC and IMSA. It will come down to them imo, not some rule maker's pride.

Right, that's why DPi only runs on one side of the pond now. Out of what was supposed to be a unified ruleset concerning P2 and DPi. No assertion of 'some rule maker's pride' involved in that decision.





L.P.
HORNDAWG is offline  
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent
Quote
Old 4 Nov 2017, 06:30 (Ref:3778484)   #5207
TF110
Veteran
 
TF110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United States
Posts: 13,440
TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by HORNDAWG View Post
Right, that's why DPi only runs on one side of the pond now. Out of what was supposed to be a unified ruleset concerning P2 and DPi. No assertion of 'some rule maker's pride' involved in that decision.





L.P.
When DPi runs lmp2-spec electronics like they were intended to, then you can talk about pride being a factor.
TF110 is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Nov 2017, 07:29 (Ref:3778491)   #5208
carbsmith
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 973
carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!
I don't think anyone has explained to me why the ACO should be falling over themselves to allow LMP2 based IMSA cars at Le Mans when they are turning away LMP2 teams already and there are no privateer DPi teams that would be eligible to enter even anyways.
carbsmith is online now  
Quote
Old 4 Nov 2017, 08:23 (Ref:3778498)   #5209
Akrapovic
Veteran
 
Akrapovic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Scotland
Posts: 5,461
Akrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Quote:
Originally Posted by carbsmith View Post
I don't think anyone has explained to me why the ACO should be falling over themselves to allow LMP2 based IMSA cars at Le Mans when they are turning away LMP2 teams already and there are no privateer DPi teams that would be eligible to enter even anyways.
Not only P2 teams, but GTE Am teams as well. And one of the big positives of LMP3 was creating security, as that can be transplanted into Le Mans if needed too. And they have a series running GT3 too.

The ACO seriously mismanaged LMP1. But they have setup LMP3 beautifully. As much as I enjoy IMSA, I don't think modifying some LMP2 cars is really what should be the top class at Le Mans. I'm not sure modifying someone else's base and performance balancing the cars to suit is really what should be winning the world's biggest motor race.

Pride is a two way street in this situation as well.

Last edited by Akrapovic; 4 Nov 2017 at 08:34.
Akrapovic is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Nov 2017, 15:33 (Ref:3778559)   #5210
HORNDAWG
Veteran
 
HORNDAWG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
United States
Oregon
Posts: 8,900
HORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by TF110 View Post
When DPi runs lmp2-spec electronics like they were intended to, then you can talk about pride being a factor.
Really, was not the thought put forward that the mfgs wishes would override the 'pride' of the sanctioning bodies involved? Who the hell wanted the electronics that they were already using? The mfgs. Which is representative of the exact scenario put forth!





L.P.
HORNDAWG is offline  
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent
Quote
Old 4 Nov 2017, 16:48 (Ref:3778569)   #5211
joeb
Race Official
Veteran
 
joeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
United States
Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 9,941
joeb will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famejoeb will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famejoeb will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famejoeb will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famejoeb will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famejoeb will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famejoeb will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famejoeb will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famejoeb will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famejoeb will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
One of the points I took out of Marshalls article was the fact that the manufacturers aren't a third-party versus imsa and the ACO but instead they are multiple parties all trying to get what they want. So what a manufacturer named McLaren might want could be different than what a manufacturer named Ford might want or Porsche, Toyota, or whoever. The sanctioning bodies want manufacturer input but in doing so you can't please everyone.
joeb is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Nov 2017, 17:58 (Ref:3778577)   #5212
TF110
Veteran
 
TF110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United States
Posts: 13,440
TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by HORNDAWG View Post
Really, was not the thought put forward that the mfgs wishes would override the 'pride' of the sanctioning bodies involved? Who the hell wanted the electronics that they were already using? The mfgs. Which is representative of the exact scenario put forth!





L.P.
You're talking about lmp2 and current dpi. Manufacturer's were pushed out of that class for a reason, to sign up for lmp1. The ACO made it clear that there were 4 chassis' and one engine. DPi did their thing and they were open to it, but DPi couldn't run as-is at Le Mans and rightfully so. All the little things like 'pride' and 'ego' are secondary. Cadillac has a nice engine and car, run lmp1. They're allowed to with some minor changes.

What you said, Joeb, I was trying to point out in a way. The manufacturers are seemingly leaning towards the 98, 99 GT1 type prototype. Sure there may be some different objectives by these manufacturers, but his article seemed like there was some huge division between the two series and ACO is trying to hijack DPi. We don't know what the future lmp1 rules are, but we will next month. I just don't get the fanboyish remarks, that's from either side. Both have something to offer imo.
TF110 is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Nov 2017, 08:27 (Ref:3778766)   #5213
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,687
chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!
I think that the ACO will edge towards LMP1 being more like DPI. They'll probably drop the requirement that factory teams have to run hybrids or alternative fuels. They might even for all we know right now ditch fuel flow in favor of air restrictors for BOP and limiting speeds.

In a way, it does make sense as DPI is growing, but not every car maker will want to race in a top class where you have to choose between four chassis manufacturers and run primarily stock block engines. Great idea and I'd like to see it, but it shouldn't be the only solution. Just like how having to run hybrids/alternative fuels and their associated R&D costs shouldn't be the exclusive solution.

I think that LMP1 should be the cost effective alternative to F1 or even something like NASCAR, not what it has become, where even TMG are spending almost F1 sized budgets (and yes, even if it's a quarter of what they spent on F1, TMG's near 100 million USD budget is big enough for an upstart minnow F1 team) on something with no where near the exposure of F1 or NASCAR on a world scale aside from the LM24.

VAG and TMG are to blame for the big factory budgets as much as anyone or anything (outside of technical requirements and being able to exploit them, no one out and out said they had to spend as much as they did), just as the ACO is for gerrymandering an agenda that appealed only to them and locked out others from even wanting to look in.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Nov 2017, 09:06 (Ref:3778770)   #5214
TF110
Veteran
 
TF110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United States
Posts: 13,440
TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!
I don't see any of the IMSA way rubbing off on the ACO. Why go backwards to a flawed bop system? As far as dpi goes, the rumors from every interview and trusted pundit are pointing towards a late 90's gt1 style of lmp1. The really big budgets were brought about when Porsche joined and Audi had to duke it out with them. The new rules hopefully allow more opportunities for innovation instead of letting big dollar manufacturers sway them to their own liking. A more simple way for speed and better looking cars.
TF110 is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Nov 2017, 11:31 (Ref:3778807)   #5215
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,687
chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!
Sadly, under the last ACO LMP1 regs, hybrids equaled speed. And as with anything else in racing, speed often costs money and resources.

Biggest problem is that the ACO with their rules prioritized one way almost to exclusivity on how to get speed. It's also one thing to put a hugely powerful hybrid system into a road car, you magnify those difficulties by putting one into a race car whilst using design principals that worked pre-hybrid.

Biggest single problem is weight. Hybrids add weight because you have in effect two engines in one vehicle. That weight isn't dead weight because it's doing something, but it's weight nonetheless. You lower the weight limits while incentivizing power of such a system, that's where you get a lot of costs of developing the cars.

We have to remember that LMP2 had weight increases from 775 to 825 (800 ALMS), and to 900 and now 930kg over the past 10 years or so. The reason for that was to discourage teams from pulling a Porsche RS Spyder and making a LMP2 car sell for LMP1 money because of it having LMP1 tech to make it reach 775 or less kg with ballast.

I know that ditching things like fuel flow and raising weight limits sound like going backwards, but the ACO are now paying for pricing out privateers and smaller manufacturers with rules that either favored one way of doing things, or favored their whims and whims of what handful of carmakers that have made LMP1 cars since the turn of the decade.

IMO, the problem was living in the moment and not having good enough longer term planning.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Nov 2017, 15:41 (Ref:3778829)   #5216
Speed-King
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location:
Wuerzburg,Germany
Posts: 7,000
Speed-King should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridSpeed-King should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridSpeed-King should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridSpeed-King should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
With manufacturer interests being as diverse as they are, maybe they need to go back to a dual ruleset ala late 90s GT1/LMP? Have one class for lightweight hybrid science projects and one for DPi 2.0 where there's no need for self-developed hybrids (maybe a spec unit for all cars) but where cars can have styling cues like the GT1s had in 97/98?

Make both of them competitive for the overall win and let series decide if they want to allow one or both halves of the rule set, e.g. IMSA could elect to do what FIA GT did in the late 90s and only run the GT-Protos whereas WEC could be open to both or just the mad science projects.

Gesendet von meinem HTC Desire 526G dual sim mit Tapatalk
Speed-King is offline  
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam.
Quote
Old 5 Nov 2017, 16:52 (Ref:3778841)   #5217
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,687
chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!
Also, another problem is aero rules. The ACO have pretty well clamped down on what teams can or can't do. That means that teams (like in F1) are spending tons of money and resources for IMO marginal returns on investment.

Stuff like the splitter feet and this or that flap or gurney probably only produce results in a wind tunnel and may or may not make any big difference on the track.

The ACO IMO can do with opening up development on the chassis and aero front, since that's cheaper than pigeon holing on the whole hybrid/alternative fuels/powertrain stuff. Some active or more adjustable aero can help with that.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Nov 2017, 18:05 (Ref:3778861)   #5218
carbsmith
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 973
carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!
F1 budgets pretty much start at 150m these days. Sauber is under at the moment but it's not viable on an ongoing basis.
carbsmith is online now  
Quote
Old 5 Nov 2017, 18:52 (Ref:3778872)   #5219
TF110
Veteran
 
TF110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United States
Posts: 13,440
TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!TF110 has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by chernaudi View Post
Sadly, under the last ACO LMP1 regs, hybrids equaled speed. And as with anything else in racing, speed often costs money and resources.

Biggest problem is that the ACO with their rules prioritized one way almost to exclusivity on how to get speed. It's also one thing to put a hugely powerful hybrid system into a road car, you magnify those difficulties by putting one into a race car whilst using design principals that worked pre-hybrid.

Biggest single problem is weight. Hybrids add weight because you have in effect two engines in one vehicle. That weight isn't dead weight because it's doing something, but it's weight nonetheless. You lower the weight limits while incentivizing power of such a system, that's where you get a lot of costs of developing the cars.

We have to remember that LMP2 had weight increases from 775 to 825 (800 ALMS), and to 900 and now 930kg over the past 10 years or so. The reason for that was to discourage teams from pulling a Porsche RS Spyder and making a LMP2 car sell for LMP1 money because of it having LMP1 tech to make it reach 775 or less kg with ballast.

I know that ditching things like fuel flow and raising weight limits sound like going backwards, but the ACO are now paying for pricing out privateers and smaller manufacturers with rules that either favored one way of doing things, or favored their whims and whims of what handful of carmakers that have made LMP1 cars since the turn of the decade.

IMO, the problem was living in the moment and not having good enough longer term planning.
I was pretty sure they increased the weight so there wasn't an lmp2 challenging lmp1's for wins. So this is news to me.
TF110 is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Nov 2017, 20:24 (Ref:3778893)   #5220
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,687
chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!
The increase to 900 came in 2011 with the first cost cap regs. Then went up to 930 when the power was increased this year.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Reply

Bookmarks




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ACO Publish 2010 Le Mans Regulations Gingers4Justice ACO Regulated Series 88 10 Dec 2009 03:41
[LM24] Whats the future of LMP's at Le Mans?? Garrett 24 Heures du Mans 59 8 Jul 2004 15:15
[LM24] 2004 Le Mans Rules pirenzo 24 Heures du Mans 6 16 Dec 2002 18:35
[LM24] No Lister LMP 900 for Le Mans. pink69 24 Heures du Mans 1 30 Nov 2001 12:17
[LM24] Entry Rules for le Mans? Liz 24 Heures du Mans 5 5 Nov 2000 22:41


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT. The time now is 23:51.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2018 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.