[WEC] LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules - now hypercar rules)

[S griffin]

Well it seems they are going the easy route with Hypercars. And this is because they need to keep the future. The ACO have let themselves down. They made a mistake going all out on WEC. They should have tried to make sure Audi had good competition. They’ve sort of let it almost die

[carbsmith]

On paper there should probably be 5 manufacturers in LMP1 literally right now (or in any event, last season) if they were in any way reliable to their commitments. There wasn't any other prototype regulations on the table with that kind of manufacturer interest. Of course they never are and that's where the argument that EoT should have been more favorable to privateers from the start comes from but given how many of those came out of the woodwork to replace the factories and how fast LMP2 cars are (last year's P2 pole sitter was closer to outright pole than the first independent P1 car in the last year of open LMP2 in 2010) I don't know if it really mattered.

Anything in Hypercar would be easy to distinguish from GTE if GTE itself had anything resembling consistency in car type.

[S griffin]

Well there could have been more manufacturers, but they decided to go elsewhere. EoT was really to help privateers. Hypercars can be good, but GTE seems a bit random as you say

[Deleted]

In the most recent Pruett podcast, there were comparisons made to the 90's Le Mans, where mishmash of prototype variants and GT1s were all able to go for the overall win. Also 1999 ALMS where stuff was jammed together for the LMP class. But I don't think that comparison makes any sense given that in those days the models were not individually performance balanced for clone laptimes and fuel windows, as will be the case here. I also didn't agree with the reasoning that they should just listen to all the manufacturer lobby demands for "whatever" because there's no supposedly other way right now in the current climate.

[hondafan37]

If the DPI are accepted in the Hypercar rules Mazda could return to Le Mans.

https://carbuzz.com/news/mazda-could...urn-to-le-mans

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Chiana

In the most recent Pruett podcast, there were comparisons made to the 90's Le Mans, where mishmash of prototype variants and GT1s were all able to go for the overall win. Also 1999 ALMS where stuff was jammed together for the LMP class. But I don't think that comparison makes any sense given that in those days the models were not individually performance balanced for clone laptimes and fuel windows, as will be the case here. I also didn't agree with the reasoning that they should just listen to all the manufacturer lobby demands for "whatever" because there's no supposedly other way right now in the current climate.

It makes some sense. It isn't exactly the same, but it also isn't completely different. It wasn't BoP, but it was akin to EoT, but with the fuel tank sizes, tyre sizes, etc. differences between P and GT. Trying to get two rule sets to the end point.

I do think that BoP is a lazy way to get there though (as opposed to EoT), which perhaps what you are getting at? (I haven't listened to the pod so maybe there is a nuance I am missing)

[hondafan37]

Ferrari has just presented the P80/C.
It is a modern Sports Prototype inspired by some of the most iconic models in Ferrari’s history, such as the 330 P3/P4 and Dino 206 S of the 1960s – highly radical cars in their day, and instant icons.
The P80/C is very different: it’s a pure track car, where peak performance is a major factor.
It is made entirely from carbon-fibre.

https://magazine.ferrari.com/en/cars...-design-56416/








I do not know if this car got to race some day but it's fantastic.

[PascaLM]

Originally Posted by hondafan37

Ferrari has just presented the P80/C.
.../...
I do not know if this car got to race some day but it's fantastic.

According to AUTOhebdo, it's a single car based on a 488 GT3 for a rich customer.
https://www.autohebdo.fr/actu-auto/a...re-201763.html

[Juntos]

This is the next brand to dominate Le Mans: https://www.thesupercarblog.com/all-...inate-le-mans/

[hondafan37]

Originally Posted by PascaLM

According to AUTOhebdo, it's a single car based on a 488 GT3 for a rich customer.
https://www.autohebdo.fr/actu-auto/a...re-201763.html

Yes it is a single car based on a 488 GT3, but it is made entirely from carbon-fibre and of course the aerodynamic development was based on the experience gained with the 488 GT3 but was not governed by the restrictions imposed by international regulations. Thus the front splitter is specific and, while the expansion curve and vortex generators of the rear diffuser are the same as those used on the GT3, the external surfaces are all unique to the P80/C. The result is an improvement of around 5% in overall efficiency, required to make full use of the unrestricted engine.


However, I understand that Ferrari will not use this car if it decides to participate in the Hypercars.
Possibly they will use the next new mid engined V8 TT-Hybrid near of 1000 HP car that will be released in the coming months (called BIG BROTHER (BB) in the forums) or maybe the next model of the Icona series (The F40 Icona) that will have the base of the BB and it is rumored that will arrive next year.
I have the feeling that many of the 4 year developments of the P80 / C will appear on the BB or on the F40 Icona.

[TF110]

As fast as that car is, it'd be too slow for the top class of LM. DSC has a short interview with Rob Leupen from Toyota on the upcoming hypercar class. Something kinda confuses me though at the end. He says the GR Super Sport is something they want to see as an R&D basis for the program but also it adds a PR basis. But at the end of the article he says they want to use a prototype not a road car. So is it the GR Super Sport or not? Maybe the car is their choice and it's a prototype first with a road version after.

[Deleted]

It won't be too slow for the top class if it's just a BoP class where they and/or ACO can do whatever artificial magic to speed it up (or slow every other car for it's level). Or else how would the million pound Bentley Continental ever have been able to compete with the others in GT3 etc

Anyway, I guess Zero Emission / Hydrogen class will retain the low performance level target of Car-Car in 2024-25
http://www.dailysportscar.com/2019/0...-tomorrow.html

[chernaudi]

I do wonder if the ACO are maybe trying to slow these cars down for safety and performance balancing reasons? I'd imagine that a slower class of cars would be easier to BOP. And slower cars would probably make safety advocates and the ACO's insurers happy, though I believe that the current cars are plenty safe, namely due to the fact that you're never going to 100% eliminate accidents/incidents in racing, nor the risk of injury or worse. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to see bad accidents or drivers getting hurt, but you're never going to entirely eliminate that possibility.

If you ask me, I actually wouldn't mind if the rules see a return back to 1994 where a whole motley crew of various cars raced at LM. At least that'd bring some variety back.

[Deleted]

The chances of accidents will actually likely only increase now that all classes will be much closer to each other in performances and top speeds and braking points, thanks to LMP2 getting dumbed down due to P1/GTP/Car-Car and GTE edging towards old GT1 lap times

[chernaudi]

IMO, there should be clear performance gaps between the classes. Granted, having Gibson give LMP2 teams a 600bhp V8 hasn't had disastrous effects, even given the top speeds of the LMP2s being at least competitive with the LMP1s.

However, having the laptimes condense closer between classes IMO can't be good, in so far as I'd at least start to question the validity of having 4 classes once laptimes start getting too close.

[TF110]

They're going back to the same problem they complained about before. Cars having to take risks in braking and corners instead of relying on the horsepower to overtake slower traffic on the straights. Who's great idea was this? I think the Toyota article hints at things like this being issues. They say it's cheaper to do a prototype to have it at the speed required. I think it makes sense because speeding up a road car is a tough ask unless you have something like the Valkyrie. No one has that. The hypercars out there are more straight line/acceleration monsters not corner-carvers.

[Deleted]

Yup

Listening to lobbyism is what kills reasonable existing ideologies

[ApexTurtle]

I've just read this and thought it was interesting: http://www.dailysportscar.com/2019/0...on-martin.html


This part especially stood out to me:

The BoP process that I think is used very effectively in GTE, I think the intention is that process will be extended to this class but the product solutions are quite likely to be a lot more diverse than they are in GTE so the challenge of performance balancing will be greater.

Maybe I'm seeing this wrong, but where does he get the idea the BoP process in GTE is used 'effectively' in any way? GTE is basically decided in boardrooms now and there's constant squabble over it. And that's just with reasonably similar cars, he already mentions this new class is going to be even more diverse so it's going to be even worse. And how does he think it will help with costs? I've seen zero evidence that BoP works to limit costs in any way.


What this smells like is Aston and Ferrari said 'we want to bring whatever we want and you make us competitive' and the ACO decided to say yes. I'm sorry if I come off as whining about this but this just... it makes me sad.

[Akrapovic]

The GTE BoP extended to pit stop times and maximum stint lengths. At that point it stopped being effective and became awful. There was no variety and every car ran identical strategies. The current state of GTE is significantly worse than it was even 2 years ago.

[Deleted]

Aston thinks it's effective as it allowed their garbage pieces of old 2008 GT2 chassis - and now it's almost as lackluster successor - to be in the winning circle ever since the 2012 season. They expect the same easy, cheap and manipulative route to work here. And it probably will, in horrible fashion of course.

[crooky]

Did we ever get the results of the survey they did last year? And more importantly what the ACO interpreted as the best way to go forward from their findings?

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by ApexTurtle

I've seen zero evidence that BoP works to limit costs in any way.

What this smells like is Aston and Ferrari said 'we want to bring whatever we want and you make us competitive' and the ACO decided to say yes.

Originally Posted by Chiana

Aston thinks it's effective as it allowed their garbage pieces of old 2008 GT2 chassis - and now it's almost as lackluster successor - to be in the winning circle ever since the 2012 season. They expect the same easy, cheap and manipulative route to work here. And it probably will, in horrible fashion of course.

For Aston it clearly allows them to compete at a lower cost.

I’m no BoP fan, but I do see it reducing costs. And that, at the moment, is taking priority over the competition of engineering and race strategy.

[helgi]

Originally Posted by Adam43

I’m no BoP fan, but I do see it reducing costs. And that, at the moment, is taking priority over the competition of engineering and race strategy.

So, they should find new fans who do not care whether it's engineering and "strategic" championship or "reduced costs series". As for me I do not care whether it's a works team or an enthusiasts' garage while there're transparent technical and sporting regulations allowing wide open competition for constructors and strategists. For me it's the core of racing (endurance or sprint). Thanks to FIA we have none of these championships today globally.
Of course, there're plenty of fans who just support certain team or even a driver and they are not interested why car A is faster than car B. They only know that there's a magical BoP which allows car B going faster at the next round. Looks like they do not need any technical explanation at all. And there're drivers who just want to race at an eye-level with competitors, so they are happy with BoP and lack of constructors' competition.
As for me, I'm not a driver, I'm not a show fan, so I stopped watching almost all the championships. There's no technical reason in it, so it's the same as if I would watch someone having a breakfast at fast-food or painting own fence - it's cost saving and rather BoPped.

[Adam43]

I'm not advocating it. I am just pointing out why it has got to where it is.

[hondafan37]

Well with the current regulation we had cars that looked frightful like the last AUDI LMP1 and sounded worse than a lawn mower with the diesel engine and even the turbo engines do not sound good (Toyota, Porsche), then if this new Hypercars rules allows us to have the new Ferrari, McLaren hypercars and the fantastic Aston Martin Valkyrie with the V12 Cosworth with 11000 RPM for me it's okay to have a bit of BOP.