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 Aug 2017, 20:00 (Ref:3757439)   #151
YZFrider
Racer
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location:
Bay Area, CA
Posts: 231
YZFrider should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridYZFrider should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
After reading the tech article in the Caddie V8 its clear isn't a stock block. The article said they used a special cast..in other words they melted it down. Oh sure it keeps the same dimensions and bore spacing (so it can pass for stock) but if I had to guess, the cooling passages and the rigidity of the block is strenghthened for higher outputs. A billet crankshaft? Both those modifications I have heard of in drag racing and only the big money teams can afford. Indeed not the same block shared in the road car. And as the BoP changes suggest the motor was likely in the 650-700 horsepower region at the beginning of the season.
YZFrider is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Aug 2017, 20:21 (Ref:3757445)   #152
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,505
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!
So it's basically a LMP1 engine already in all but name?

Even the aluminum Ford 351 SVO block retains all the stock dimensions and other items that the steel block did, seemingly so hot rodders who are sitting on boxes of 351 Windsor parts can use them to build up a light weight engine:

https://performanceparts.ford.com/part/M-6010-Z351

This is basically the engine block that Panoz used in their LMP1 roadsters, cut down to have a 302/5.0 deck height.

Basically the same stuff that Nissan did to the VK45 to make it into a Super GT engine was done to the Caddy engine. Only more extreme example was the Ford small block Indy Car engines: iron to aluminum block, wet sump to dry sump, and ultimately OHV pushrod 16 valve to DOHC 32 valve.

I think that the discussion on the Cadillac engine should also be taking place in the DPI thread, because it should be of interest there. But it does seem that the Caddy V8 is the most LMP1-like of the current DPI engines.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Aug 2017, 20:31 (Ref:3757447)   #153
YZFrider
Racer
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location:
Bay Area, CA
Posts: 231
YZFrider should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridYZFrider should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
No arguement from me in what you're saying. I just found it funny when the article mentioned (paraphrasing) "the caddilac is a production engine going up against pure race engines". We know the AER is. I am curious about the Nissan.

Is it an LMP1 motor? The basis is there. But as mentioned previously, it has to be rengineered and optimised for fuel restricted racing, per the current regulations
YZFrider is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Aug 2017, 21:17 (Ref:3757452)   #154
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,505
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!
That's if the ACO don't revert back to air restrictors for LMP1 privateer. The fuel flow stuff to me has been a red herring in both the WEC and F1. It doesn't add anything but cost, and it basically in the end is a speed/performance limiter like the air restrictor.

Big difference is that an air restrictor is a $5-10 piece of metal, fuel flow meter itself is a $2000+ electronic gizmo that requires thousands of dollars more electronics to function right.

It's also "little" things like that which can make a big difference at the end of the season as far as budgets.

I mean, air restrictors worked fine in LMP900 and LMP1 for nearly 20 years, and LMP2s and GT cars still use them.

And of course for the Cadillac engine, when you consider that GM has pumped millions more into their DPI program than anyone else, what else did we expect. I know that all stock block engines are modified for racing, but GM almost built an entirely new engine almost from scratch using LS block castings.

If someone wants to do that, why shouldn't they also be looking at engine supply for LMP1 if there's a demand?
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Aug 2017, 21:25 (Ref:3757453)   #155
Adam43
14th
20KPINAL
 
Adam43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
European Union
New Orleans
Posts: 31,138
Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!
I like it. A much more elegant way to equalise different engine configuration and sizes. At worse it's the same as restrictors. At best it means a level playing field that still allows development!

Yes expense is important, but those prices aren't significant. It's a red herring to cite the cost as a reason here. The advantages of removing the whinging about restictor size and reducing the lobbying budget is worth it.
Adam43 is offline  
__________________
News just in. Every manufacturer to pull out of every race series ever.
Quote
Old 4 Aug 2017, 21:53 (Ref:3757460)   #156
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,505
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!
Then why outside of LMP2 (spec engine) are they still being used on GT cars and in DPI. I know that human errors have been made, but they can be made with the flow meters.

Only way to fix it is to have BOP fully automated, like what the ACO have done with GTE pro.

Granted, this is where rose tinted glasses come back in, but I never heard of a lot of BOP whining back in LMP900. Everybody was using the same 100 octane gasoline back then, and also development was looser (no factory homolgation crap like we have today). IMO, BOP became a cop out to complain about different fuels and factory vs privateer.

Do I think that privateers deserve a chance against a factory team, even if only on paper? Yes, should the planets and stars align. But I don't think they should automatically be given a hand out. Same thing for factory teams that are unable or unwilling to invest in their efforts.

Unfortunately, that genie's been let out of the bottle, and we have to deal with the consequences, both positive and negative.

As you've said, the hope at least is that it's harder to game the system, but the ERS Incentive was effectively a way to game the system in LMP1, at least in my opinion. Hence the ERS Incentive should've have been there in the first place. Give factory teams any excuse to take an inch, they'll take a mile. We've seen that with some of the aero trickery in LMP1 the past couple of years, too.

I don't like the fuel flow meters. IMO, they're just an expensive way to slow down the cars and keep them from going faster. Same as the air restrictors, but air restrictors are a lot cheaper, and plus there's no lift and coast.

And I don't think that the automated BOP stuff is anywhere near as expensive as the fuel flow equipment. And yes, I get the argument that these are million plus dollar race cars, and that a $2000 part shouldn't make a big difference. But the whole system adds probably $10 grand to the cost of the car easily.

We have to remember that F1 are simplifying their engine regs for 2021. Twin turbochargers, no more ERS-H, among others. I think that LMP1 might have to follow the same lead. Especially to make it appealing for car makers who don't want to spend the big out of control budgets, or privateers.

That might run contradictory to an earlier statement, but we have to look at what we have now vs then, and consider that the landscape has changed.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Aug 2017, 22:01 (Ref:3757461)   #157
Adam43
14th
20KPINAL
 
Adam43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
European Union
New Orleans
Posts: 31,138
Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Air restrictors are part of the levers used to balance performance of the whole car. The flow restrictors are not used for that.

The genie is out of the bottle, the elephant is in the room and taking a mile when given an inch and there is no smoke without fire. The rest of the post is nowt to do with the point I was making. The privateers have the same fuel and they can use it at the same rate. These are not the reason why the privateers aren't there or can't compete. It is equally a good way to allow different privateer engines to compete too.
Adam43 is offline  
__________________
News just in. Every manufacturer to pull out of every race series ever.
Quote
Old 4 Aug 2017, 22:30 (Ref:3757467)   #158
TF110
Veteran
 
TF110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United States
Posts: 13,010
TF110 has a real shot at the podium!TF110 has a real shot at the podium!TF110 has a real shot at the podium!TF110 has a real shot at the podium!
About the only bad thing we heard was it cost more and it may have had some issues in reading the flow accurately. But that was when it was first (re)introduced.
TF110 is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Aug 2017, 22:45 (Ref:3757473)   #159
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,505
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!
If that's so, then why aren't we seeing that? I'd bet that if you took the hybrid systems off the Porsche and Toyota, they'd still be faster. We have to also remember that the ACO opened up a lot of aero stuff on LMP1 cars in 2014--stuff that the private teams haven't been able to take advantage of.

My points are cost control and the fact that it's actually going to take a lot of concessions--basically to the point of BOP--to get privateers competitive with a modern factory effort.

The 15mm higher front diffuser lips and narrower/shorter rear diffusers on LMP1 factory cars are effectively BOP to try and slow them down and help LMP1 privateers catch up, as their cars are unaltered in the tech regs. And as we've seen, it's going to take a lot more than that to get them to catch up.

So they're going to get fuel flow meters probably the size of 30 inch water pipes relative to what Toyota will have next year (if Toyota are still around). May as well go back to running air restrictors on the privateer cars and give them ones the size of a drainage pipe (like what IMSA did with Intersport in the ALMS).

I though that the point of the fuel flow meters was to encourage fuel saving. If you're just going to give larger allowances of fuel flow and burn to privateer teams, what's the point if that's the point that the ACO and FIA were trying to make?

Privateers already should be given under the technical regs unlimited engine use (no 5 engines a season limit like for the factory cars), unlimited engine size, and being allowed to do more things with the aero on their cars. None of which even when combined will eliminate the gap up front I fear.

And how much could Toyota get pegged back next year if the ACO want to pull a 2007-08 and 2010 ALMS style of manufactured inter-class racing? Because like it or not, the ACO might have to go to such extremes to put on competitive races. I don't think that fans, or even Toyota, would put up with the one-sided sprint race results that sometimes happened in the ALMS in 2000-2002.

It's undeniable that almost everyone here thinks that LMP1 as it is has peaked, and it's time for a shake up/reset. Unfortunately, the forward looking views that lead to the current package if anything were ahead of their time, and now we have to go "backwards" to find a happy medium.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Aug 2017, 22:51 (Ref:3757477)   #160
Adam43
14th
20KPINAL
 
Adam43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
European Union
New Orleans
Posts: 31,138
Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by chernaudi View Post
If that's so, then why aren't we seeing that? I'd bet that if you took the hybrid systems off the Porsche and Toyota, they'd still be faster.
Quite probably, but faster than who?

Quote:
We have to also remember that the ACO opened up a lot of aero stuff on LMP1 cars in 2014--stuff that the private teams haven't been able to take advantage of.

My points are cost control and the fact that it's actually going to take a lot of concessions--basically to the point of BOP--to get privateers competitive with a modern factory effort.

The 15mm higher front diffuser lips and narrower/shorter rear diffusers on LMP1 factory cars are effectively BOP to try and slow them down and help LMP1 privateers catch up, as their cars are unaltered in the tech regs. And as we've seen, it's going to take a lot more than that to get them to catch up.

So they're going to get fuel flow meters probably the size of 30 inch water pipes relative to what Toyota will have next year (if Toyota are still around). May as well go back to running air restrictors on the privateer cars and give them ones the size of a drainage pipe (like what IMSA did with Intersport in the ALMS).

I though that the point of the fuel flow meters was to encourage fuel saving. If you're just going to give larger allowances of fuel flow and burn to privateer teams, what's the point if that's the point that the ACO and FIA were trying to make?

Privateers already should be given under the technical regs unlimited engine use (no 5 engines a season limit like for the factory cars), unlimited engine size, and being allowed to do more things with the aero on their cars. None of which even when combined will eliminate the gap up front I fear.

And how much could Toyota get pegged back next year if the ACO want to pull a 2007-08 and 2010 ALMS style of manufactured inter-class racing? Because like it or not, the ACO might have to go to such extremes to put on competitive races. I don't think that fans, or even Toyota, would put up with the one-sided sprint race results that sometimes happened in the ALMS in 2000-2002.

It's undeniable that almost everyone here thinks that LMP1 as it is has peaked, and it's time for a shake up/reset. Unfortunately, the forward looking views that lead to the current package if anything were ahead of their time, and now we have to go "backwards" to find a happy medium.
Lots of things in there. None of which are relevant to fuel flow restrictors!

To be clear I am not talking about how LMP1 is dead, ruined forever by,well, whatever. I'm just talking about fuel flow restrictors.

Last edited by Adam43; 4 Aug 2017 at 23:06.
Adam43 is offline  
__________________
News just in. Every manufacturer to pull out of every race series ever.
Quote
Old 4 Aug 2017, 23:28 (Ref:3757483)   #161
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,505
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!
And I'm trying to talk about how we got here. If you just want me to say that I don't like the fuel flow meters and why I don't like them, I'll do that, and, actually, have done that.

Now, to your point and my counter-point. If they were to ensure closer competition between engine types, I have to ask why that hasn't happened, and why everyone gravitated to a similar solution? Stating out, we had a 4 liter V6 turbo diesel, a 2 liter turbo V4, and a 3.7 liter NA V8. Now, we have a 2 liter V4 turbo, a 2.4 liter V6, had another 2.4 liter V6, had a 3.0 V6, and even Audi were looking into running a forced induction gasoline engine again.

Everyone is running 6 cylinders or less, small displacement forced induction engines. Obviously, there's a bias in favor of such engines. Not really the variety that you suggest that the flow meters were supposed to encourage through balancing different engine types. Mind you, the LMP900 and LMP1 rules have long favored forced induction engines. But we had a better variety anyways before the present era.

Also, the flow meters have done little, if anything, to address the balance between factory and privateer. Let me remind you of Fuji in 2016. For the brief amount of time that a hybridless Audi was going around the track, it was still out-running the Rebellions and the Kolles cars by a good couple of seconds a lap. That's another point I'm making when arguing against the flow meters.

Granted, the point of them was to encourage fuel saving strategies and to try and balance different engine concepts as far as power. In my honest opinion, they failed in the latter goal.

The LMP1 aero regs and the factory teams having better cars and chassis plays a part, but could it still be argued that they have better engines, even with the flow meters? I don't see how the engine balance was made any better by the presence of the fuel flow meters.

Maybe if everything was down to the engine, I can see that working. But nevertheless a preferred solution was gravitated towards anyways. And it's not just a simple as in IMSA where we can point to the Riley chassis being a dog as to why VFR has done so bad all season. Or that one's engine is solely the problem for their struggles.

Granted, I'm also not a big fan of teams drifting to the same solutions, especially when the rules are supposed to at least in theory balance things out, be it EOT or BOP.

Last edited by chernaudi; 4 Aug 2017 at 23:34.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Aug 2017, 23:40 (Ref:3757484)   #162
Adam43
14th
20KPINAL
 
Adam43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
European Union
New Orleans
Posts: 31,138
Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!
The flow meters weren't introduced to balance performance between privateers and factory teams.

Lots of things in your post. To be clear I am not talking about how LMP1 is dead because privateers aren't there or competitive, or ruined forever by, well, whatever. I'm just talking about fuel flow restrictors. It is equally a good way to allow different privateer engines to compete too.

It's not about balancing the engines, it's about giving them all the same energy to work with. That's why it is preferable.

Last edited by Adam43; 4 Aug 2017 at 23:47.
Adam43 is offline  
__________________
News just in. Every manufacturer to pull out of every race series ever.
Quote
Old 4 Aug 2017, 23:59 (Ref:3757487)   #163
carbsmith
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 861
carbsmith should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridcarbsmith should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridcarbsmith should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by YZFrider View Post
After reading the tech article in the Caddie V8 its clear isn't a stock block. The article said they used a special cast..in other words they melted it down. Oh sure it keeps the same dimensions and bore spacing (so it can pass for stock) but if I had to guess, the cooling passages and the rigidity of the block is strenghthened for higher outputs. A billet crankshaft? Both those modifications I have heard of in drag racing and only the big money teams can afford. Indeed not the same block shared in the road car. And as the BoP changes suggest the motor was likely in the 650-700 horsepower region at the beginning of the season.
C5-R engines weren't STOCK stock block originally either, but it was just a change to the way the bores were done to be able to run 7L reliably. On the other hand the Cadillac Northstar "stock block" was everything but stock, being a turbocharged IRL engine that happened to share some architecture with the Oldsmobile version of the Northstar. Despite that it wasn't a very good sports car engine.

Cadillac engine is not something anyone would seriously want to use in a current LMP1 car because it can't be used as a fully stressed member. Engine weight aside that subframe is a killer for hitting the weight limit.
carbsmith is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Aug 2017, 01:44 (Ref:3757499)   #164
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,505
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!
But if we're gonna play the game of "let's give everyone the same energy", why not just go back to Group C where you're allotted a certain amount of fuel, and it was up to the teams to use it the best way it suited them? IMO, it's just an over-complicated way of doing things.

As to the future of LMP1, there's a push to reduce costs to get more teams in, both privateers and factory teams. Do we favor a total re-write of the rules to reset the whole class, and even "wind back the clock" to how things were a few years ago?

Or do we favor a piece-meal, chip-away deal where we see certain things restricted or brought back in line to reduce costs?

One main aero package is one way, but we already sort of had that back prior to 2011. The opening up the front of the floor between and just aft the front wheels was IMO a slight pandora's box. The bigger one was setting such lofty goals for hybrid systems so quickly.

As I've pointed out, the Peugeot proposals seem to aim for a "turning back of the clock" to some of the stuff they actually got their way on in 2012 (and, of course, didn't race that year or since in LMP1).

Also, might I point out that from 1999-2008, the only changes that happened really were the introduction of diesel and ethanol blended gasoline, and the LMP1/LMP2 aero regs that replaced LMP900 and LMP675. We've had a lot more changes than that the past decade since.

In 2009, we had the rear wing span reduction. 2011, engine downsizing. 2014, the fuel flow/big hybrids/narrow car regs. And that's not accounting for smaller changes made between seasons.

I understand that change is inevitable and is healthy when done right. But I don't think that making major changes every 3 or so years, as I've mentioned several times before, is the way to get things done.

Ideally, factory teams would probably like to get 3-4 years of use out of their cars. I think that's a healthy number of seasons before they have to design a new car. I personally think that pressing though with rapid changes that are pretty sweeping just drives the price tag up.

This goes hand and hand with my point on rules stability. Ironically, for the most part, LMP1 privateer rules are largely frozen until 2022. But a lot of that infrastructure is gone as companies making LMP1 privateer spec cars have gone out of business or moved onto other ventures.

I also don't think that some have committed yet because they're not sure if anyone will pull the trigger, and how things will look on the LMP1 factory team front.

But I'll suggest this: If they feel that they have a chance at winning LM or even some sprint races, I think that you might see quite a few Ginettas, SMP Dallaras and maybe Onroak and Orecas get ordered if they make LMP1s (Oreca and Onroak are part way there since LMP1 and LMP2 share chassis regs).

I'm actually more worried about the engine front there, if I'm honest. Only engine I've heard bandied about is the Mechachrome turbo V6. Yet Gibson and Judd have engines (4.5 liter V8 and 5.5 liter V10) that they're ready and willing to sell, but no one seems to be biting.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Aug 2017, 02:38 (Ref:3757502)   #165
carbsmith
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 861
carbsmith should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridcarbsmith should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridcarbsmith should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
The fuel limit in a vacuum has a lot of flaws that are even more pronounced today than they were in the 80s. If you give them enough fuel to run x pace for 24 hours under theoretical ideal conditions, every guard rail that gets replaced means the optimal green flag pace goes up a ton (you both save fuel for those laps and need to do fewer laps), and if you give them less fuel then you're going to get races where teams run a normal pace for 5 hours then have to go into massive fuel save mode in the last hour because they didn't get yellow flags. Plus if you have no fuel flow limit nothing is stopping you from bringing a car that can do 2:55s and 260mph trap speeds in qualifying to run an average lap time of 3:25 in the race (it's the ideal solution for the first scenario after all) It's all just messy and stupid, and that's why F1 has a hard fuel cap of 100kg which is the serious intent of the rule but still has a fuel flow limit that lets them burn only a bit more than that on a per lap basis.

There isn't going to be any wholesale changes to the cars, just tweaks to what differentiates the different LMP categories.
carbsmith 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
How about a LMP1 Pro & LMP1 Privateer class Holt Sportscar & GT Racing 35 6 Jun 2012 14:44
Joest Porsche LMP1 Megatron Sportscar & GT Racing 6 31 Oct 2003 10:28
2004 Riley & Scott LMP1???? Tim Northcutt Sportscar & GT Racing 8 12 Oct 2003 11:48
To clear up the 675/LMP2/LMP1 for next year... Megatron Sportscar & GT Racing 14 11 Aug 2003 22:38


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:36.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2016 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.