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

[deggis]

Originally Posted by Chiana

It never made sense to me why the CCGT was not allowed into GT1 when MC12 was already there

Different issues. Homologation rules changed, carbon fibre monocoque was no longer allowed and the minimum production numbers went to 300s which Koeniggsegg would not have met. Of course fanboys on the internet have turned this into a conspiracy theory too.

[Mike E]

Hello. Hindy saying on the Nurburgring 24 comms that Bentley motorsport are proposing a prototype entry for 2020/21 to their board this week.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Mike E

Hello. Hindy saying on the Nurburgring 24 comms that Bentley motorsport are proposing a prototype entry for 2020/21 to their board this week.

I missed that, did it sound like an ACO "hypercar" or something for the N24 SPX class like the Glick?

[Bentley03]

Originally Posted by joeb

I missed that, did it sound like an ACO "hypercar" or something for the N24 SPX class like the Glick?

I didn't, my ears pricked up immediately!

The proposal is for an ACO hypercar programme in prototype guise, same as Toyota.

Whilst I'm struggling massively to find anything appealing whatsoever in these new regs, I guess I'd consider a Bentley programme to be a slight sweetener. And if the other successful marque from the early years revisited their heritage and returned, I might even find a little genuine enthusiasm.

[GingerPixel]

As I've said all along, as long as the racing is decent and the cars aren't completely hideous I can find little reason to care about the nitty gritty of the regs.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by GingerPixel

As I've said all along, as long as the racing is decent and the cars aren't completely hideous I can find little reason to care about the nitty gritty of the regs.

The opposite extreme argument is that a BoP class means those that play the BoP game the best and those that play the politics games the best will prosper, rather than the best team with the best car.

My opinion falls between these 2 extremes somewhere.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by Chiana

The old GT1 and GT2 regs also had standard weight and air restrictor according to set-in displacement table, and that was it for most of the time, working very well.

They messed up with turbos vs non-turbos, though, which was one of the main-issues hampering the original Porsche GT1 and later all the privateer-built GTS-Porsches as well. Turbos were legal, but so far disadvantaged that it really didn't make any sense to race anything other than a high-displacement NA-engine.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by carbsmith

That is utter horse ****. Why are you even watching if you think this crap?
And stop with this RULES=BOP nonsense garbage, for f's sake. Especially if you're going to complain about other people discussing things wrong, you can't just turn around and be intentionally obtuse and try to shut down conversation that way.

Sorry but you are the full of the bullshit there, ask ANY of the classic racing teams and they built cars to F'ING sell more cars. Don't bother trying to argue, it will show you have no clue about old racing and at this point want to be an ass who just argues to hear himsefl talk.

AND NOWHERE DID I SAY A DAMN THING ABOUT RULES=BOP. I recommend you learn how to read and compile information before you attempt to attack someone who speaks and reads the language better than you ever will.

But thanks for convincing me the sportscar board is full of *******s who want to hear themselves ***** and pretend they know more than rules, makers, teams, media and well fans who want to actually enjoy something. It wasn't cool when record stores did it, it was cool when video dorks did it and both have crashed and burned. Sadly this site used to have discussions but now it's how much f'ing smarter people who have never been involved in racing anything larger than a toy car on their parents' floor want to tell everyone how to enjoy racing and what the rules should be. Sorry but they rulesmakers couldn't give two shits about your opinion, and like excrement, it often stinks,

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Bentley03

I didn't, my ears pricked up immediately!

The proposal is for an ACO hypercar programme in prototype guise, same as Toyota.

Whilst I'm struggling massively to find anything appealing whatsoever in these new regs, I guess I'd consider a Bentley programme to be a slight sweetener. And if the other successful marque from the early years revisited their heritage and returned, I might even find a little genuine enthusiasm.

I had hoped VAG would get involved, but I didn't expect it to be Bentley! That is great if they end up competing again.

[chernaudi]

To be fair, Audi Sport and Porsche have between them 32 wins at LM alone. And that's even more if you add Bentley's 5 pre-World War II wins and Bugatti's pre-war wins retrospectively.

I'd argue that unless some tech window gets opened up beyond hypercar LMP1, Audi and Porsche don't have anything left to prove. However, Lamborghini hasn't been to Le Mans, and I'm sure if given the opportunity, Bentley would like to add a potential LM win or two before the Zero Emissions vehicles become the favored platform for LM.

[Sodemo]

I'd have thought the potential marketing gains for VAG would be better with an everyday brand than a luxury one? Would seeing Lambo win lemans shift more Lambos? I'd argue that a positive marketing spin for say a VW entry would yield far more value for VAG as a group.

[chernaudi]

But is VW itself noted for performance cars? Not really. VW is VAG's bread and butter/meat and potatoes brand, along with Seat and Skoda. Lamborghini has never seriously been to LM, and since being acquired by VAG, has been a profitable company. Bentley is also profitable, and has serious LM history over the years. Audi and Porsche have little if anything left to prove until EV or hydrogen fuel cell or hydrogen hybrid cars come to the fore.

So I think that in the near future, it'd probably be Bentley or Lamborghini to get the nod for a potential LM program.

[Mike E]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

But is VW itself noted for performance cars? Not really. VW is VAG's bread and butter/meat and potatoes brand, along with Seat and Skoda. Lamborghini has never seriously been to LM, and since being acquired by VAG, has been a profitable company. Bentley is also profitable, and has serious LM history over the years. Audi and Porsche have little if anything left to prove until EV or hydrogen fuel cell or hydrogen hybrid cars come to the fore.

So I think that in the near future, it'd probably be Bentley or Lamborghini to get the nod for a potential LM program.

Toyota isn't noted for its performance cars either. VW vs Toyota makes sense.

Whatever, I would be very happy to have Bentley turn up.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by Mike E

Hello. Hindy saying on the Nurburgring 24 comms that Bentley motorsport are proposing a prototype entry for 2020/21 to their board this week.

I heard it too live. Here it is:

https://youtu.be/ZXz8cNjXlzA?t=19968

[chernaudi]

Originally Posted by Mike E

Toyota isn't noted for its performance cars either. VW vs Toyota makes sense.

Whatever, I would be very happy to have Bentley turn up.

Toyota made/makes the Supra, and own Lexus. Granted, that's like saying that VW makes the Golf GTI and owns Audi, Porsche Cars, Bentley, Lamborghini and Bugatti.

Biggest difference is that Toyota has run under that name in Indy Car, Le Mans, F1, NASCAR and other ventures. I can't think of very many high performance motorsports ventures that VW entered under the VW brand over the years. I can only think of the WRC in the late '80s and a few years back for VAG entering Volkswagen in a major championship.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

I can only think of the WRC in the late '80s and a few years back for VAG entering Volkswagen in a major championship.

And 2013-2016 in WRC. Program got axed on the same day than Audi's LM program.

[Maelochs]

A final (yeah, right) word on BoP: It Can be done well. If cars are not adjusted frequently and without testing (like between quail and the race) and if the organizers can avoid micromanaging on a per-track basis (let some cars have advantages at different tracks if their designs so benefit them) then there is no reason the new regs cannot work. Given the management skill and the carefully considered judgments made b FIA/ACO in the past, I am sure we can expect them to do this right.

If the new regs do attract a bunch of teams, that in itself is a huge benefit. I am willing to watch and wait. It is possible the new era of international sportscar racing won’t be significantly worse than the last.

[carbsmith]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I'd have thought the potential marketing gains for VAG would be better with an everyday brand than a luxury one? Would seeing Lambo win lemans shift more Lambos? I'd argue that a positive marketing spin for say a VW entry would yield far more value for VAG as a group.

Lamborghini as a brand in general would stand better against its competitors if it had more racing heritage. It's not as much about exposure directly. A Lambo win at Le Mans would continue to be valuable for decades. Although this also means like Bentley they aren't as obliged to stick around once they have one.

I think that's actually a lot of the problem that ACO and WEC have. The vast majority of the marketing value of their product is not coming from the events including even the 24 Hours itself but just being able to say you won Le Mans so participation is inordinately dependent on the chances of victory. It used to be that endurance racing was so grueling and cutting edge that even making it to the end in a decent place was something you could brag about but these days nobody even gives a crap about a 3rd place finish. So you have a lot of manufacturers looking at hypercar right now and thinking they don't need a big budget to beat other manufacturers, but I feel like only so many will commit before deciding there's too many competitors to provide a high enough chance of success even with BoP.

Originally Posted by broadrun96

Sorry but you are the full of the bullshit there, ask ANY of the classic racing teams and they built cars to F'ING sell more cars.

Ever heard of this "Ferrari" thing? Maybe Lotus or McLaren? They all began building race cars for themselves. Racers race. They always have, and they always will long after motorsport ceases to have any corporate purpose. I don't want to be treated as cynical by someone acting as if the sport I live for only exists to be a crappy commercial.

Originally Posted by broadrun96

Your options are not the (never actually happened long term) golden age of no rules or BOP

If you aren't equating rules and BoP, then why the hell did you bring up "no rules" here when no one else has mentioned such a thing? You've tried to shut down BoP complaints with the "but having rules is balancing cars so it's always been this way" nonsense in the past too.

[GingerPixel]

I'm not sure performance car pedigree makes much difference with these enormous companies. Toyota could probably engineer a fighter jet if they really wanted to, irrespective of how fast my Yaris is (not very).

[TF110]

Originally Posted by GingerPixel

I'm not sure performance car pedigree makes much difference with these enormous companies. Toyota could probably engineer a fighter jet if they really wanted to, irrespective of how fast my Yaris is (not very).

Well, Honda does make a jet, so you'd be right!

[hondafan37]

Good summary of DSC on other Hypercar projects beyond Toyota and Aston Martin

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2019/0...p7NLuSn5ooIXYE

[TWRv12]

Speaking of VAG, the crisis just got worse, can of worms blew up!
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/i...ices-v6-diesel

https://www.handelsblatt.com/unterne...GwmgvBCC1H-ap1

[merak1974]

Originally Posted by canaglia

Because MC12 was a work Ferrari Enzo with a different bodywork, while small manufacturers simply have not any influence....

mosler MT900 never got a FIA gt3 homologation, or speaking about nowadays just look at glickenhaus, they are yelling here and there they're going to make ACO hypercars but ACO and FIA tend to ignore them


BTW recall GT1 bop was a bit different before 2009; usually private and work teams could choice between 2 kind of bop set

option A: lighter car but shorter restrictors
option B: heavier car but larger restrictors

I don't think the MC12 was a "work Ferrari Enzo" at all, and the differences between the cars are sufficiently large to suggest that the MC12 should indeed be regarded as a different car, although related of course. In fact, I don't think Ferrari was particularly happy about the whole project. While they accepted it, my understanding is rather that they did not really endorse the possibility of a Maserati outgunning Ferraris on the race track, which of course the MC12 did.

[deggis]

Lamborghini Targeting Prototype Future
https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...gram-for-2022/

Sportscar365 has learned that the Italian manufacturer has been involved in talks with both IMSA on its so-called DPi 2.0 platform, as well as the FIA and ACO with the recently confirmed ‘Hypercar’ formula, although discussions are still at exploratory levels.

According to Lamborghini motorsport boss Giorgio Sanna, such a program would not come until 2022 at the earliest, and as of now, would largely be customer-focused.

[TF110]

Perfect time for them to hook up with an Oreca or Ligier or other constructor and go 'halves' on a hypercar program. There's willing parties, I'm sure the money is the biggest and maybe only issue besides a boardroom blessing.