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

[Acid09]

Dosen't really look that bad, no idea what all the outrage is about.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Acid09

Dosen't really look that bad, no idea what all the outrage is about.

I think it looks bad, like they just ran out of material or something. But I'm not going to worry about it too much until we see some real world examples and the different solutions teams are coming up with.

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by joeb

I think it looks bad, like they just ran out of material or something. But I'm not going to worry about it too much until we see some real world examples and the different solutions teams are coming up with.

Everyone cried doom about the 1.6 m wide rear wing, we got used to that within a season. Everyone cried doom about the sharkfin, some of the teams actually made it work in terms of design and blended it well in the overall lines of the car. Everyone has been crying doom about the aesthetics of the holes, I suspect by the end of 2012 we'll barely take notice of them.

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

Everyone cried doom about the 1.6 m wide rear wing, we got used to that within a season. Everyone cried doom about the sharkfin, some of the teams actually made it work in terms of design and blended it well in the overall lines of the car. Everyone has been crying doom about the aesthetics of the holes, I suspect by the end of 2012 we'll barely take notice of them.

I still don't like the 1,6m wing, and every time i see the 2m i miss very much.
The fin is still something that catches my eye in a bad way, would love if they went away.

The holes i do not have that big a problem with. The only problem i see is that we probably will see less light colored cars, and more dark livery. (because the holes will be very clear and oblivious in a light livery)

[Flat12-Aircool]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

Everyone cried doom about the 1.6 m wide rear wing, we got used to that within a season. Everyone cried doom about the sharkfin, some of the teams actually made it work in terms of design and blended it well in the overall lines of the car. Everyone has been crying doom about the aesthetics of the holes, I suspect by the end of 2012 we'll barely take notice of them.

That's a fairly weak argument tbh.

The changes to the Rear Wing and Shark Fin however unpopular still don't alter the underlying concept of the Formula. These ridiculous holes fundamentally change that concept, whilst trying to fix a problem that has already been substantially minimized.

[TF110]

Rather the holes than the fin. Hopefully the '13+ regs are to that likeness.

[Fogelhund]

Interesting... this started out as the LMP EVO thread... then LMP future rules.... and today the LMP EVO finally gets introduced, but at Grand Am, and the ACO is doing all they can to make the LMP's uglier...

[AGD]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

Everyone cried doom about the 1.6 m wide rear wing, we got used to that within a season. Everyone cried doom about the sharkfin, some of the teams actually made it work in terms of design and blended it well in the overall lines of the car. Everyone has been crying doom about the aesthetics of the holes, I suspect by the end of 2012 we'll barely take notice of them.

I'm still not used to the BHFs except for the Peugeot one. We'll see about the BHHs. Most/many teams run pretty dark paint schemes and I think that might hide the holes pretty well. It will be different for teams with brighter colors, but we'll see. cdsvg's bright yellow car is an extreme example.

Still, these adjustments are kind of like plastic surgery. A little adjustment here or there might make things look good or at least won't make things look bad, but when too many changes are made, you end up looking like this:

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Interesting... this started out as the LMP EVO thread... then LMP future rules.... and today the LMP EVO finally gets introduced, but at Grand Am, and the ACO is doing all they can to make the LMP's uglier...

Yeah, exactly. The Corvette DP still has an ugly greenhouse, but it's a pretty attractive package all things said. No BHFs and no BHHs. That's refreshing. I almost thought that I might want to watch a GA race next year to see the thing in action, but then I remembered the many other reasons why I think GA sucks and those will still be around. Well, GA may not lure me in, but maybe they can get others to tune in.

[cdsvg]

My hope is that 2014 will be somewhat of a clean-sheet with none of the carry-over fins and holes. Maybe also a re-think of the floor/diffuser. I'm not holding my breath though.

[deggis]

Moved from the other thread:

Originally Posted by AGD

I think the ALMS/IMSA almost has to do this now. Even without the ∀IℲ slight, the ALMS has to do something to make their series look relevant in the domestic market. Grand-Am is starting to put out more attractive looking DPs. I don't think BHF/BHH LMPs are going to be the best face for the series. They need cars that look cool in magazines/blogs/video clips and of course they need them to be mega fast. The ∀IℲ will ensure that none of this happens.

I can see where this is going: suddenly the current cars will be remembered as the best looking LMPs ever (with the ACO-made rear wings, ACO-made fins and hundred other costly changes made over the years) and FIA will be blamed for everything in the future despite that the rulebook will still be mainly written by ACO.

Not easy to be FIA. Even when the teams themselves (F1 Technical Working Group is headed by team personnel) draft the rules (new look F1 cars for example) the sh!t only hits FIA.

[CTD]

Originally Posted by deggis

Moved from the other thread:

I can see where this is going: suddenly the current cars will be remembered as the best looking LMPs ever (with the ACO-made rear wings, ACO-made fins and hundred other costly changes made over the years) and FIA will be blamed for everything in the future despite that the rulebook will still be mainly written by ACO.

Not easy to be FIA. Even when the teams themselves (F1 Technical Working Group is headed by team personnel) draft the rules (new look F1 cars for example) the sh!t only hits FIA.

Well you could blame the ACO for being too weak to stand the pressure from FIA, but often it's FIA who leads ACO hand when writing the rules. Just look at the 3.5l Engine regulations and it was also FIA who laid pressure on ACO after the Ortelli crash for something to be done.

[Flat12-Aircool]

Originally Posted by CTD

Well you could blame the ACO for being too weak to stand the pressure from FIA, but often it's FIA who leads ACO hand when writing the rules. Just look at the 3.5l Engine regulations and it was also FIA who laid pressure on ACO after the Ortelli crash for something to be done.

And the 2 chicanes on the Mulsanne.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by CTD

Well you could blame the ACO for being too weak to stand the pressure from FIA, but often it's FIA who leads ACO hand when writing the rules. Just look at the 3.5l Engine regulations

Back then ACO was mainly or only a race organizer and definitely not in control of the sport and regulations as it is now. Not a good example.

and it was also FIA who laid pressure on ACO after the Ortelli crash for something to be done.

It's not like ACO wasn't ultra-concerned all things safety related even before that the [flying cars] issue.

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Flat12-Aircool

And the 2 chicanes on the Mulsanne.

I didn't know that! - DAMN YOU FIA! (Mostly Mosley and Balestre)

[Pandamasque]

Here's a funny observation on the subject of 'Evo Rules' and how the new Corvette DP supposedly looks like a Evo LMP.... some say.
Just compare it with Maserati MC12 GT1, you'll see that DP still has more in common with a Turismo Carretera car rather than with something like a classic sportscar a-la group C.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by deggis

Moved from the other thread:

I can see where this is going: suddenly the current cars will be remembered as the best looking LMPs ever (with the ACO-made rear wings, ACO-made fins and hundred other costly changes made over the years) and FIA will be blamed for everything in the future despite that the rulebook will still be mainly written by ACO.

Not easy to be FIA. Even when the teams themselves (F1 Technical Working Group is headed by team personnel) draft the rules (new look F1 cars for example) the sh!t only hits FIA.

Some stuff may be ACO directives, but if they don't do it on their own, the ∀IℲ will force them to do it. So it really does not matter. The BHFs and BHHs may or may not be factors in the long-term, but the 3:30 directive will be and you can chalk that up to the ∀IℲ. Obviously there are a lot of factory engineers who will make whatever changes are made irrelevant and so the rules will have to change on an almost regular basis to appease the ∀IℲ. They have three options as I see it. Keep changing the regs on a regular basis (workable, but as we see now, it's not the best of solutions), modify the track so 3:30 isn't an issue for several years (probably not the best of ideas either), or go to a consumption formula where the cars will have little fuel and will have to make it work. Well, we think that last option may be the future. It's probably the best option for Le Mans, but what about everywhere else? Do you give teams lots of fuel at tracks where speeds aren't really a factor?

More importantly, what does the ALMS do. We don't give a damn about 3:30 and we'd rather not see econobox prototypes. We certainly don't want to see BHF and BHH'ed econobox prototypes. Previous Road Atlanta races have shown us that it is important to keep cars on the ground, but that has not been an issue of significance here for many years. Even Grand-Am recognizes that you can't have ugly cars. The IRL is a little slow to pick up on this, but who wants to be like the IRL? Nobody. It's not that we don't want to see hybrids and stuff like that (remember Sparky?), but fuel savings should still be within the context of ultra performance and such like that. That's what sells people (or at least Americans) on fuel saving technology. That's the direction the ALMS should move towards. We want the earsplitting sound of powerful engines, not the earsplitting sound of gunfire in Bahrain or whatever other hellhole favorites the ∀IℲ has on their list.

[JAG]

I'm sure if you had a word with the powers that be they'll knock together something including tube-frame 'Vette's, retro M8's and even the odd Panoz that currently serves as trackside decoration, the rest can suffer those econobox prototypes, the quickest sportcars we've seen, and arguably the most exciting class in motorsport.

As for the FIA, there's no one more sceptical than myself, but some people need to read up on the differences between this organisation today, and twenty years back. TBH, NASCAR won't quite believe their luck, piece by piece they're dismantling the ALMS' ace cards, while fans focus is elsewhere.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by JAG

the quickest sportcars we've seen, and arguably the most exciting class in motorsport.

Take the current sports cars and put a big honkin' engine in it and/or few restrictions and the ACO LMPs will become prototurtles. Kick the ugly stick to the curb and the ACO LMPs will look like prototurtles. We'll see what excites the sports car fan then.

As for the FIA, there's no one more sceptical than myself, but some people need to read up on the differences between this organisation today, and twenty years back. TBH, NASCAR won't quite believe their luck, piece by piece they're dismantling the ALMS' ace cards, while fans focus is elsewhere.

The ALMS is fighting a two-front war. Yes. Oddly, one group of savages are the French and the other group are Frances. Go figure. As for the ∀IℲ, their explicit role may be different now, but they are still the all-powerful puppet master of auto racing. Maybe the European answer is to fawn and submit to their power. But look at NASCAR. In their early days, they told the all-powerful American racing associations (AAA and eventually USAC) to F off even though it wasn't easy. Well, which series is more famous now, NASCAR or the purposely crippled USAC Stock Car Division?

[deggis]

Originally Posted by AGD

Some stuff may be ACO directives, but if they don't do it on their own, the ∀IℲ will force them to do it. So it really does not matter.

Apparently it does, because I see ∀IℲ instead of OↃⱯ.

The BHFs and BHHs may or may not be factors in the long-term, but the 3:30 directive will be and you can chalk that up to the ∀IℲ.

What? 3:30 is a FIA rule now?

Obviously there are a lot of factory engineers who will make whatever changes are made irrelevant and so the rules will have to change on an almost regular basis to appease the ∀IℲ.

If you change that to past tense and ∀IℲ to OↃⱯ...

It's probably the best option for Le Mans, but what about everywhere else? Do you give teams lots of fuel at tracks where speeds aren't really a factor?

Probably but why is this now an issue when it wasn't the last time? If SꟽꞀⱯ is still married with OↃⱯ, the limits could be easily adjusted for the different race format (and the Autocons and Intersports could have their own allocations). And, unlike now, big engines (apparently) won't be literally forbidden.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by deggis

What? 3:30 is a FIA rule now?

Well, the 24 Hours of Le Mans is pretty useless if the track isn't certified, yes?

If you change that to past tense and ∀IℲ to OↃⱯ...

First of all, I have no idea what you're trying to write. Blame my Norwegian browser if you wish! The bottom line is that the less ɷ kissing of the ∀IℲ there is, the ☺ we'll be.

✌

Probably but why is this now an issue when it wasn't the last time? If SꟽꞀⱯ is still married with OↃⱯ, the limits could be easily adjusted for the different race format (and the Autocons and Intersports could have their own allocations). And, unlike now, big engines (apparently) won't be literally forbidden.

Well, that's fine then if they want to let 'em rip outside of Le Mans. Either way, IMSA GT was more than successful going in a totally different direction. I don't see any reason for the ALMS/IMSA to stick to what the ACO is doing when the ACO could care less about them. Maybe for once we can have a stable and domestically relevant rulebook. That's been a huge problem. It's not like the ALMS would have to go far outside the ACO rulebook to remove BH aerowork and it's not like bigger engines don't exist. They were around just a few years ago.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by AGD

Well, the 24 Hours of Le Mans is pretty useless if the track isn't certified, yes?

Yes but I just don't think that 3:30 is relevant because I believe it is purely ACO's own "reference point" (and I also find it dumb because it is too simplistic or at least that's the image ACO has given).

First of all, I have no idea what you're trying to write. Blame my Norwegian browser if you wish! The bottom line is that the less ɷ kissing of the ∀IℲ there is, the ☺ we'll be.

✌

Is supposed to be "ACO" (and later "ALMS") upside down, but looks like I used OS-dependent characters.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by deggis

Yes but I just don't think that 3:30 is relevant because I believe it is purely ACO's own "reference point" (and I also find it dumb because it is too simplistic or at least that's the image ACO has given).

It has been rumored (Hindy and/or Graham Goodwin earlier this year) that the track may lose certification if the average race laps are below 3:30. Or something like that. I don't know the criteria exactly and if that information is even accurate, but I think the 3:30 thing is more than just an ACO wish. There may be more meaning behind it.

Is supposed to be "ACO" (and later "ALMS") upside down, but looks like I used OS-dependent characters.

Well, we can put the SW˥∀ and the OƆ∀ in the hall of shame too if you want. That's fine with me. Just leave the LMS alone. I know the series may not be much of a spectacular thing next year, but I respect the way the series is not trying to be popular and is trying to focus on the racing and racers instead. It's refreshing to follow racing and not feel like I've been overpromised and underserved. Maybe someday they'll find a way to put LMP1s on a track in an interesting way, but regardless, I'm sure they'll have the best racing that nobody knows about next year!

[Tim the Grey]

3:30 is a Rule of Thumb for when cars are getting out of hand. I don't think the track should change, I would love the chicanes to get taken out. So you have to do something about the cars.
With Group C it was easy. Just give them less fuel.
Hmm. It's an idea. Oh, the ACO already did that, look...

Safety at LM IS a massive issue. Think 1955, live, on TV, world wide. Then tell me you would have motor racing ANYWHERE, at all. Today's society would have screaming headlines demanding a ban, and it would happen.

[Pandamasque]

The lap of La Sarthe could be made slower while actually improving the track somewhat. There are a few places where the completely flat curbs allow the drivers to blatantly cut the corners, why ACO pretend no to notice. Just build higher curbs.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by AGD

It has been rumored (Hindy and/or Graham Goodwin earlier this year) that the track may lose certification if the average race laps are below 3:30. Or something like that. I don't know the criteria exactly and if that information is even accurate, but I think the 3:30 thing is more than just an ACO wish. There may be more meaning behind it.

Some sort of average km/h ballpark would be more believable instead of the 3:30. Most idiotic thing about the 3:30 is that whenever the track changes, the 3:30 doesn't adapt.

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

The lap of La Sarthe could be made slower while actually improving the track somewhat. There are a few places where the completely flat curbs allow the drivers to blatantly cut the corners, why ACO pretend no to notice. Just build higher curbs.

Tougher curbs eventually break more cars. Probably one of the main reasons why the curbs are so flat.

I'm not a track builder but I find it incredible that on the fastest part of the track (Mulsanne-Porsche curves) there's basically nothing more than some grass and a relatively primitive and low barrier. Not a lot of crashes seem to happen in this part of the track though, but instead of touching the track configuration maybe there are other things that could be done.