View Single Post
Old 10 Sep 2016, 19:47 (Ref:3671558)   #34
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,880
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!
Well, if the ACO considers traction control a "chassis system" (I don't know how, since it's part of the ECU, which is an engine electronics system), why not ban traction control in LMP1 (and maybe DPI and LMP2) across the board? Audi had a 700bhp/900lb-ft torque diesel in 2006 that lived most of the season without it. Audi also lived without traction control on their front wheel drive hybrid system until this season.

Besides, if a simple ASR system is all that's legal under ACO and IMSA regs, that shouldn't be a problem. From what I've seen, ASR is rather ineffective given how easy it is for even pros to spin out on their own at times.

This goes along with the split between the ACO and IMSA over the spec ECU. Engine makers in IMSA wanted to use their own, while otherwise they'd have to use the Cosworth ECU, which in its basic form is set up for the Gibson GK428 V8. Between engines of different displacement, NA vs turbo, et al, I'd still think that the Cosworth/Gibson ECU would still have adjustable parameters, like the McLaren semi-spec ECU has in F1, and the McLaren/Freescale quasi-spec ECU in NASCAR Cup does. But then again, car makers it seems even want to run their own ASR traction control system.

This whole deal is basically everyone egos getting in the way, and sometimes that spill over onto this board, too. Which is why I'm slowly but surly drifting away from social media of all types.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote