|
Mazda mystifies me.
I don't trust the AER motor ... it has never been a reliable motor---but at the same time, it nearly got the #70 to the podium at Petit and it was strong enough to break its own gearbox at Daytona ... the car ran what, 23:45 before they pulled it?
I am really hoping the cars will do well in the shorter events.
Also ... the chassis would unquestionable fit a V6 ... I wonder if the choice to do the gasoline I4 was based off the decision to do the diesel I4, when someone should have thought a little more widely.
Petit last year proved that the I4 couldn't manage the 5.5 V8 ... the #55 couldn't get around the #10 even it it might have been faster over a lap, given running room. The motor lacked the torque ... just like the early P2/DP contests, better aero couldn't overcome more torque.
Mazda had to know it would always face that disadvantage. Was Mazda just being penny-wise, pound foolish? or did no one step outside the I4 box to consider a wholly new motor?
Re: the Rotary .... Please no. Great motor, but it would make me take up wearing earplugs again.
More seriously, imagine the BoP nightmares .... No one would ever know why the car won, whether the BoP was wrong or the team actually got its stuff together and made it work.
Let's see if IMSA can come up with a fair BoP table and Stick to It for a season, instead of this race-by-race crap ... Then we can consider things like rotaries.
|