|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
19 Oct 2006, 15:00 (Ref:1742164) | #1 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,102
|
Evolution of the ACO regulations in 2007
This should prove controversial!
Quote:
|
||
|
19 Oct 2006, 15:05 (Ref:1742167) | #2 | |
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 240
|
Very. Quote: "None of us will say anything because we want an entry next year."
|
|
|
19 Oct 2006, 15:11 (Ref:1742169) | #3 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Summary:
Last edited by gwyllion; 19 Oct 2006 at 15:18. |
|
|
19 Oct 2006, 15:46 (Ref:1742194) | #4 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,102
|
Quote:
|
||
|
20 Oct 2006, 09:45 (Ref:1742863) | #5 | |||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,102
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
20 Oct 2006, 09:59 (Ref:1742869) | #6 | |
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 240
|
No that's fine James. No original copy (in the middle - the important part) - just a translation of the Ouest-France piece.
MC |
|
|
19 Oct 2006, 18:55 (Ref:1742358) | #7 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Quote:
|
||
|
19 Oct 2006, 15:14 (Ref:1742171) | #8 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
With this special statement about ALMS allowing ethanol it is save to assume that the Rahal Porsche will run on ethanol. See http://www.rahal.com/
The question remains LMP2 or GT2. The ACO annoucement seems to give a hit, because ethanol is only mentioned for GT1 and GT2 Last edited by gwyllion; 19 Oct 2006 at 15:18. |
|
|
19 Oct 2006, 15:28 (Ref:1742176) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,147
|
Thoughts:
Last edited by paul-collins; 19 Oct 2006 at 15:42. |
||
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean? -Bill James |
19 Oct 2006, 15:33 (Ref:1742181) | #10 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,351
|
Contrived competition, you reap what you sow.
|
||
|
19 Oct 2006, 15:43 (Ref:1742189) | #11 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
19 Oct 2006, 15:46 (Ref:1742193) | #12 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,147
|
I understand the rationale, gwillion. What I'm saying is that, since those manufacturers have no reason to go the diesel route, and with diesel regs being maintained in this beneficial setting, they'll simply not bother.
Oh well, it'll be another test of ALMS' ability to forge ahead on their own, I guess. |
||
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean? -Bill James |
19 Oct 2006, 15:50 (Ref:1742196) | #13 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 264
|
I don't know what to say to all this. I thought maybe we would see something a little bit different, maybe allow more competion, and maybe more brands into the ACO rules.
This however makes me think that we will not see anything new come up in the near future. The idea of a porsche in LMP1...well kiss that goodbye. Honda, Mazda, Porsche in LMP2....well that looks to be going the same route, atleas in the eyes of the ACO. I wonder what they think of cusomer supported teams in their "lower" class? |
||
__________________
Foster's The View From the Cheap Seats |
19 Oct 2006, 15:57 (Ref:1742206) | #14 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,349
|
Why would anyone bother to run a petrol P1 any more? The only place to be competitive is for them all to pack up and enter the ALMS as the LMS is bound to be an Audi/Peugeot white wash.
It's a shame the Audi domination has scared the other companies into going the P2 route, which is only going to end up hurting the dedicated privateers with Acura and Porsche duking it out in 2007. It's curious that the ACO still thinks P2 is for private teams yet does nothing to protect them from getting whomped by a richly backed factory outfit. |
||
__________________
Real cars have roofs. |
19 Oct 2006, 16:15 (Ref:1742225) | #15 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,147
|
Quote:
Mazda has been privateer with a little bit of support all along. I'm hearing that, at the very least, the engines will be Japan-supplied next year instead of built stateside. At most, it can be said that the Japanese teams right now are semi-factory. The real protection comes in the form of forcing companies to be prepared to supply their wares to any and all comers (ie Michelin). With those tires, Porsche vs Intersport might look a bit different right now... Anyway, you can't force the factories to go to P1. You can certainly discourage them from entering P2 (which the pinning back of the ears is about), but you have to provide the incentive for them to join P1 at the same time - and with current P1 engine regs, if Honda (or Porsche) isn't prepared to go the diesel route, there's just no incentive. |
|||
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean? -Bill James |
19 Oct 2006, 18:52 (Ref:1742356) | #16 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Quote:
65kg ballast in favour of petrol cars in the ALMS is not insignificant by any means, but I am 100% convinced Dysons increased competitiveness is 70/30 car development/performance breaks. FIA GT has shown cars with upto 100kg success ballast are very competitive. Zytek and Creation both flew away from the R10's at PLM, with the extra weight I'm quessing they would have be toe to toe with the R10's, which lets not forget is a massive achievment being privater vs factory, diesel or not. I'm extremely pleased the ACO have shown they are happy with 2006 Le Mans speeds/times, seeing as they were very quick, even into the 3.32s during the race. Apparently it will only be when cars dip below 3.30, consistently, during the race that speeds will be brought back. |
||
|
19 Oct 2006, 16:18 (Ref:1742227) | #17 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 240
|
Quote:
|
||
|
19 Oct 2006, 16:44 (Ref:1742255) | #18 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 428
|
If they restirct those LMP2s and GTs even more, they'll get no air at all!!
|
||
|
19 Oct 2006, 17:06 (Ref:1742282) | #19 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,958
|
Another daft set of rules by the ACO. Such a shame that they run that "little race", as they continously frustrate by trying to make all other racing in this genre struggle.
All that was needed to be done, was to release the gas powered P1's a bit, to equalize the diesel/gas performance. It is theoretically possible that this new spec Shell fuel will do so, but one would have expected this to be explicitly stated if is so. I hope that Audi paid well for these regulations. |
||
|
19 Oct 2006, 19:00 (Ref:1742360) | #20 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Quote:
Races have been handed to each team on a plate this season, each time a factor other than pace has denied them victory. It's too easy to blame increased diesel power for the R10's dominance, a horrendously restricted R8 embarrased Dyson and Porsche earlier in the season. |
||
|
19 Oct 2006, 20:00 (Ref:1742403) | #21 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,699
|
Quote:
Audi could have easily engineered the R10 around the petrol FSI bi-turbo and been just as fast. I'm with you on this one JAG. The ACO have it right. Instead of doing performance adjustments at the drop of a hat (ahem, IMSA/ALMS), they're taking a measured stance. The diesel's fuel capacity was the only real choice given the available petrol P1 data in terms of pace. Last edited by jhansen; 19 Oct 2006 at 20:02. |
|||
__________________
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." Albert Einstein |
19 Oct 2006, 21:11 (Ref:1742450) | #22 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Lets see what the petrol opposition have in their locker.
If they lose because they're massively off the pace, the season adjustments twice a season will kick in. If they lose due to poor pitstops, reliabilty and accidents, hard luck. |
|
|
19 Oct 2006, 17:19 (Ref:1742292) | #23 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,699
|
To those of you that are partaking in the diesel conspiracy punch...show me the evidence that the diesel cars have a true speed advantage.
The R8s were spanking the Pescarolos in terms of outright pace at Le Mans in 2004 (I'm excluding '05 for obvious reasons even though they won regardless). The R10s then spanked the Pescarolos in terms of outright pace at Le Mans in 2006 and this surprises people? Not to mention, the Pescarolo is only a hybrid at this point and not even a true P1 car. Are you honestly telling me that if a manufacturer came into the picture with a petrol car that was engineered on the scale of the R8 that it would not be competitive? I call B.S. on that. |
||
__________________
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." Albert Einstein |
22 Oct 2006, 13:22 (Ref:1744965) | #24 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,102
|
Quote:
Just wanted to come back to this since you were there yourself. Despite Laguna (apparently!) not being an 'R10' track, it was in fact an Audi that did the fastest LMP1 lap in the race yesterday, despite a 65kg weight disadvantage to it's far more nimble adversaries. On the other hand, the fastest lap of the race was in fact turned by a Spyder. What we don't know, of course, is how much boost the Audi's were running. |
||
|
22 Oct 2006, 13:32 (Ref:1744972) | #25 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,418
|
Quote:
Just cant run down to the local truck stop and get more diesel for these cars. IMHO diesel fuels need to be standardized for any diesel race cars to get. or refinery to make. Sunoco makes most of the race fuels ( petrol) in N American race cars. Shell makes for europe and elswere. Very close in formulation between Sunoco and Shell. Not much tuning difference when cars cross the atlantic. Diesel fuel should be the same. Forget the Bio-fuels until they also can be standardized. |
|||
__________________
"When the fear of death out weighs the thrill of speed, brake." LG |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ACO regulations for 2006 released | Alistair_Ryder | ACO Regulated Series | 96 | 14 Nov 2006 08:10 |
Official: 2007 Sporting regulations | Marbot | Formula One | 19 | 19 Oct 2006 09:46 |
[FIA GT] FIA/ACO GT regulations | ger80 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 4 | 14 Jul 2006 23:23 |
P1 top speeds with new ACO rules and regulations??? | Garrett | ACO Regulated Series | 7 | 18 Jul 2004 23:33 |
[FIA GT] ACO & FIA 2004 Regulations. Help! | sebring1971 | ACO Regulated Series | 6 | 6 Sep 2003 19:27 |