|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
17 Mar 2018, 09:22 (Ref:3808489) | #5501 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,561
|
Let 'em run what they got. They obviously can go faster with some breaks and/or give some penalties to newer cars like a Ford or Toyota GTP. The Mazda was recently given a 15kg weight break, and the Rebellion is going to be based on the Oreca lmp2 running 833kg. So it's a matter of whether they feel like bop is something suddenly unacceptable imo. We'll see. But Ford is huge, and if they get their way, maybe Toyota comes too running as Lexus?
|
|
|
17 Mar 2018, 09:30 (Ref:3808490) | #5502 | ||
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
Quote:
That would be absolutely horrendous, a total mess of epic proportions. Plus like I've said before, if you can theoretically win Le Mans with cheap sticker-badged customer spec car with zero development required as it's all bopped, no-one's gonna bother with expensive P1 chassis of your own. Because there's no incentive whatsoever. |
||
|
17 Mar 2018, 12:03 (Ref:3808513) | #5503 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
|
Someone like Toyota might. But I agree, no BoP mess in LMP1 please. LMP2 was supposed to be free of it as well but even that is starting to crumble.
|
|
|
17 Mar 2018, 14:40 (Ref:3808548) | #5504 | ||
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
Quote:
It's the same thing as if in F1 the FIA would allow spec F2 Dallaras into the grid and to be able to artificially complete for overall win. They'd allow small aesthetic modifications to how the wings would look like, thus enabling the teams technically still be "constructors", but effectively it'd mean just rebranding the Dallaras as what the teams wish to call them. Everyone would instantly give up on building expensive and innovative F1 chassis of their own (except maybe like Ferrari and Mercedes for similar marketing/historical reasons as said above) and stick their engines and 100 dollar wing modifications and different paint jobs into the spec F2 Dallaras, trusting FIA to give them power to win. Last edited by Deleted; 17 Mar 2018 at 14:47. |
||
|
17 Mar 2018, 18:26 (Ref:3808606) | #5505 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,561
|
Quote:
|
||
|
17 Mar 2018, 18:41 (Ref:3808609) | #5506 | |
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
But again, why would anyone bother with regular nonhybrid P1 if you can do the same exact thing with cheaper performance balanced spec car you don't have to develop at all? That also has the added benefit of (camouflaged) OEM association
|
|
|
17 Mar 2018, 18:51 (Ref:3808615) | #5507 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,561
|
Right now there's semi-factory teams in DPi, not quite full factory backed. So if they keep it the same then it prevents them from doing a full factory DPi/non-hybrid lmp1. They can supply engines and tech stuff but private teams run them. Penske isn't really a factory squad technically and neither is Joest or Wayne Taylor, but they probably get some support. If there's an incentive to run a hybrid or GTP style car (like fuel efficiency) there may be more takers. They just need to make sure it's not allowing guys like VAG to come in with hundreds of millions to blow everyone away.
|
|
|
17 Mar 2018, 19:11 (Ref:3808622) | #5508 | ||
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
Quote:
If those are allowed to go for overall wins with half-assed efforts instead of full blown factory campaigns with their self built cars, that brings whole can of new worms to the table... because then there's expectancy for the future that you can represent manufacturer with more or less badge-engineering and be 'entitled' to win with such. Much like performance balancing and pro-am structure are now expected everywhere because they've been drilled to the head of the participants so deeply that they can't even remember how it was before them, not so long ago... |
||
|
17 Mar 2018, 19:57 (Ref:3808626) | #5509 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,561
|
I don't like it either, but that's probably the best scenario in order to get the cars to run both series. I think if the manufacturers supply engines and give some tech to these guys it's about equal to private lmp1's. What I really think needs to happen is that these teams foot the bill if they want to run DPi. It shouldn't be pure Acura or Cadillac. It should be a Penske Oreca Acura. Ginetta said something similar before about how they could change the appearance to match to a manufacturer. So if a manufacturer wants to enter right now and not use a hybrid they might not be allowed but with this they would be. They might have to appease DPi guys but if it means that there's lmp1's/GTP's in IMSA too that would have to be the settlement.
|
|
|
17 Mar 2018, 20:21 (Ref:3808632) | #5510 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,148
|
Quote:
Nissan LMP1- Ben Bowlby's design group in Indianopolis, and a Cosworth TwinTurbo V6... Renault F1 - That Enstone facility has changed ownership a handful of times. Renault, Lotus, Benneton etc. All while retaining, hiring, mixing and mingling employees from all over motorsport. Acura ARX P2s and P1 - Wirth research (independent) aero with the Honda powerplant and HPD support for build and support. Mercedes F1 - Sure there are a few Mercedes road car division employees (and probably new hires), but for a facility in Brackley that used to be Brawn, and Honda, and so on....they didn't just sack all of the employees. Many have been working in the facility since before it became Mercedes F1. So does Mercedes "self build" their F1 car? Puegeot, Audi, Porsche etc. All the company has done is hire a bunch of people working on other areas of motorsport, and sometimes from within their road car division to develop these race cars and run the race teams. Why do you consider those efforts "self built". Just because everyone was given the same uniform to wear at the race? Even though GT's get the semi pass. Aston Martin - Prodrive, Ferrari - Michelotto, Corvette - Pratt & Miller.... The manufacturers do not own any of these companies. They effectively slap their name on those race cars. Other than the frame (from production) and engine....Which really isn't all that different to DPI. What do you think it means to be "self built"? Genuinely trying to get something productive out of this. I'm not sure that you are actually opposed to the DPi concept, even though you say you are. Because it's really no different to many of the things you probably considered to be "self built". Last edited by Articus; 17 Mar 2018 at 20:31. |
||
|
17 Mar 2018, 21:23 (Ref:3808645) | #5511 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
|
Isn't that difference pretty simple? Building a car yourself (or letting other people build it) from scratch versus buying a completed car anyone else can buy too and modifying it.
|
|
|
17 Mar 2018, 21:58 (Ref:3808658) | #5512 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,920
|
Interesting stuff about "self built" issue
among recent lmp1 manufacturers, guess that peugeot and porsche have been the ones who basically made ther car "in house". Audi lmp1 chassis was made by dallara first and ycom later. Toyota chassis and aero is developed by TMG in germany, powertrain by toyota motors in japan and hybrid hardware by other japanese firms. The less "self built" car was lola - aston. Chassis supplied by lola, bodywork by prodrive, engine by ford. |
|
|
17 Mar 2018, 23:14 (Ref:3808683) | #5513 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,308
|
How is the TS050 not completely in house when Toyota Motorsport has been a division of the company for 25 years and the hybrid hardware comes from the same suppliers as Porsche, Audi, and/or their road cars?
|
|
|
17 Mar 2018, 23:38 (Ref:3808689) | #5514 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,148
|
At some level, every race car is just a parts bin of things that are "bought" from a supplier, and fit to the car. Electronics, fuel systems, drinks bottle, brakes, wheels, tires, and so on. Why should being able to purchase a turnkey vehicle and mod it be any different? I don't see how the former, is any more worthy.
|
|
|
18 Mar 2018, 02:40 (Ref:3808760) | #5515 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
|
You seem to grossly underestimate the necessary skill to turn a 'parts bin' into an actual car.
|
|
|
18 Mar 2018, 03:37 (Ref:3808778) | #5516 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,561
|
I think something like 85% of Toyota's car is all their own doing. I bet the Ginetta is mostly their own but uses a Mechachrome engine. I get Chiana's words, he means a car designed or built for a specific team/manufacturer vs a run of the mill Oreca or Ligier lmp(2).
|
|
|
18 Mar 2018, 10:37 (Ref:3808834) | #5517 | ||
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
What EffectiveSprinkles said.
Quote:
|
||
|
18 Mar 2018, 12:51 (Ref:3808855) | #5518 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,148
|
LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules)
Quote:
No... It also takes skill to run a spec car as a race team in a full season....Everything requires "skill" And whose "skill" is it? When the teams just hire a bunch of ex F1 and Motorsport "spec employees" to design the car. What's the difference between that and just buying the spec car? It seems the actual issue isn't the self made problem, but more that people can't get over someone not spending 100million dollars to win the LM24. Only if you are spending 100million + even as a complete idiot wasting design and track time and resources until you've spent 100 million, is that somehow worthy of winning LM. It doesn't take "skill" to spend 100million dollars. |
||
|
18 Mar 2018, 12:52 (Ref:3808856) | #5519 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,082
|
...a lot. Like, a huge amount. Like, we don't have enough server space on this forum to discuss it all.
|
|
|
18 Mar 2018, 13:00 (Ref:3808860) | #5520 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,148
|
LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules)
Quote:
My point is we make a big deal out of something that is quite superficial. When Genii were the owners of the Lotus F1 team, did Geniii do anything other than throw money at it? The operation and people at Enstone already existed. They bought a functioning F1 operation. If you think about it, why is that any different in terms of end result to just buying a customer spec Ferrari? They still haven't done anything. And the same applies to many LMP and GT teams. They effectively buy "spec experts" most of the time. The idea of buying something that is "spec" still exist. It's just being done at a different level. So if that's the reason that people don't like DPi, then it wouldn't be consistent to like things we have seen in the past. Last edited by Articus; 18 Mar 2018 at 13:05. |
||
|
18 Mar 2018, 13:09 (Ref:3808863) | #5521 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,082
|
Buying a product is completely different to hiring people to design a product. You can apply that to any level.
You need a mouse for your PC. You could buy one. Or you could hire a team of engineers with the background in making a mouse to design, test, manufacture and support your custom built mouse. "If you think about it, what's the difference? You're just hiring spec experts." |
|
|
18 Mar 2018, 14:21 (Ref:3808872) | #5522 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,148
|
LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules)
Quote:
I think this is where we fundamentally differ. My opinion is that engineering service is a product that can be bought and/or sold. And that's consistent with the way that it's treated in the real world. Through contracting, consulting, and/or buying up something that already exist. And that's the way many of these recognized "self built" teams operated.... |
||
|
18 Mar 2018, 14:27 (Ref:3808877) | #5523 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,082
|
Of course engineering services are a product that can be bought and sold. But just because it's a product that can be bought, it doesn't mean it's the same as buying a finished product. The scale of the tasks we're describing can barely be compared to each other.
Quote:
|
||
|
18 Mar 2018, 16:31 (Ref:3808900) | #5524 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,148
|
Quote:
I'm not trying to be funny or overly literal. If you choose to look at it at the level of the carpets, and the space that you sit in, then sure everything is different. But you know that's not where I'm going with this as pointed to by everything I've said above. For the company, or owner, it is the same as buying the finished product. For the owner, all he or she has done is contribute money to get an end result. So why should the owner somehow be perceived as more worthy of winning LM because they bought engineering services vs the final product. That's what we are addressing. People are opposed to DPI because of the spec chassis that is purchased by the OEM. As opposed to when the OEM has simply done a no strings attached engineering services purchase (the FWD Nissan LMP1 is the least subtle of the examples). They are the same when it comes to the contribution of the manufacturer. No one was up in arms when Nissan had Ben Bowlby and Cosworth make an LMP1 car for them (other then the drive layout) |
||
|
18 Mar 2018, 16:37 (Ref:3808901) | #5525 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,082
|
Quote:
I know you're not being funny or difficult, and I hope I'm not coming off as rude. But I think you're massively underestimating the task of creating a vehicle from scratch. I imagine there would be a few team owners who would raise an eyebrow at the "only contributed money" comment. |
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[WEC] Glickenhaus Hypercar | Akrapovic | ACO Regulated Series | 1603 | 12 Apr 2024 21:24 |
[WEC] Aston Martin Hypercar Discussion | deggis | ACO Regulated Series | 175 | 23 Feb 2020 03:37 |
[WEC] SCG 007: Glickenhaus Le Mans LMP1 Hypercar | Bentley03 | ACO Regulated Series | 26 | 16 Nov 2018 02:35 |
ALMS Extends LMP Regulations | tblincoe | North American Racing | 33 | 26 Aug 2005 15:03 |
[LM24] Whats the future of LMP's at Le Mans?? | Garrett | 24 Heures du Mans | 59 | 8 Jul 2004 15:15 |