|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
8 Feb 2012, 20:17 (Ref:3023336) | #426 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,264
|
And the problem is you couldn't make the DW into a spec series because it's whole raison d'etre is innovation and pushing technology forwards. To run it as a spec race car would be an oxymoron. I know it was going to be one in Indycar, but that's not what they're talking about any longer.
|
|
__________________
Michael Delaney was wrong. In between is not waiting - in between is the glory, the passion. In between is what elevates racing. |
9 Feb 2012, 00:24 (Ref:3023453) | #427 | |||||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
Quote:
Quote:
It's running because Don Panoz and a few others want to make money off the silly thing. That's all. Spec car classes are easy money. Well, in theory of course. I'm not sure how much money has been made off the URC. Quote:
Quote:
As for what Panoz should do with his money, yes, I'd rather see the Abruzzi over the Wang. Most of all, as Fogelhund said, I'd rather see the money invested in the ALMS series itself or in cars that actually create excitement amongst the fanbase. |
|||||
|
9 Feb 2012, 00:46 (Ref:3023466) | #428 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,229
|
Has auto racing been reduced to nothing more than entertainment?
If it has, then I find that sad. I got to enjoy the late 1960's and the 1970's when the cars had all sorts of interesting stuff that has been legislated out of existence. Some of it has been legislated out in the interest of safety, including keeping speeds down. Other things, like requiring no more than four wheels, like requiring the engines to all be piston engines, have taken most of the fun out of it. Why not let designers innovate? If a kooky new idea is a flop, then fine. Somebody tried something and it didn't work. If a kooky new idea puts all the field to shame, that's great. Now everybody else knows they need to copy it or come up with something better. I'm glad the ACO is open to a kooky new idea, and has decided there should be an on-going place reserved for kooky new ideas. I hope they loosen up the overall rules package so kooky new ideas can run within the normal class structure. And occasionally put the rest of the field to shame. |
||
|
9 Feb 2012, 01:00 (Ref:3023470) | #429 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
Quote:
It's even more of a problem when the intention behind the kooky Indycar is that if it runs well, it will be sold as a spec car to run in a spec "sports car" class. |
||
|
9 Feb 2012, 01:59 (Ref:3023479) | #430 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,229
|
Quote:
Racing cars used to not have wings. There have been F1 cars with fenders. Now, in any series except Formula Student/FSAE, the cars are all a bunch of clones, or are at least very similar. It would be fair to say a car needs to be able to seat two if it's going to compete at Le Mans. With the DW, they would need to make it two people in tandem because it blows the whole concept if it's two people side-by side, but running P2 times using half the fuel would be the most innovative thing that's happened at Le Mans in a long time. |
|||
|
9 Feb 2012, 02:15 (Ref:3023481) | #431 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
|
9 Feb 2012, 03:22 (Ref:3023501) | #432 | |||||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,229
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
|
9 Feb 2012, 03:36 (Ref:3023503) | #433 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
9 Feb 2012, 08:16 (Ref:3023547) | #434 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,586
|
As an old joke says, if it was a horse it'd better be shot now. There's no sense in that carrot-o-mobile. There's no connection with real life. While you have some very interesting and useful innovations (Audi's TDI, Porsche's Flywheel, Toyota's supercapacitor) that already are (or would be) at conveyor, this strange red vehicle is just an attempt to save some money from fault with Indycar version. Do you realy think it has any bright ideas under that ugly body except headlights beaming right into it's own rear mirrors. Rather small engine that gives enough power to be as fast as LMP2? Hm. Have that vehicle driven at last one lap in reality? How we can say that it's going to be fast enough? We can only belive. You belive that it can, I belive not.
|
||
__________________
ACO-Ratel-Lotti group of "entertainpreneurs" soon will make you think that Reverse-Gear-Racing is the most professional series in the world. "Faccio il pane con la farina che ho". |
9 Feb 2012, 08:33 (Ref:3023551) | #435 | |||
Team Crouton
20KPINAL
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 39,934
|
Quote:
No, not for me. Not every kooky new idea is automatically brilliant just because it works. As I say, the DW could turn out to be utterly brilliant, but if I thought there would be 20 of them on the grid at Le Mans in 2013, I fear I'd be missing from my grandstand seat.... Anyhow, a really good sensible debate guys! |
|||
__________________
280 days...... |
9 Feb 2012, 09:48 (Ref:3023593) | #436 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,399
|
I hear what a number of people say about not wanting another spec class - and I don't necessarily disagree.
As I see it there are various schools of thought ranging from the "Hate the way it looks", via "Can't see the point", through "Should have spent the money some other way that I approve of" and including, and never forgetting "It'll never work." I keep, in my own mind coming back to the point that if it DOES work then the same clever peoplke responsible for developing it have already made it clear that the concept has lessons for road cars - lighter, more efficient etc etc Frankly that's where the bigger wins, and the bigger bucks lie and that's what the principle of introducing new tech through the 56th entry really should be about - relevance. Strip all of that out and the "Don't make this about jobs" remark made earlier seems ill-judged at best. On the Panoz LMP1 issue - I agree, I'd love to have seen that too - But it's Don's money and he chose not to do that - Having had the opportunity to chat to him in June last year privately it is VERY clear that he makes those kinds of decisions with icy focus - not on a whim. Look at it this way guys - You can marshal plenty of points to back up your own point of view - Please don't ignore and/ or dismiss those that inconveniently offer a worthwhile response. - whichever way you see the issue. I agree Ayse btw - a good debate |
||
|
9 Feb 2012, 10:21 (Ref:3023610) | #437 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
Quote:
Quote:
You may want to tell Don the next time you see him that he ought to start giving the ALMS fans what they want to see instead of seeing "environmentally conscious" CF genitalia and other works of abstract art on the track. You may want to remind him that nobody is going to ALMS tracks to see "green racing," they come to the track to feel the rumble of a Corvette V8 and stuff like that. The factories know that and that is why the ALMS has been mega fail the past few years. There was a point in time where Don seemed fully aware of this, but I don't know what has happened the last few years. We sit here hoping to see good news, but all we get are more LMPCs, URC, UNC Abruzzis, and the Wang. |
|||
|
9 Feb 2012, 10:46 (Ref:3023622) | #438 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 527
|
Some people dismiss this kind of cars just because they look "different" or are not what they want "their series" to be. But, thinking this way, we would have never seen the big GT1´s in the nineties ("The1996 Porsche GT1 is outside the spirit of the rules..."!) , we would have never seen the little Lola LMP675 ("it´s killing the ´675 class, it´s too expensive!!") fighting the Audis, we would have never seen the diesel battle between audi and peugeot "...diesel does not belong to sportscars"..., and, maybe looking back, there would have never been a Porsche 917 "... breaking the rules by building 25 cars..."
If the DeltaWing fails as a concept, we have lost nothing, if it suceeds..., well, there may be lessons to learn from that. I think the DeltaWing concept makes Le Mans 2012 a little more technically interesting... |
||
|
9 Feb 2012, 12:18 (Ref:3023669) | #439 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 391
|
Quote:
While the 993 GT1 looks like this: Some might think it's stupid or petty to shoot down the DW just because of how it looks (not even gonna comment on the ''innovative'' technical aspects of the car since AGD pretty much said exactly what I think), but at least in my case, how the cars look was the reason I started following sportscar racing in the first place and I still consider it to be a big aspect of the sport. |
||
|
9 Feb 2012, 12:56 (Ref:3023684) | #440 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,062
|
Quote:
|
||
|
9 Feb 2012, 13:00 (Ref:3023689) | #441 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 527
|
Some might think it's stupid or petty to shoot down the DW just because of how it looks (not even gonna comment on the ''innovative'' technical aspects of the car since AGD pretty much said exactly what I think), but at least in my case, how the cars look was the reason I started following sportscar racing in the first place and I still consider it to be a big aspect of the sport.[/QUOTE]
I agree it´s a pretty ugly car... But, imagine for a moment that the concept proves to be, somehow, quick... (altough I would not bet on it) You cannot tell a manufacturer like Audi, Peugeot, Porsche... not to imitate it, they want the quickest possible car, and do not care much about the looks... (1998 Porsche GT1 was far more ugly than 1996 or 1997´s one, but won the race, Bentley´s 2003 car was uglier than 2002´s... etc). I don´t like the looks of the DeltaWing! But I thinks it´s fair for them just trying it! |
||
|
9 Feb 2012, 13:31 (Ref:3023702) | #442 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,406
|
I'm more than willing to accept that everyone is entitled to an opinion, and I'm not going to try to convince anyone that their opinion is wrong........my opinion is based on the fact that I work in advanced automotive powertrain design at a time when road car powertrains are undergoing extreeme change in the form of downsizing and working in harmony with motor-generator systems, basically a time of "outside of the box" thinking for mainstream auto makers, weather its an engine, gearbox or a vehicle.......therefore I think that the ACO have done something great here, to show the world that we need to accept change in order to reduce emissions and running costs with a sensible business case overall........
This is just the sort of thing that will attract forward thinking vehicle manufacturers to endurance racing and prove that they dont need to spend hundreds of millions on a disasterous F1 programme that is not road relevant. Once the DW starts competing I think it will soon win everyone over, a bit like a jackrussel having a fight with a doberman, whereby the Jackrussel will put up an equal fight despite being less than half the size.......in the UK everyone loves the underdog who puts up a good fight.........personally I think it will sound great too........have you heard the latest WRC cars.....music |
||
|
9 Feb 2012, 15:04 (Ref:3023733) | #443 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,834
|
Would it have that Anti-Lag System that spits fire and brimstone everywhere?
To nick a phrase from on here a while back.. "It's like an Apache Gunship strafing a fireworks factory..." At which point, I think I could get to like it! |
||
__________________
Tim Yorath Ecurie Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch Fan of "the sacred monster Christophe Bouchut"... |
9 Feb 2012, 22:51 (Ref:3023882) | #444 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
Quote:
The GreenGT and Courage concepts have some interesting fuel technology that may be interesting to factories, but they were not chosen over the Wang. Quote:
Some people are associating the resistance to the Wang as being a resistance to new ideas. That's not the case for most I don't think. For example, I'm not aware of any resistance to the hybridization of P1. Some people don't like diesels because of the noise issue and some of the fuel equivalence issues, but that is understandable as a lot of people go the races to feel the noise and power of the cars. Stuff like homologation specials are naturally controversial. So on and so forth. |
|||
|
10 Feb 2012, 08:53 (Ref:3023983) | #445 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,406
|
I think the old style of bang-bang anti-lag is even frowned upon in rallying these days, I dont think its allowed anymore for noise reasons, turbo lag on 1600cc WRC cars is now controlled by what is termed a fresh air valve, which during an off throttle moment, allows the intake plenum air to bypass the engine and purge through the exhaust turbine in order to keep the turbo shaft spinning......but otherwise it should sound just like a 1600cc WRC car which will be just perfect in my book........overall I'm not sure how the ACO noise regs compare to the WRC noise regs???....
|
||
|
10 Feb 2012, 15:39 (Ref:3024138) | #446 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,834
|
Boo. Hiss. Shame.
Spoilsports! |
||
__________________
Tim Yorath Ecurie Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch Fan of "the sacred monster Christophe Bouchut"... |
10 Feb 2012, 18:08 (Ref:3024191) | #447 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 944
|
Quote:
1. It's essentially a three-wheeler. No automaker is going to release a three-wheeler or one with such a narrow front wheelbase compared to the rear. A lot of the car's proposed improved aerodynamic efficiency is due to something that would never be implemented into road car use. 2. Cars that are lighter use less energy. Are you trying to say that automakers don't know this already? What carmaker in the world does not understand that point? 3. It's going to use ground effects. Yes, that makes a car sleeker and they use less energy. What carmaker in the world does not understand aerodynamics? 4. This is one that really gets on my nerves because it's something the race folks that think the raison d'etre for the sport should be a technology experiment don't get. I work everyday as an engineeer on an engine for road and industrial use that in my opinion is a more technologically advanced diesel engine than anything Audi or Peugeot have ever put on the track at Le Mans. 5. In light of the car getting waivers on minimum weight and other things, why are they being allowed to enter a car that no one else could? Hey, I can make the same points they can with a piece of junk I can create. I'll manufacture the World's Fastest Indian like Bert Munro did. |
|||
|
10 Feb 2012, 18:43 (Ref:3024204) | #448 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 785
|
I don't see where a person can think an LMP Audi R18 has relevance.
1. It's essentially a single seater. No automaker is going to release a single-seater or one with a passenger seat full of electronic boxes. A lot of these cars' proposed improved aerodynamic efficiency is due to something that would never be implemented into road car use. 2. Cars that are lighter use less energy. Are you trying to say that automakers don't know this already? What carmaker in the world does not understand that building a car out of carbon fiber gives something that is more "Ultra Lightweight" than a road car with a metal chassis? 3. It has advanced aerodynamics. Yes, spending years in a windtunnel gives better aerodynamics. What carmaker in the world does not understand that cubic dollars make better racecars? 4. This is one that really gets on my nerves because it's something the race folks that think the raison d'etre for the sport should be a technology experiment don't get. He works everyday as an engineeer on an engine for road and industrial use that in his opinion is a more technologically advanced diesel engine than anything Audi or Peugeot have ever put on the track at Le Mans. 5. In light of the car getting waivers on diesel engine displacement and boost, why are they being allowed to enter a car and technology that no one else could? Hey, I can win all races with a car inspired by Darth Vader on which tens of millions of dollars are spent. Why should that be allowed to compete - with FOUR LM entries - when the rest of the field is very well balanced with engines that make a great noise? |
||
|
10 Feb 2012, 19:04 (Ref:3024210) | #449 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
Quote:
Based on other VAG ads during Super Bowl XLVI, it seems that VAG also likes Darth Vader. The R18 makes perfect sense then. I guess the Wang has relevance to any car company who wants to center their marketing campaign around the talents of Ron Jeremy. Or Richard Simmons. |
||
|
10 Feb 2012, 19:13 (Ref:3024214) | #450 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 944
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Wide Front Wing / Narrow rear wing | browney | Formula One | 30 | 21 Nov 2011 12:13 |
Delta S4's that were in Rallycross | M.Lowe | Rallying & Rallycross | 23 | 30 Aug 2007 11:47 |
Delta wing , inverted delta wing | effuno | Racing Technology | 3 | 8 Apr 2007 13:45 |