Vic Elford's thoughts on sportscars today

[isynge]

There's a fascinating interview with Vic Elford over on Project Le Mans and right at the end he offers some thoughts about the state of sportscars today.

VE- Not a great deal, except for Formula 1 (luckily) racing is going backwards. Everybody is more concerned with entertainment than racing. Look at Grand Am, it's a great example of that. Regulations are such that any progress is blocked, cars are ugly as hell, they all look the same and there's no reward for performance. One of the teams had developed great fuel economy and was able to do 1 fuel stop less than the rest even in this 2 hour 45 minute TV race format we have these days. So what did they do? They forced a compulsory stop before 45 minutes!!! So there goes all the hard work to improve, the team's fuel economy was punished rather than rewarded. Same in the ALMS where LMP1s and LMP2s are evened out, performance is brought back to the level of the worst cars.... Same with the Diesel and Gasoline dispute, every step forward is blocked by rules. From a racing point of view it's not good and guys like Piech, Forghieri.. they would pull their hair if they were managing teams now! Races should be won by the best racers in the best cars.

I can see this resonating in the diesel v petrol discussion elsewhere, the conversations about the relative merits of Grand Am, and other threads across the forum, but I found it highly interesting, to say nothing of worrying, that someone I respect enormously in the sportscar world has such views.

It did also strike a thought that several eras that we thought were golden ages, e.g. 69-71 with the 917, and the early Group C era with the 956/962 were periods of dominance either through exploitation of a rules loophole or fundamental engineering excellence (diesel and Audi overall spring to mind) and perhaps today there would have been pressure to legislate them out of existence.

Personally I think Vic's being a touch unfair in places. The ALMS LMP1/LMP2 situation might be likened to the early 70s in that the 917 was optimised for tracks like Le Mans but on a more typical circuit the 3 litre cars could often show it a clean pair of heels - okay that wasn't something artificially facilitated by revisions to the rules of the day, but are we now in a period which we might look back on and reminisce about the days of how spectacular the R10s and (Peugeot) 908s were when they were given their head and forget about the days on street tracks when the RS Spyders beat them?

Interesting thoughts one way or another.

[Marcel ten Caat]

errr...it's on Planetlemans

[isynge]

Absolutely - got it in one, my mistake and many apologies; to be honest it's lucky I didn't call it Petit Le Mans...

[Lusitano]

I absolutely agree with him!

There is a lot of bull****, these days!

[TRuss]

There is alot of things that I don't like about modern racing too. Ideally I agree with Vic. However, with out spectators the series will not survive. So the show must be entertaining not only for those who are current fans, but also for those just seeing a race for the first time on CBS to capture their interest. Also. With so few cars on the ALMS grid (only a handfull of prototypes LMP1 and 2 combined) they have no choice but to make these rules. I don't like it either, but for now it will have to do.

[paul-collins]

Oh if it were true!

In the ALMS the cars are not being brought back to the level of the worst cars - show me where any team is currently carrying penalty weight or restrictors! Last year of course the Corvettes were hammered, but this year all adjustments have been to speed up the back end of the field (if you consider the restrictor set used, or the extra boost for turbo engined P2 cars).

OTOH I agree that the 2h45m format is crap. And it's an interesting suggestion that the 45m pitstop rule in GA was to penalize an economy run - GA folks had been quick to tell us it was to preserve the gentleman driver's role, but it absolutely ensures that 2 stops are necessary.

[Mirage M6]

We could argue for years if car racing is going backwards or not but, if we choose the first point of view, I think that F1 could be a great example to illustrate that.

Endurance racing? Well, I like actual situation on LMS/ALMS/LM, much more than in the past (not only 90s, 50s, 60s and 80s too, it’s only an opinion, please don’t call an inquisitor) great times, incredible races and drivers, I love to read about those years and I collect all the books that I can buy…but now the gap between privateers and manufacturer is not too much (a great novelty), equilibrate grids with 4 categories with a lot of good and professional teams, very closed races in every category, etc…oh! and the most important: FIA is out. It’s not perfect I know (I hate that 3 ‘silly’ chicanes at Le Mans) but in general, the LM series are very good.

Maybe he complains about diesel rules…well his Porsche 917 was the result of favoured rules too so…

Anyway, very interesting thoughts from a legend of endurance racing

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by Mirage M6

Maybe he complains about diesel rules…well his Porsche 917 was the result of favoured rules too so…

There is a big difference between being "favored " by the rules (as is the case of the diesels) and "exploiting" rule "loop holes"
Any good manufacturer will "exploit" rule loop holes. We see it all the time in F1 and other series.
Anyway, Porsche might have been the first to spot the loop hole, but they certainly were not the only ones! (Ferrari 512P springs to mind)

[Mirage M6]

But ACO was pressured by Porsche for change the minimum number of Group 4cars that a manufacturer had to built to race (50 to 25)…and then Porsche built 25 917…and later Ferrari built 25 512s (25 512s? well, maybe not at the beginning)

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by Mirage M6

But ACO was pressured by Porsche for change the minimum number of Group 4cars that a manufacturer had to built to race (50 to 25)…and then Porsche built 25 917…and later Ferrari built 25 512s (25 512s? well, maybe not at the beginning)

It's the FIA that homologates the cars not the ACO, and I doubt that they were "pressured" by Porsche

"The F.I.A. representative Dean Delamont instructs Porsche that prior to homologation, and according to the new regulations, they must physically present the 25 units required. The term for such inspection was set in a four-week period. A month later, in April 1969, the C.S.I. had inspected 25 fully finished Porsche 917´s, minimum quantity required for the homologation. Engineer Piech felt so proud, that offered Delamont to take a ride in any of the units, gesture that he declined.
On May 1st, 1969 the Porsche 917 was officially accepted by the F.I.A. to race. "

[Martin Bull]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

in April 1969, the C.S.I. had inspected 25 fully finished Porsche 917´s, minimum quantity required for the homologation. Engineer Piech felt so proud, that offered Delamont to take a ride in any of the units, gesture that he declined.
"

Given Frank Gardner's comments re driving the 917 on its debut, maybe Delamont was prudent to decline the idea of a ride ! I remember that there was much political wrangling at the time because Porsche were so desperate to win at Le Mans - and it was so wonderful in '69 when the GT40 did it....

Interesting to see 'Quick Vic's' comments but then he was famous for being an all-out , foot-to-the-floor racer. Even old codgers like me have to accept that the World has moved on but, whatever political chicanery may have been involved, I for one will always cherish the memory of the 917/512 days.....

[Mirage M6]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

It's the FIA that homologates the cars not the ACO

Of course! we argue too much about nowadays racing and I wrote a big mistake

[WouterM]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

It's the FIA that homologates the cars not the ACO, and I doubt that they were "pressured" by Porsche

"The F.I.A. representative Dean Delamont instructs Porsche that prior to homologation, and according to the new regulations, they must physically present the 25 units required. The term for such inspection was set in a four-week period. A month later, in April 1969, the C.S.I. had inspected 25 fully finished Porsche 917´s, minimum quantity required for the homologation. Engineer Piech felt so proud, that offered Delamont to take a ride in any of the units, gesture that he declined.
On May 1st, 1969 the Porsche 917 was officially accepted by the F.I.A. to race. "

The cars were assembled, but hardly finished. I think Piech was lucky that Delamont did not take him up on that offer. Ferrari was even worse with having maybe 15 cars assembled at the time of the inspection.

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by WouterM

The cars were assembled, but hardly finished. I think Piech was lucky that Delamont did not take him up on that offer. Ferrari was even worse with having maybe 15 cars assembled at the time of the inspection.

“On March 12, 1969 the Porsche 917 was displayed to the public at the Geneva Auto Show. It had been painted white with the front of vehicle painted green.

Inspectors came to the Porsche factory to verify that the 25 necessary vehicles had been built. Unfortunately only three had been assembled. There were nearly 20 other examples in the process of being assembled and parts for the remaining available, however, Porsche was denied the homologation. Near the end of April all 25 examples were assembled and on display for the inspection team. It was finally cleared for racing in the Sport category.”

[WouterM]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

“On March 12, 1969 the Porsche 917 was displayed to the public at the Geneva Auto Show. It had been painted white with the front of vehicle painted green.

Inspectors came to the Porsche factory to verify that the 25 necessary vehicles had been built. Unfortunately only three had been assembled. There were nearly 20 other examples in the process of being assembled and parts for the remaining available, however, Porsche was denied the homologation. Near the end of April all 25 examples were assembled and on display for the inspection team. It was finally cleared for racing in the Sport category.”

Yes. They were assembled, I think I already established that fact. They were by no means ready to race though. At least not all of them.

[Spyderman]

I have not read that before.
Also - Pretty risky not having the cars completed the second time around for inspection.

[Spyderman]

Also - Just to clear up the actual reasons why the homologation figures were changed from 50 to 25:
"In April 1968, the CSI announced that the minimal production figure to compete in the Sport category of the World Championship of Makes (later the World Sportscar Championship) was reduced from 50 to 25 starting in 1969 through the planned end of the rules in 1971, mainly to allow the homologation of the Ferrari 250 LM and the Lola T70 (which was not manufactured in sufficient quantities, unless the open Can-Am T70s were counted as well) as there were still too few entries in the 3 litres Prototype category".

[Svierge]

If you think Grand Am and some aspects of LMP racing are contrived these days, you should try competing in GT3. The level of complaining truly beggars belief.

[Bramzel]

We can go back and dream about the old days of the 917. However, that car dominated. Just like Audi dominated the past years. And I think most of us want to see battles, not domination. Looking back it's easy to drift away on the good-old-days-dreams, but let's not forget the rest either. Domination is boring. So where do you pull the line between domination on one side, and a big battle on the other side? I completely agree that development should be supported, and that the battle should be on terms of prestations, not on being equalized through rules. But if that happens, everybody is complaining about dominance again.

[Martin Bull]

I think it was Frank Gardner again who said that someone always reads the regulations closely, spends a lot of money - and then '******s off into the distance'....

Le Mans is almost always about domination - Ford, Porsche ( at various times ), etc. I agree that we can't go back - but I'm sure glad I was around to see and hear the 917s !

[Spyderman]

I'm with you Martin!

[SebringMG]

Originally Posted by Svierge

If you think Grand Am and some aspects of LMP racing are contrived these days, you should try competing in GT3. The level of complaining truly beggars belief.

Yeah some of the quotes from Barwell about the recent British GT race at Snetterton (on DSC) do smell more than a little like sour grapes.......gave up reading the article in the end as the complaining was starting to get on my nerves!!!!

[jhansen]

Originally Posted by isynge

I can see this resonating in the diesel v petrol discussion elsewhere, the conversations about the relative merits of Grand Am, and other threads across the forum, but I found it highly interesting, to say nothing of worrying, that someone I respect enormously in the sportscar world has such views.

I wouldn't let this put a dent in your respect for Elford. In fact I would imagine that most drivers from this era share these views. Racing was much different back then, as were many other things. Interesting read, thanks.

[Svierge]

Originally Posted by SebringMG

Yeah some of the quotes from Barwell about the recent British GT race at Snetterton (on DSC) do smell more than a little like sour grapes.......gave up reading the article in the end as the complaining was starting to get on my nerves!!!!

I'm glad it wasn't just me who thought that.

[isynge]

Originally Posted by jhansen

I wouldn't let this put a dent in your respect for Elford. In fact I would imagine that most drivers from this era share these views. Racing was much different back then, as were many other things. Interesting read, thanks.

Rest assured respect remains undented. While his racing days were over long before my interest started his career and the way he expresses opinions in works like the Speed Merchants and his autobiography have convinced me he's a top bloke who knows what he's talking about.

Way I see it is that if he sees problems with sportscars today then there might well be one or two and we would be foolish to brush his thoughts aside.

As you say, an interesting read and I'm happy that it's provoked so many thoughts from us all.