|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
9 Oct 2018, 19:31 (Ref:3855744) | #5926 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,827
|
Only thing I don't get/don't like about the LMP1 "hyper car" regs is that the LMP2s might look more "prototype-like" than the LMP1 cars.
|
||
|
9 Oct 2018, 19:49 (Ref:3855747) | #5927 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,864
|
Quote:
Sooo...Basically what the original Daytona Prototypes SHOULD have looked like. |
|||
|
9 Oct 2018, 20:39 (Ref:3855757) | #5928 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,209
|
||
|
9 Oct 2018, 21:23 (Ref:3855765) | #5929 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,864
|
|||
|
9 Oct 2018, 21:24 (Ref:3855766) | #5930 | |
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 303
|
Why are they insisting on the HUGE cockpits? I just don't get it. Surely something like the CLR and 911 GT1-98 would be the better solution. Wide enough to get two people side by side, narrow enough to be quite far removed from a road car and look quite alien and special.
I think the secret is that the entirety of the cockpit should be contained within the inner width of the front wheels. I saw this fan-made render last week and it's much preferable to those released by the ACO: More pictures here https://grabcad.com/library/project-919-gt1-1 Obviously there are aspects of the fan render that make no sense in a modern context - such as those doors, the mirrors and the tiny exit for the front diffuser - but the car as a whole seems sound enough to my untrained eye. |
|
|
9 Oct 2018, 22:09 (Ref:3855782) | #5931 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,864
|
Quote:
First of all, they're not that much wider than what you refer to. Don't forget that the ACO now uses narrower overall chassis(and that's expected to be retained in the new LMP1 regs), so a cockpit of similar width will look wider than it actually is. Secondly, there's the road car side of things. To help the factory-car look, they'll need those wider cockpits. The Mercedes CLR and Porche 911 GT1-98 bared only the most minute of resemblances to the road cars they were allegedly based on. Lastly, there may very well be leeway in the cockpit widths that allow designers to narrow them if they choose to do so. These are CONCEPTS meant to illustrate the idea behind the car, NOT finalized rules. I personally prefer the wider cockpits if they're going to insist on the hypercar rules. As long as they don't make the dimensional regulation mistakes that led to the original DPs, we're good. |
|||
|
10 Oct 2018, 02:06 (Ref:3855808) | #5932 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,308
|
A 1900mm width for "hypercars" is when street hyper cars start around 1950 and go up to over 2060 for the track cars, and the GTEs are 2050 is laughable. Then again what isn't about this?
|
|
|
10 Oct 2018, 03:05 (Ref:3855811) | #5933 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,394
|
I don't think it's set in stone yet what the width is. I'm with RedSquirrel though. They look like GTE's, not GTP's. The Valkyrie and the Toyota don't have that extra wide cockpit.
|
|
|
12 Oct 2018, 10:33 (Ref:3856227) | #5934 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 393
|
....so the ACO remains on suicidal mode.
At this moment there are some LMP1 because the development costs are relatively small (they just need to modify the existing LMP2). But.... How many constructors will risk their funds developing a complete new car considering the tiny LMP1 market? You can see where is Ginetta at this moment. 6 Works teams? I'm expecting between 1 to zero. The reception of the new regulations was as cold as a exgirlfriend's mother hug on the manufacturer side. |
||
|
12 Oct 2018, 11:40 (Ref:3856239) | #5935 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,183
|
Since when did the FIA or ACO know what they were doing? Its just one muddled decision after another.
|
||
|
12 Oct 2018, 13:22 (Ref:3856255) | #5936 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 241
|
While I don't think the whole thing is ideal, I'm still excited to see something new pounding around tracks we know and love. I think some of the comments in here are overly cynical. As a motorsport fan why wouldn't you want this to succeed?
|
||
|
12 Oct 2018, 15:20 (Ref:3856274) | #5937 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,394
|
Is it? Or is this a decision based on feedback from fans and manufacturers/teams? I think we'll see Toyota and Aston Martin in 2021. That's a 100% increase in factory teams than we have now.
|
|
|
12 Oct 2018, 19:04 (Ref:3856327) | #5938 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,209
|
Evidently... Almost every week one of these 5-6 manufacturers talks about the regs in public. We can also name these manufacturers because they have come out and admitted interest and/or the fact they've been present in the meetings. If you can't name them, then cleary you have not followed news closely enough.
|
|
|
12 Oct 2018, 21:43 (Ref:3856352) | #5939 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,864
|
Quote:
You clearly haven't been paying attention. Sure, a few manufacturers have been a bit dismissive of it, but the general treatment hasn't been anywhere near as cold as you claim. Quite the contrary, many manufacturers are excited about it, with the hybrid rules being the primary sticking point. For at least one interested manufacturer(Ford), the rules aren't the sticking point so much as whether it will form the basis for IMSA's top prototype class in the future. And frankly, the class COULD work for IMSA. If the ACO can get the costs down far enough, just removing the all-wheel-drive and hybrid systems would make it a suitable top class for IMSA. And don't think for a moment that any manufacturer interested in the class won't be willing to provide non-hybrid versions for IMSA racing. |
|||
|
14 Oct 2018, 03:15 (Ref:3856755) | #5940 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,308
|
Quote:
There's been a few small manufacturers talking about running but honestly none of them actually have the money for it. Just floating it for investors. |
||
|
14 Oct 2018, 10:10 (Ref:3856782) | #5941 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,390
|
|||
|
16 Oct 2018, 00:11 (Ref:3857053) | #5942 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,394
|
Quote:
|
||
|
16 Oct 2018, 06:41 (Ref:3857082) | #5943 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,308
|
Trying to compare a $3.5m/year privateer class that has pretty vague equalization between chassis to a $25m/year factory class where all the performance parameters of the car are fixed does not work.
LMP2 has approximately the technology and cost level necessary for its performance requirements and is reflected in large competitive fields, which is an okay tradeoff for more technical freedom. Meanwhile the hypercar class is 7-8x as much money for less (rather nearly zero) performance differentiation and a fraction of that worth more speed. There's no benefit, only the loss of any chance of decent field sizes, resulting in a terrible competition on every level. It manages to make DPi look like a good idea, and that's just plain spending twice the money on LMP2 cars to make the fields smaller and the racing worse. In other words spec racing usually trades freedom of technology for more freedom of entrants, while spec racing at this price point and base technology requirement is trading both for guaranteed advertising for a few manufacturers able to play. |
|
|
16 Oct 2018, 08:57 (Ref:3857093) | #5944 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
|
But you don't even know what's spec yet and what isn't. I'm not very enthused about what I've heard about these regs so far but there's been nothing to indicate that it's going to be anything like LMP2 spec wise.
|
|
|
16 Oct 2018, 22:48 (Ref:3857189) | #5945 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,209
|
Quote:
iirc December was mentioned as a final approval date for the full regulations. |
||
|
17 Oct 2018, 00:42 (Ref:3857199) | #5946 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,864
|
Quote:
But if there's a problem they'll in all likelihood finalize enough details that the manufacturers can still get to work and only need to make minor adaptations to account for the later changes - anything that could cause a delay right now is probably not going to be a big enough detail to invalidate a manufacutrer's entire design. |
|||
|
17 Oct 2018, 00:52 (Ref:3857200) | #5947 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,209
|
December is also when the next FIA WMSC is. After that the next is in March.
|
|
|
17 Oct 2018, 07:53 (Ref:3857229) | #5948 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 152
|
http://www.dailysportscar.com/2018/1...up-a-gear.html
Quote:
|
||
|
17 Oct 2018, 09:34 (Ref:3857244) | #5949 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,209
|
20M eur for OEM and 16M for privateers? Really?
An OEM will find a way to spend more. Then a full BoP system will be implemented... if it isn't already in the plans at least regarding the DF cap. |
|
|
17 Oct 2018, 09:38 (Ref:3857245) | #5950 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,183
|
Lets face it, they are just trying to create a somewhat faster GTE class, with all the same BOP measures.
Take a GTE car, lose 300kg, insert a 800bhp engine, fit a massive aero bodykit, done! |
||
|
|
|
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 |