 |
|
4 Jun 2012, 05:00 (Ref:3084883)
|
#1
|
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 690
|
How about a LMP1 Pro & LMP1 Privateer class
I think Toyota has made it plainly clear privateers can't compete for overall victories. They have built a gasoline car, and made it competitive with the Audis.
I find it funny people are still mentioning the "petrol" class in LMP1 while not mentioning the Toyotas.
So, how about giving the privateers something to race for? How about a LMP Privateer and LMP Pro/Manufacturer class.
Gasoline engine or diesel, a privateer has no chance of competing in LMP1 unless they are given a current factory spec LMP like Oreca in 2010.
So the classes can perhaps look like this
LMP1 Factory
LMP1 Privateer
LMP2
GT Pro
GT AM
Maybe LMP2 and LMP Privateer can merge into one class.
|
|
|
4 Jun 2012, 05:17 (Ref:3084890)
|
#2
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,084
|
I think it's a good idea. The way things are at the moment, Le Mans is something like MotoGP with its mix of strong manufacturer / satellite units like Honda, Yamaha, Ducati and Tech 3 leagues ahead of the more pedestrian CRT bikes.
But we may not see it as it could be an admission of failure by the ACO... Toyota has certainly given us a small glimpse of what a professional, well funded outfit can do with the current petrol/diesel regs.
One wonders whether a works petrol effort from the likes of Toyota, Porsche or BMW would have been able to tackle the diesels between 2006 and 2011?
|
|
|
4 Jun 2012, 06:35 (Ref:3084903)
|
#3
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,811
|
Why LMP2 is not the privateer class you're looking for?
And there is already a subchampionship in P1... the "Endurance Trophy for Private LMP1 Teams". And I think that makes no sense because Audi & Toyota and rest of the teams do not score points for the same points table. I'd like to see a simpler format, just one overall championship in P1, whether it's named Teams' or Constructors' (latter one is much different to "Manufacturers'" and wouldn't by definition exclude private teams).
Everybody doesn't have to win.
Last edited by deggis; 4 Jun 2012 at 06:45.
|
|
|
4 Jun 2012, 06:41 (Ref:3084904)
|
#4
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,811
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pplater
One wonders whether a works petrol effort from the likes of Toyota, Porsche or BMW would have been able to tackle the diesels between 2006 and 2011?
|
Rules are not the same (especially not pre-2011 regs) so what Toyota has done now means nothing in that regard.
|
|
|
4 Jun 2012, 08:14 (Ref:3084924)
|
#5
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,348
|
I'm against splitting classes by anything other than tech regs. I wouldn't mind a privateer trophy within P1, with a separate podium ceremony, but still in the same class so that a private car that has a really good day can still be eligible for the overall P1 win. Similar to the Independent's Trophy in the WTCC. And I'd do the same with GTE AM.
|
|
__________________
When Henry Ford II wanted to kick Enzo Ferrari’s ass he did not instruct his minions to build a Formula 1 car.
|
4 Jun 2012, 08:27 (Ref:3084931)
|
#6
|
Ten-Tenths Prowl Again
20KPINAL
Join Date: Oct 2001
|
Lymington, New Forest, England |
Posts: 31,501
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by deggis
Everybody doesn't have to win.
|
Nice one! It's a bit like political correctness in schools (and everywhere else these says), no-one is allowed to lose. Unless privateers can compete for an overall win, I wonder how much value they would see in a class LMP1 win?
|
|
|
4 Jun 2012, 09:05 (Ref:3084948)
|
#7
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,300
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aysedasi
Nice one! It's a bit like political correctness in schools (and everywhere else these says), no-one is allowed to lose. Unless privateers can compete for an overall win, I wonder how much value they would see in a class LMP1 win?
|
totally agree we do not want any more "classes" P1 should be one class only we can talk about best petrol etc but you enter P1 to win not to get a consolation prize
|
|
|
4 Jun 2012, 09:08 (Ref:3084949)
|
#8
|
Ten-Tenths Prowl Again
20KPINAL
Join Date: Oct 2001
|
Lymington, New Forest, England |
Posts: 31,501
|
I appreciate some will say a 'best of the rest' prize is better than nothing - particularly if it helps get the sponsors in......
|
|
|
4 Jun 2012, 09:20 (Ref:3084953)
|
#9
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,860
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aysedasi
It's a bit like political correctness in schools (and everywhere else these says), no-one is allowed to lose.
|
Doesn't this same apply to BoP?
|
|
|
4 Jun 2012, 09:21 (Ref:3084954)
|
#10
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location:
|
Wuerzburg,Germany |
Posts: 7,038
|
I think it's becoming apparent now that the last decade and a half has seen a monumental shift in prototype racing.
Whereas up to the late 90s prototypes were mostly* just GT-cars without a road model (and about as expensive and complicated to run), we have moved to 'F1 cars with a roof' now, with the budgets of factory teams exceeding those of the best funded privateer efforts by more than a magnitude.
Audi and Peugeot have raised the bar to such an extent that privateers have no hope in hell to compete with the manufacturer efforts and the cars have become so complicated that customer cars are no longer a real possibility.
Maybe it's time to drastically reduce the complexity of prototype machinery, back to a more GT-ish level.
I am not quite sure how to do it, but maybe going back to a fairly high number of cars produced before homologation like in the 70s would help. Add a price cap at - say twice that of LMP2 -,manufacturers would be forced to built cheaper and simpler cars and privateers would actually get access to competitive equipment.
*The final years of IMSA GTP and Gr.C being the notable exception.
Last edited by Speed-King; 4 Jun 2012 at 09:27.
|
|
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam.
|
4 Jun 2012, 09:21 (Ref:3084955)
|
#11
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 629
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aysedasi
I appreciate some will say a 'best of the rest' prize is better than nothing - particularly if it helps get the sponsors in......
|
Isn't that what LMP2 is for?
|
|
|
4 Jun 2012, 09:31 (Ref:3084960)
|
#12
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 900
|
LMP1 is, in essence, the manufacturer class. LMP2 is the privateer class. Toyota have shown that a manufacturer petrol programme can compete with diesel so I guess the much maligned regs have always been pretty well constructed.
I think its now obvious a privateer LMP1 effort, diesel or petrol, simply can't compete with the cost and technology that only a works programme can provide.
Even if manufacturer's were to sell their cars to private teams, few, if any, could afford to run them and would probably need significant factory support anyway.
|
|
|
4 Jun 2012, 09:33 (Ref:3084961)
|
#13
|
Ten-Tenths Prowl Again
20KPINAL
Join Date: Oct 2001
|
Lymington, New Forest, England |
Posts: 31,501
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultimo
Isn't that what LMP2 is for? 
|
Yes, I'd say so.
|
|
|
4 Jun 2012, 09:45 (Ref:3084967)
|
#14
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 629
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aysedasi
Yes, I'd say so.
|
So here's the 10 trillion dollar question: how do you craft the rules as to attract several manufacturers to compete for a multi-year attack whilst keeping the P1 grid large and robust?
I suppose this is the same question that the sanctioning body always has.
|
|
|
4 Jun 2012, 09:50 (Ref:3084971)
|
#15
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 900
|
I'm afraid the misty eyed dreams of a plucky Brit building a Le Mans winning car in his chicken shed have gone forever!
The days of Alain de Cadenet, Jean Rondeau etc, etc are sadly long gone.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|