WEC LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules - now hypercar rules) - Page 262

ApexTurtle · 11 Apr 2019, 19:43 (Ref:3896881)

It's rare when I agree with someone on everything but I couldn't find a single flaw in any of Vasselon's answers in that article. Well done sir!

Mike E · 11 Apr 2019, 20:21 (Ref:3896885)

That's good stuff from Vasselon.

BoP, or success ballast or whatever, has a place in a series which takes existing cars with differing layouts and turns them into racing cars. Even if it is a repulsive concept to purists like us, brothers and sisters.

But a formula is different. A formula says here are the rules, build your car to these rules and may the best one win. That's the point of a formula.

I would rather watch Rebellion, SMP, ByKolles and Dragonspeed fight it out with their current cars than some lardy, glorified road car lumbering around LM at 3 minutes 30.

S griffin · 11 Apr 2019, 21:12 (Ref:3896891)

I agree with Vasseleon. WEC is supposed to be the F1 of sportscar series, so BoP has no place at the top of the tree in my book

chernaudi · 11 Apr 2019, 22:09 (Ref:3896904)

Gotta agree with M. Vasselon's sentiments about TMG preferring to run prototypes (or at least road car influenced, prototype based cars) in preference to what the ACO seems to be pushing for.

**Bentley03** · 12 Apr 2019, 08:55 (Ref:3896959)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

This is a complete cluster at this point. They've managed to get to a position where absolutely nobody is happy.

Can't help but draw comparisons to Brexit.

BOP, as unacceptable to me as the backstop is to NI. I didn't like what was being proposed in the first place, but I that's probably the final nail in the coffin for me...

Deleted · 12 Apr 2019, 13:24 (Ref:3897003)

Don't wry there's still one non-BoP class at LM. Too bad it's a spec proam class with fake sticker rebrandings but you know... Better than nothing I guess

Anyway, this will be the first time since the beginning of LM where the tech incentive for overall win will be irrelevant... Which in turn makes the PR about Zero Emission look pretty funny when right now they don't care rats ass about technology, only OEM money

bobec · 12 Apr 2019, 14:56 (Ref:3897020)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiana

Don't wry there's still one non-BoP class at LM. Too bad it's a spec proam class with fake sticker rebrandings but you know... Better than nothing I guess

LMP2? That's a spec class.

Deleted · 12 Apr 2019, 15:01 (Ref:3897021)

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobec

LMP2? That's a spec class.

Which part of "spec proam class with fake sticker rebrandings" did you miss in my post

TF110 · 12 Apr 2019, 15:15 (Ref:3897023)

The fact that Toyota says it's cheaper to do a prototype should say something about who is influencing these rules. It has to be someone with a car already made that can be adapted and ran a little bit slower than lmp2s right now. Is that Ford? Aston Martin? McLaren? Whoever it is, I don't think it's worth it unless they're bringing other big names along. And even then it's basically glorified GTE, which I thought was going to end up happening. Shame...

Deleted · 12 Apr 2019, 15:23 (Ref:3897025)

While Aston Martin is obviously going to be at the head of any lobbying list, they're not particularly hyper big name or provider of OEM cashflow / bribes, so it's either Ferrari or McLaren I reckon. Ford seems to be more on the "whatever we'll do it if it's cheap to transform our GTE into it" line

Now then, in the past when ACO slowed down cars, the target lap times never really materialized. Even the pace of 2011 was much quicker than the ACO projected thanks to Audi and Pug pushing the envelope. However, in a boring old BoP class they can do whatever they want to control it, even order FIA test driver to bop-test all the cars at Paul Ricard or something. And if/when it's spec tires for all there's not going to be any point for tire development either

Mike E · 12 Apr 2019, 18:14 (Ref:3897057)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TF110

The fact that Toyota says it's cheaper to do a prototype should say something about who is influencing these rules.

Crazy, really. They've spent years moaning about costs and now they want to spend more than they need to.

Deleted · 12 Apr 2019, 18:26 (Ref:3897062)

Toyota wants to win on merit, not by luck/politics/wrestling. You can also control your destiny better if it's a competition of superior engineering rather than lottery draw.

I imagine they'd also rather spend money on actual cars rather than wasting it on nonsensical marketing and bribing the bop committee like everyone else

BoP also means they won't be allowed to win LM two years in a row because that's "boring" by the said ideology. So 2021 should already be wasted

TF110 · 12 Apr 2019, 19:32 (Ref:3897080)

I don't know how this is going to work out but if Toyota has a plan to use a prototype, it'll be weird to see it vs something like the Ford GT which is a... GT. I know people say that it's a prototype but it's mostly because it raced before it sold. Same thing as the M8 which I have yet to see a production model of. Ford brought an actual sportscar though while BMW brought a big bodied 'coupe' if you can call it that. I guess it'll be something like the TS020 racing against the McLaren F1 just fast forwarded 20 years in the future!

bobec · 12 Apr 2019, 20:59 (Ref:3897097)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiana

Which part of "spec proam class with fake sticker rebrandings" did you miss in my post

Guess that whole part

You even said it better

pablocomics · 13 Apr 2019, 09:48 (Ref:3897191)

Why not just make a cost capped P1 instead? It worked very well on P2 (I mean before the Spec regulations). Do wathever you like with a small amount of money and sale it to the teams without any money losses.

TF110 · 15 Apr 2019, 20:22 (Ref:3897772)

Whatever happened to that supposed announcement of interest/intent within a week of Sebring? Guess that never really was on?

Deleted · 16 Apr 2019, 04:29 (Ref:3897853)

Hopefully nothing's happening and they reverse their plans (again)

S griffin · 16 Apr 2019, 05:27 (Ref:3897869)

Well maybe they've hit a dead end and have been forced to make a u turn

Deleted · 16 Apr 2019, 08:05 (Ref:3897901)

Quote:

Originally Posted by S griffin

Well maybe they've hit a dead end and have been forced to make a u turn

Which has been the story of these regulations since LM 2017 press conference lol

Sodemo · 16 Apr 2019, 09:06 (Ref:3897917)

What exactly is the sticking point for the regulations?

Mike E · 16 Apr 2019, 09:20 (Ref:3897920)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sodemo

What exactly is the sticking point for the regulations?

Aston wants to run a Valkyrie.
BMW wants to use hydrogen.
Toyota wants to run a prototype.
Ferrari wants to turn up to the meetings to appear interested but never commit to anything.
Ford wants to switch to DPi unless they might be interested in running a version of the GT as a hypercar. Maybe.
McLaren wants to run a Senna, or maybe a prototype that looks kinda like a 720S.
Glickenhaus wants to run a prototype that looks like a hypercar that they can sell as a road car.

Rebellio/SMP/ByKolles/Dragonspeed (maybe even Ginetta) don't want to throw away the very recent investment in their prototypes.

Besides that it's plain sailing...

Gingers4Justice · 16 Apr 2019, 09:49 (Ref:3897931)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike E

Aston wants to run a Valkyrie.
BMW wants to use hydrogen.
Toyota wants to run a prototype.
Ferrari wants to turn up to the meetings to appear interested but never commit to anything.
Ford wants to switch to DPi unless they might be interested in running a version of the GT as a hypercar. Maybe.
McLaren wants to run a Senna, or maybe a prototype that looks kinda like a 720S.
Glickenhaus wants to run a prototype that looks like a hypercar that they can sell as a road car.

Rebellio/SMP/ByKolles/Dragonspeed (maybe even Ginetta) don't want to throw away the very recent investment in their prototypes.

Besides that it's plain sailing...

Someone should make a massive Venn diagram with all those parties and see what's in the middle.

My guess is four wheels and a roof.

**Adam43** · 16 Apr 2019, 10:13 (Ref:3897934)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

My guess is four wheels and a roof.

Now that’s a rule book!

J Jay · 16 Apr 2019, 10:29 (Ref:3897938)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

My guess is four wheels and a roof.

I wouldn't be supremely confident about the roof, I've heard rumours that Ferrari want to go open-top, so they can save money by using their F1 tub (along with almost everything else from the car).

Four wheels should be agreed by all interested parties - as long as they all want the wheels to be the same size.

crmalcolm · 16 Apr 2019, 10:30 (Ref:3897939)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

Someone should make a massive Venn diagram with all those parties and see what's in the middle.

I think that was done in post 2 of this thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by zac510

The EVO rules are in a constant state of evolution

ie nobody knows yet!

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