Porsche being assisted by ACO in GT2 for 2009?

arakis · 3 Jan 2009, 19:55 (Ref:2364647)

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

The new regulations for 2009 gt2 are changed as folows
minimum weight increased for ferrari and porsche
1145 ferrari 1245 porsche
restrictor sizes reduced by 0.7 for both porsche and ferrari,
ferrari 2008 28.1 2009 27.4 -2,4911%
porsche 2008 29.3 2009 28.6 -2,3890%
witch will give an advantige to porsche since they are running on bigger restrictors and the difference is smaller % wise. ( not a big deal but still)

and to save the worst for last
Quote for aco 2009 regulations http://www.lemans.org/sport/sport/re...lmgt2_2009.pdf

" Porsche 911 GT3 RS (997) (ACO homologation N°: LMGT2-03) :
For all the events excepted the « 24 Heures du Mans »
- To remove 25 Kg to their minimum weight." - last page

why oh why............ I hate them I hate them I hate them,

**FIRE** · 3 Jan 2009, 20:04 (Ref:2364650)

Who do you hate? Porsche, Ferrari or ACO?

Did the Ferrari 360 get "help" from ACO or FIA?

arakis · 3 Jan 2009, 20:12 (Ref:2364656)

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIRE

Who do you hate? Porsche, Ferrari or ACO?

Did the Ferrari 360 get "help" from ACO or FIA?

not that i know of,

and I hate ACO for ruining a perfect equalibrimu, that exists in gt2 class, quit changing rules

I love Ferrari,
I respect Porsche,
Hate Fia/ACO/SRO............the list goes on all of them set up a set of rules and then keep changing them to ballance the performance, witch tottaly eliminates the point of watching racing for me. I want to see 1 set of rules a lot of Manufacturers and see who will come out on top

bil588 · 3 Jan 2009, 21:38 (Ref:2364716)

I think the smaller LMP wings for 2009 are stupid. It drives up costs and they don't look good.

juicy sushi · 3 Jan 2009, 23:09 (Ref:2364761)

i'd be happier if they just took the rear wings off entirely.

the 2008 rules for GT2 were fine and produced excellent racing. there were absolutely no changes necessary regarding performance balancing...

The Badger · 4 Jan 2009, 08:24 (Ref:2364861)

Quote:

Originally Posted by arakis

not that i know of,

and I hate ACO for ruining a perfect equalibrimu, that exists in gt2 class, quit changing rules

I love Ferrari,
I respect Porsche,
Hate Fia/ACO/SRO............the list goes on all of them set up a set of rules and then keep changing them to ballance the performance, witch tottaly eliminates the point of watching racing for me. I want to see 1 set of rules a lot of Manufacturers and see who will come out on top

Well then , I suggest you tune into Serbian motorsports then . If your motorsport is anything like your music , you should enjoy it !!! .....

arakis · 4 Jan 2009, 11:20 (Ref:2364920)

joke aside, I don't get it do you actualy suport performance balancing in motorsport

(edited by Aysedasi - as the 'joke' wasn't actually funny - although it was provoked..... Watch out for the warning bat you guys!!)

Nordic · 4 Jan 2009, 11:47 (Ref:2364930)

All GT2 cars should weigh the same then we would not have this type of problem.

If a car is built to the rules, then let the best man win.

Speed-King · 4 Jan 2009, 11:49 (Ref:2364931)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nordic

All GT2 cars should weigh the same then we would not have this type of problem.

If a car is built to the rules, then let the best man win.

I think there are a few things that speak for a sliding weightscale instead of one weight for all cars as it allows greater variety of possible engines.

Nordic · 4 Jan 2009, 11:54 (Ref:2364933)

If a cars lighter, does it need to be as powerful?

Have a
1, maximum CC
2, Max and minimium weight and let the car makers decide which route to take.

Sometimes the bigger engined cars will win, sometimes the lighter more nimble but less powerful will win out.

**Dani Filth** · 4 Jan 2009, 12:58 (Ref:2364962)

and we have that don't we?
but we also have restrictors

The Badger · 4 Jan 2009, 13:25 (Ref:2364987)

Quote:

Originally Posted by arakis

joke aside, I don't get it do you actualy suport performance balancing in motorsport

No , I dont support it . Im just pointing out that if you hate something , dont watch it . That would be a normal attitude , or not ?

arakis · 4 Jan 2009, 13:58 (Ref:2364997)

nope since there isn't anything better to watch, if its the best racing around it doesent make it perfect, what is the point of helping porsche with these rule changes, when in that porsche vs ferrari topic, all porsche fans agree porsche was by far superior, so if it was superior why is the help administered

The Badger · 4 Jan 2009, 15:37 (Ref:2365038)

What is the point of helping Ferrari to the tune of 80 million , in F1 , and trying to hide it like in the Max & Bernie show ? ..... that is so unfair to smaller teams , but Ferrari didnt object . If that same rule was applied to Ferrari sportscars , I dont think they would mind , do you ?

At least with the Porsche deal , everybody knows about it before .

I didnt like the performance break Porsche got last year ..... completely , and I dont like it now .

Nordic · 4 Jan 2009, 15:42 (Ref:2365042)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dani Filth

and we have that don't we?
but we also have restrictors

Thats the point.

Trying to pretend you can have a level playing field by playing with power output vs weight is dumbing down the sport.

arakis · 4 Jan 2009, 16:44 (Ref:2365082)

every one knew about the 80 mil, it was the money berny and max paid ferrari to stay with them in F1. And F1 has apsolutley nothing to do with sportscars,
so quit mixing the two.

In my oppinion this is the proof ferrari had built a supirior car then porsche, all that don't agree I guess will never know becouse all other comparisons have been compromised by FIA -30 kg, and ACO -25.

**Aysedasi** · 4 Jan 2009, 17:37 (Ref:2365115)

Let's keep this thread on topic please guys, and not another excuse for a Porsche v. Ferrari thread......

NightStalk3r · 4 Jan 2009, 17:45 (Ref:2365125)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Let's keep this thread on topic please guys, and not another excuse for a Porsche v. Ferrari thread......

Thats exactly what it is thought, a Ferrari fan moaning that Porsche get abit of help.

**Aysedasi** · 4 Jan 2009, 17:51 (Ref:2365129)

It was, before it started to get personal - hence the bits I deleted. Remember - 'attack the post - not the poster......'

chernaudi · 4 Jan 2009, 18:48 (Ref:2365172)

We all have to remember what started this whole deal-Porsche on the 997 incarnation of the 911 GT3 RSR decided to run GT1/LMP2 spec rear tires on the 911, so they got hit with a weight penalty due to homolgation requrements, but in compensation, they were allowed to run a larger air restictor.

If Porsche stuck to the original GT2 tire width requirements, we wouldn't have the performance balancing-and if Porsche was more supportive of their GT2 private teams in '07, I doubt we'd be talking about this either.

JAG · 4 Jan 2009, 20:07 (Ref:2365200)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nordic

Thats the point.

Trying to pretend you can have a level playing field by playing with power output vs weight is dumbing down the sport.

It's the only way forward unless you have stricter engine regs, i.e 2l turbo's only in the WRC.

That's obviously impossible for GT sportscars with such different engine configerations.

The Badger · 5 Jan 2009, 06:58 (Ref:2365396)

Quote:

Originally Posted by chernaudi

We all have to remember what started this whole deal-Porsche on the 997 incarnation of the 911 GT3 RSR decided to run GT1/LMP2 spec rear tires on the 911

Porsche cant be blamed for that . Thats the rules that the organisers choose . Creation had a simlar option a few years ago , they got a break from running a smaller diameter wheel/trye , which didnt work out too well for them , but if it had , that would have been ok , or not ?

chernaudi · 5 Jan 2009, 15:39 (Ref:2365679)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Badger

Porsche cant be blamed for that . Thats the rules that the organisers choose . Creation had a simlar option a few years ago , they got a break from running a smaller diameter wheel/trye , which didnt work out too well for them , but if it had , that would have been ok , or not ?

Creation was a private team with a racecar that was an old Reynard design that they updated from LMP675/LMP1 to an actual LMP1 hybrid and money and time kept them from converting to LMP900/LMP1 tires.

Porsche is in terms of sportscars(road going and racing) a large manufacturer, and they should've been able to make the normal GT2 tries work.

makaveli87 · 6 Jan 2009, 03:21 (Ref:2366043)

this still leaves Ferrari with a slight HP to weight ratio advantage.

Correct me if im wrong but last year it was (depending on series)
Ferrari:445hp 1100-1125kg
Porsche:465hp 1200-1225kg

if the cars have similar power differences, Ferrari will have still kept its power to weight ratio advantage for 09'.

The Badger · 6 Jan 2009, 03:33 (Ref:2366047)

Quote:

Originally Posted by arakis

every one knew about the 80 mil

Maybe you did .... but this was not common knowalage.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
ACO 2009 regs	zac510	ACO Regulated Series	2	16 Sep 2008 13:36
GT2 replaced by GT3 ..... ACO new idea	The Badger	ACO Regulated Series	315	4 Sep 2008 16:31
Porsche GT2 domination	Garp	Sportscar & GT Racing	60	14 Sep 2005 15:35
New GT2 porsche	pink69	Sportscar & GT Racing	6	1 May 2002 14:31