|
| Site Partners: | SpotterGuides | Veloce Books |
| Related Sites: | Your Link Here |
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
18 May 2004, 20:31 (Ref:974765)
|
#1 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,761
 |
Intersport's Car Choices
i really think that a two car MkIIIC effort would be much more viable in terms of sponsorship exposure and overall race performance in 2004 than their current combination of the Lola B160-Judd in LMP1 and Lola B2/40-Judd in LMP2.
just look at the results of Autocon (running a Lincoln and not an Elan) at Sebring and look at the results of the B160. cost wise, running two of the same car with a big V8 that has been proven is much more efficient than running two seperate cars, one of which (the B160-Judd) is problem-prone (huge problems at LeMans test days keeping it from running at the LMES race at Monza). in terms of performance the R&S can be VERY fast, just look at its speed when run under Matthews. if run as the main car of the team, the R&S MkIIIC could be every bit as fast in Intersport's hands as it was in Matthews', esp. if running two cars (sharing of information, benefits of testing, etc.). |
|
|
|
|
18 May 2004, 20:44 (Ref:974779)
|
#2 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,721
 |
I'm inclined to agree. The Lola B01/60 has shown more promise since the Judd V8 was wedged into it in place of the original MG hand-grenade, but a two-car R&S effort with a stable driver line-up would seem the way to go.
|
||
|
|
__________________
Interviewer: "Will the McLaren F1 be your answer to the Ferrari F40?" Gordon Murray: "Hmm... I don't think we have anyone at McLaren who can weld that badly..."
|
|
18 May 2004, 21:22 (Ref:974811)
|
#3 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,215
|
Amen to that....couldn't agree more....
When you look at the R&S IIIC: Dyson campaigned it for only a short time...the the Lincoln Log engine.. Matthews ran the car for a few years, but on a limited season schedule...Daytona, Sebring, Petit, Miami and Le Mans in 2002 Sebring and Le Mans in 2003.... Intersport ran it for about 4-5 races.... American Spirit ran a full season, but with the Lincoln Log.... With a solid engine like the Elan, or even the Yates, and a decent team committed to running the car and campaigning it over a decent period of time, the car would show results.... No one has put those two elements together yet... As for Intersport, I also think that the two-car R&S effort would bear more fruit than what they are trying to do now... If they aren't going to race them, then I'd love to see someone buy the two MkIIICs from Interpsort and run them.... Sure beats having them collect dust!!!! |
||
|
|
__________________
Finally... One American Open Wheel Series!
|
|
18 May 2004, 21:22 (Ref:974812)
|
#4 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,699
|
This is an interesting question. I decided to check and see how the numbers stacked up. Intersport ran the R&SMK3C the last four races of 2003 and for Sebring this year. The Lola outqualified the R&S on all five occassions. It was anywhere from half a second to five seconds quicker over a single lap. In terms of finishes the R&S outscored the Lola on three of those five occassions. However, the Lola gave Intersport its only overall podium finish in 2003. The best the R&S yielded was 8th.
Last year I think the Lola was the way to go. Actually, they should have had two of them. With two Audis, two Panoz LMP1's, and two well prepared Dyson Lolas, the competition was fierce. This year I'd go with the R&S, as there is only one Audi, the two Dyson cars, the Lotus and AutoCon. With the more reliable Riley they could always be in position to pounce on the fragile Lolas and have a shot at outracing the Lotus and AutoCon. I believe Intersport are going with pace rather than reliability. The R&S is reliable, but it will struggle to keep the factory Vettes in its mirrors over a race distance. It would take a budget on the order of Champion Racing to give the R&S a fair shake (now that would be interesting). I believe they are running the LMP2 class for the driver situation and a shot at two different classes. |
||
|
|
__________________
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." Albert Einstein
|
|
18 May 2004, 21:41 (Ref:974841)
|
#5 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,958
|
I said this in the ALMS forum as well.
Of course Field's/Intersport own two MkIIIC's. Do you think that in owning all of these cars, that they might have come up with a rational reason as to why they are fielding the cars they are? Is it possible they know something we don't? |
||
|
|
|
|
18 May 2004, 22:15 (Ref:974902)
|
#6 | |||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,215
|
Quote:
Could very well be that they do...or at least they think they do. Of course they thought Clint was apparently an LMP1 class driver.... John Field is clearly the best driver in that effort...he was in the Lola....Clint was in the R&S....that should tell you why the qualifying times were different...Clint was usually back with the American Spirit Car with the Lincoln engine...an inferior engine to the power that the Elan could generate... The American Spirit ran about the same times as the Intersport car because Michael Lewis and Tom Drissi were better drivers than Clint... (BTW...I think it is a good move to have Clint running in LMP2 instead of LMP1....I'm not trying to trash him...I just think he needs more racing and when he gets the experience and the confidence, he will be fine).... It could cut either way....I like the Lola B160 a lot better with the Judd than the AER grenade.... and that car has raced only a few times with that package... My biggest question is: Why buy two chassis, race them for four or five races, then let them sit??? Either race them or sell them.... |
|||
|
|
__________________
Finally... One American Open Wheel Series!
|
|
18 May 2004, 22:28 (Ref:974918)
|
#7 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,699
|
I've always been skeptical about the true pace of the R&S MK3C. But, as you said Tim, we haven't seen a true dedicated effort with that particular chassis. I'd like to see someone with a budget along the lines of Dyson make a good run with this car. Then I could see what it's really all about. I'm not sure AutoCon is that team, but maybe they are. I was most impressed last year at Le Mans where the Riley qualified seventh about 2.25 seconds behind the quickest Audi. Forget which team, but it was impressive. The problem is we may never know this car's true capability. Intersport's driver lineups in the Riley is also a good point. Not at the strength of their smaller Lola, or AutoCon.
Last edited by jhansen; 18 May 2004 at 22:30. |
||
|
|
__________________
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." Albert Einstein
|
|
18 May 2004, 23:31 (Ref:974986)
|
#8 | ||
|
Rookie
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5
|
Two other things to remember - the Intersport Mk3Cs are the only ones with the Megaline paddle shift system (big advantage) and your tire choice makes a big difference. Michelins are a huge advantage, just look at the Vettes at Le Mans PQ this year.
|
||
|
|
|
|
18 May 2004, 23:40 (Ref:974993)
|
#9 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,699
|
PiSigma...if a team with a solid budget, good pilots and Michelins would commit to doing the time with this chassis, what would it be capable of time wise at say Road Atlanta? Secondly, would the Judd GV5 be a better fit for this car, or is the Elan the best bet? Thanks for any info you're able to offer.
And welcome to the forum! 
Last edited by jhansen; 18 May 2004 at 23:44. |
||
|
|
__________________
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." Albert Einstein
|
|
19 May 2004, 00:59 (Ref:975021)
|
#10 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 550
|
Clint's still young, like you said Tim. He just needs more time to grow. I can see him being just as fast as Jon. IIRC they won as a pair the 675 class at Washington in '02.
|
||
|
|
|
|
19 May 2004, 01:41 (Ref:975031)
|
#11 | ||
|
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 399
|
Im incline to think the GV5 is the ideal engine package for the MIIIc. When set up right Robinson Racing where as fast as the Lista Dallara in 2002 and that wasn't with many hours under the package.
If some people ive heard are right Intersport will be running Rileys next year... Not the MIIIc tho. |
||
|
|
|
|
19 May 2004, 01:43 (Ref:975032)
|
#12 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,761
|
but the times and results you mentioned jhansen are for the car under Intersport's use, and they never ran the car seriously. look at matthews' speed with the car and you can see what it can do when given proper attention and drivers... it was always Intersport's "second" car with their 2nd best set of drivers.
Intersport's B160-Judd simply isn't a contender for overall wins, and a pair of MkIIIC's can be... especially when running on Michelins and mated to an Elan engine and paddle shift gearbox also, losing Intersport to GARRA would be a HUGE blow, if they go, I fear that Dyson would be right behind them, and then who knows what... Last edited by tblincoe; 19 May 2004 at 01:49. |
|
|
|
|
|
19 May 2004, 02:18 (Ref:975042)
|
#13 | |||
|
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 399
|
Quote:
Sure it would suck not to have LMPs at every round but with the factories all showing interest in GTS cars it could be an awesome series. 
|
|||
|
|
|
|
19 May 2004, 02:26 (Ref:975045)
|
#14 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,761
|
i dont think ALMS will ever be a FIA-GT style series... if it comes down to that, i believe Don Panoz will just dump the series all together
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 May 2004, 02:35 (Ref:975047)
|
#15 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,958
|
Interestingly, Fields recently stated they had no interest in running anywhere beyond ALMS & LM. But, internet rumours are always such fun.
Dyson is committed to running their Lola's in 2004 & 2005, and then will decide what to do based on available equipment, again would prefer to stay in ALMS. Note ** Sebring 2002 - Knighthawk, privateer MG/Lola outqualifies R&S factory team. http://www.imsaracing.net/menu/resul...qualifying.htm It gets hard to compare after that, Dyson's were new to the car late in the season, and the other teams were not the quite the quality to compare against JMR. Had JMR stuck with it, surely they would have been winners in 03', and definately in 04'. |
||
|
|
|
|
19 May 2004, 03:39 (Ref:975068)
|
#16 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,761
|
true knighthawk outqualified the r&s "factory" team but that was the AER version of the car which dyson runs, and the MkIIIC was still a different car at that point than what it was in Matthews' hands. in terms of quickness, the AER Lola B160 of Dyson is faster, but a fine-tuned MkIIIC with good tires and a good driver pairing can be just as competitive as the Lola, and more importantly, VASTLY more reliable...
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 May 2004, 07:56 (Ref:975169)
|
#17 | ||
|
Racer
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 376
|
I feel intersport was waisting their money putting the Judd engine inthe car.
Instead of reliability they have again engine whoes ,right from the beginning,cooling system not up to the task. Sure ,a N/A car is easier to drive thru the traffic ,as you don´t have to keep revs up to keep the boost ,but looking at Dysons difficulties to get reliability into the Lola package shows that the lola is still not really a endurance car. In dysons hands the lola was a genuine contender for outright winsso given lots of reliability development the lola is competitive at the moment. I would not think of a MKIII to be a contender for wins anymore,as it´s strong point never was outright speed but reliability ,and user friendlyness. |
||
|
|
|
|
19 May 2004, 08:04 (Ref:975174)
|
#18 | ||
|
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 128
|
Concerning the R&S performances in 2002 and 2003 with JM Racing, a lot of development was done in these 2 years : change of engine Elan towards Nascar engine builder, aero changes, tyre changes (Goodyear, Dunlop, Michelin) electronics changes, Megaline paddle shift system and last but not least one of the best SC-cars drivers helping with th development Marc Goossens. Yes the car went faster and faster, but engine reliability was not present in LM.
|
||
|
|
|
|
19 May 2004, 09:11 (Ref:975224)
|
#19 | |
|
Racer
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 152
|
I personally think they gave up on the R&S before giving it a real effort. Maybe Lola made them a good deal on the LMP2, maybe they found prize money more effecient, but they did have a bit of the Dyson "Shop and then drop" the car.
I will say this, when you run two (or more) cars you want at least something to carry over and try to share information and etc to cut costs. At Sebring they ran three different cars in three different catagories (ok, R&S and Lola Judd are P1 but one was 675 and other 900) with two different chassis makers and two different tire suppliers with three different types of tires. This was a bit odd. |
|
|
|
|
|
19 May 2004, 10:23 (Ref:975266)
|
#20 | ||
|
Racer
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 376
|
well Dyson is not really into shop and drop inmyview.They bought a new MG and then bought a knighthawk chassis and began development.
The car features revised aero and new Frontsuspension(deleting the flexures)as well as different frontend geometries (KPI and Caster as far as I know ,to complement their tyre choice).To make the changes work they adopted a power steering system ,trying first a hydraulic assistance ,wich failed and then going to the proven Kayaba electric servounit(as Audi ,Bentley and dome use). They changed and developed the alternator and startermototor installation several times to get rid of the problems and AER made consideral efforts to improve the engine power and reliability. Dyson has an ongoing tyre development programme in place and has integrated a paddle shift system to the gearbox .... Far from shop and drop....and that is only what I remember instantly... |
||
|
|
|
|
19 May 2004, 10:39 (Ref:975279)
|
#21 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
Ive been waiting for someone to get their hands on a brace of R&S MK3C chassis and run them with Elan power units in them . There must be lots of untapped potential still left in that chassis ? Unfortunatly Matthews and R&S never really had a huge budget to develope the car and that is a shame !!! What could a team like Dyson do to a R&S if he threw the same money at it as he is doing with the MG ?
My bro and I managed to get down half way down to the first chicane on the inside of the track at LeMans last year , in the night . Just where the R&S nudged into last gear , two excellent litte blue flames shot out of the exhaust every time and there was this tremendous belch outta the engine . What a beautiful car it is !!! I would love to see a serious two car effort from somebody , that would make my day !!! |
||
|
|
|
|
19 May 2004, 14:16 (Ref:975499)
|
#22 | |||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,215
|
Quote:
The two main problems I had with the Matthews effort were as follows: 1. The car was campaigned in only four ALMS events, Le Mans, plus Daytona in 2002, and only twice in 2003....Sebring and Le Mans... I know that they spent the summer of 2002 doing aero work to install and test the endplates that were unveiled at Miami... That team seemed to have the resources to do it...and the car had the paddle shifters, etc....they would have been very strong at places like Sears Point, Laguna, Mosport, Washington DC.... By not running circuits that seemed to set up well for that chassis, they didn't show the car's full capabilities.... It, in turn, could have helped Riley to sell cars and to showcase the improvements that had been made to the chassis... 2. I'm sure that Jim Matthews is a great guy, and a wonderful sportsman...but he was usually at least 8-10 seconds slower (average lap itmes) than the professional drivers in the car.... If you're going to copete for the big prizes...and focus your efforts on them the way that they did in 2002 and 2003...make sure that all three pilots are of the same top quality that the competition has hired to race their cars....otherwise, you will not win, if all other things are relatively equal....period.... But that's just My Opinion.... |
|||
|
|
__________________
Finally... One American Open Wheel Series!
|
|
19 May 2004, 14:20 (Ref:975501)
|
#23 | |||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,215
|
Quote:
That might be the case with the MG-Lola, but it sure wasn't with the R&S MkIIIC, the Reynard or even the Crawford chassis that they ran in a couple of events in GARRA in late 2002.... Personally, I think they are ultimately going to dump the MG-Lola for a new Dome....they have to be getting tired of the breakdowns, the electical problems and the fueling system and turbo fires.... |
|||
|
|
__________________
Finally... One American Open Wheel Series!
|
|
19 May 2004, 14:25 (Ref:975506)
|
#24 | |||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,215
|
Quote:
I feel that returning to the Elan or fitting a IIIC with the GV5 would be the next progression for a committed team to take.... and if it were me, I'd do two things.... 1. I'd make a serious effort to buy those two Intersport cars, since they have a lot of the goodies already on them, and 2. I'd be calling Riley technologies as soon as I handed over the check....to set up a "factory deal" like they had with Matthews with one exception: Riley would call the shots on all racing decisions and personnel decisions...period...especially drivers... From thee, the agreement would be to ultimately develop a 2004 specs car to run in future seasons.... I don't see how you could go wrong with that scenario....and you would be competitive in every race you entered.... Now all I need to do is hit a PowerBall jackpot and we're all set 
|
|||
|
|
__________________
Finally... One American Open Wheel Series!
|
|
19 May 2004, 14:45 (Ref:975522)
|
#25 | ||
|
Racer
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 152
|
Quote:
Parked their MKIIIC after a limted season Had an unusual alliance/sponsorship package with the Crawford And if you count getting the old MKIII out again, they ran four cars in two series in a little over a year. Yes, they seem very committed to the Lola right now so perhaps they are out of the shop and drop syndrome. |
||
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| choices on cars | slicktsax | Sportscar & GT Racing | 21 | 1 Nov 2004 19:33 |
| Tough choices | Wrex | Road Car Forum | 26 | 29 Jul 2003 15:31 |
| LeMans Motor choices | gttouring | Sportscar & GT Racing | 143 | 6 May 2003 20:21 |
Linear Mode
