Sportscars that were worse than their predecessors

[fausto]

The Harrier GT1-98, it achieved a lot less than the previous models, LR9C and GT1-97, both of them won races in British GT, even against cars like the mighty McLaren F.1 GTR
:-)

[johntt]

Originally Posted by fish88

I geuss he means in the meaning of sound.

Yes, but at Le Mans there were 49 other cars screaming/rumbling past making lots of lovely noise. Sportscar racing is about technical diversity, and that inlcudes diversity of engine noise. I would not be at all happy with every car sounding like the LM diesels. You need to over the range of sounds, from the quite whoosh of the diesel to the rumble of the Corvette to the scream of the Judd.

Quiet engines are integral to Audi and Peugeot's plan for promoting their diesel engines as quieter (in Peugeot's case quieter than the competition and in Audi's case quiter than an American petrol).

Ullrich Baretsky (the designer of the R10's diesel) said that eventually all engines will sound like the R10's and future race fans will expect this. Here he is just plain wrong, as half of motorsport's appeal is the noise. The ACO's equalisation of petrol and diesel (and the arrival of petrol works teams in P1/ eventually P1 EVO) will prevent the whole field being dominated by diesel.

[Mirage M6]

And what do you think about the Aston Martin works program between the end of the 50's and the early 60's? A fantastic DBR1 (1959 champion with 3 victories, Le Mans included) and a not very competitive DP214 (unreliable at least) which they launched some years later, in 1963.

[dj choc ice]

the panoz LMP07, the one that raced at LM in 2001 and had the zytek/mugen 4.0 V8 engine in it, lovely noise but it wasnt particularly reliable and i can distinctly remember the drivers complaining that it didnt have very good handling.

[minimangler]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

the panoz LMP07, the one that raced at LM in 2001 and had the zytek/mugen 4.0 V8 engine in it, lovely noise but it wasnt particularly reliable and i can distinctly remember the drivers complaining that it didnt have very good handling.

Isn't that the one Brabham parked, pretending it had broken?

[Nick6]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

You all can say what you want. It was meant to be a newer better model from Ferrari. Had it been successful it would have been the next best thing. But it was a POS and therefore did not supplant the 550.


L.P.

All cars are suppose to be better than others. That doesn't make everything a sucessor to something.

[HORNDAWG]

The 575 is also the next successive car in the Ferrari F/R 2 seater Gran Turismo line after the 550. Its not some random thing. But I suppose that was already known, or maybe not!


L.P.

[dj choc ice]

Originally Posted by minimangler

Isn't that the one Brabham parked, pretending it had broken?

im not sure lol, probably was though, it was a right crock of **** to be fair, on the LM2001 video review coming into the dunlop chicane the thing was really moving around and i mean as in it looked like it was about to snap sideways into the wall it was that bad.

[Tim the Grey]

Looks like the elephant sat on a CLK. Unlucky.

Those things are UGLY.

917 or 512 if you want sex on wheels...

[minimangler]

The CLK-LM was a beautiful car, but yes, fairly terrible.
Reynard 2KQ, anyone?

[isynge]

Originally Posted by minimangler

The CLK-LM was a beautiful car, but yes, fairly terrible.
Reynard 2KQ, anyone?

This ignores, one assumes, the hat-trick of Le Mans class wins for the 2KQ...

[mattcat]

Originally Posted by Tim the Grey

Looks like the elephant sat on a CLK. Unlucky.

Those things are UGLY.

Really? I thought they looked quite good. That's what we're going to get with EVO anyway, so I guess we'd better get used to it. On another note, why were these vehicles being driven on the oval at Fontana Speedway in California?

[ensign14]

What was that red blob that didn't get through scrutineering at Le Mans one year? The ROC-Chevron? It had taken part the previous year, don't know if it was the same car or an uprated model. Either way, first retirement is better than DNP.

[Sarthe82]

Originally Posted by ensign14

What was that red blob that didn't get through scrutineering at Le Mans one year? The ROC-Chevron? It had taken part the previous year, don't know if it was the same car or an uprated model. Either way, first retirement is better than DNP.

Same car. Kicked out of scrutineering at LM '88 so had no chance to scale the dizzying heights of achievement from '87...when it crashed after 18 laps!
Watch your eyes....

http://www.racingsportscars.com/phot...-06-12-114.jpg

[JAG]

Originally Posted by fausto

Jaguar XJR10/11: the Rover Metro V6-engined car was a big step backward for Tom Walkinshaw Racing, just when they needed something to fight the very strong Mercedes C11...

No win situation, the V12's were uncompetitive in sprints, but the V6 Turbo's needed two full years of development before they'd become a force, as the XJR-10/16 did in the US. In Europe the 3.5l cars came in for 1991.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by minimangler

The CLK-LM was a beautiful car, but yes, fairly terrible.
Reynard 2KQ, anyone?

The CLK-LM is the '98 car, which was totally dominant in FIA GT, the CLR was the '99 car, and the best looking LMP for a decade.

[Leighton Irwin]

Going back in time: the Lotus 40.
The standing joke at the time was: A Lotus 30 with 10 more mistakes.
Even Jim Clark couldn't make either go most of the time.

[ensign14]

I've got a photo of Clark in a 30, he's going one way, the wheels another, and the bodywork a third.

[dj choc ice]

i guess you could put the zytek 06S in here, due to the fact that the 04S finished runner up in the LMES in 2005 and won at laguna seca in the ALMS, whilst the 06S wasnt runner up in the LMS in 2006 and didnt win any races.

[Dario911]

And who of you do remember the Maserati 151S? Greatful shape, greatful performances... but the worst reliability. It was a failed Le Mans queen.
And Lancia LC2? Beautiful, but worst than LC1. LC2 cannot fight anyway against Porsches. 956 and 962 were just another story!

[minimangler]

Originally Posted by isynge

This ignores, one assumes, the hat-trick of Le Mans class wins for the 2KQ...

Luck, my friend. The mulsanne's corner article is scathing, to say the least.

And wasn't it only 2?

[isynge]

Originally Posted by minimangler

Luck, my friend. The mulsanne's corner article is scathing, to say the least.

And wasn't it only 2?

Luck is something you make all by yourself. I wish I had the time or energy to dig out the reference to whether it's better to be good or lucky - it's somewhere in "The Guns of Navarone" at any rate - but let's leave that for another day - in any case, show me a Le Mans in the lesser prototype category (perhaps excluding 2008) where luck hasn't been the primary driver. Either way I don't think Reynard could have grumbled too much about what the 2KQ delivered.

Otherwise 2001 (ROC), 2002 (Del Bello), and 2003 (Del Bello) sounds like a hat-trick to me...

The other issue is this - was the 2KQ emphatically worse than what Reynard offered before? Cutting to the nub perhaps, would Reynard have been better sticking with what went before? I'd argue no on this one, but hey - prove me wrong - that's what makes the forum fun!

[CTD]

Originally Posted by isynge

Luck is something you make all by yourself. I wish I had the time or energy to dig out the reference to whether it's better to be good or lucky - it's somewhere in "The Guns of Navarone" at any rate - but let's leave that for another day - in any case, show me a Le Mans in the lesser prototype category (perhaps excluding 2008) where luck hasn't been the primary driver. Either way I don't think Reynard could have grumbled too much about what the 2KQ delivered.

Otherwise 2001 (ROC), 2002 (Del Bello), and 2003 (Del Bello) sounds like a hat-trick to me...

The other issue is this - was the 2KQ emphatically worse than what Reynard offered before? Cutting to the nub perhaps, would Reynard have been better sticking with what went before? I'd argue no on this one, but hey - prove me wrong - that's what makes the forum fun!

And think of its successor!.. the DBA car, which later developed into the Zytec cars!

[Jonerz]

The LMP07 was a factory effort was it not?

Chris

[marcosgt]

Originally Posted by Dario911

And who of you do remember the Maserati 151S? Greatful shape, greatful performances... but the worst reliability. It was a failed Le Mans queen.
And Lancia LC2? Beautiful, but worst than LC1. LC2 cannot fight anyway against Porsches. 956 and 962 were just another story!

That was more down to German efficiency vs Italian flair and Lasse Faire (or the Italian equivalent).

The LC2 was often quicker than the Porsches, it just tended to break down, use more fuel or get crashed more often...

Probably the best looking Group C car of all, though, especially in Martini works colours.

I'd chip in for the Mazda 787B and the TWR Mazda thing (RX01?) - The Rotary engined Mazdas were as much part of the Le Mans atmosphere as the big wheel and frites - I can clearly remember walking into the circuit on the Friday evening one year and hearing a howl and KNOWING it was the Mazda being bedded in on the airfield runway.

Of course, Mazda are STILL the only Japanese marque to win Le Mans (which must irk all the others enormously), but the TWR thing was a rather cynical and unsuccessful marketing exercise.

M.