Mr Pescarolo personal reflections

[SebringMG]

I thin kthe basic Courage package is decent but the fact that both Pescarolo and Acura have taken basic cars and improved them so much does imply that something was lacking....possibly on the aero side ?

Pescarolo's re-engineering of the C60 is very impressive and possibly has created one of the better chassis around - IMO a toss up between that and the Zytek depending upon track config......

[canam]

Not so sure of the pesca any more. It has not shone at the two LMS races. One car has been quick in the LM test but it was on qualifiers and, judging from the sector times, it was a clear lap. Furthermore, pesca has more experience of the LM track than most, so they would have been closer to a good setup than most. No doubt they will be strong but I would not put them 'easy' top right now.

The Zytek and Creation look to be formidable although it is early days for both of them. Zytek's problems are bit worrying almost equally as much as Creation's reliability ie. something's bound to change!!! I am disappointed in the Dome as it was only able to set a slightly faster time on qualifiers when Creation, for example, were running on race tyres that had done half a stint.

[SebringMG]

Think Pesca was running older bodywork in Monza and possibly Valencia too - beleive there were a bunch of suspension modifications due as well which i don't think made it in time to be on the car at Valencia.

Zytek is probably best for ALMS races through 1000km events as it seems to be highly agile with very good downforce though possibly a bit weak at LM given the engine (high revving V8 not ideal really), the Creation is a good basic design but do they have the facilites to really develop a car? KWM will give them a good basic design, but remains to be seen how quickly it develops!!

Dome always flatters to deceive IMO ans possibly needs a years development.

[canam]

Originally Posted by SebringMG

Think Pesca was running older bodywork in Monza and possibly Valencia too - beleive there were a bunch of suspension modifications due as well which i don't think made it in time to be on the car at Valencia.

That may explain what has happened so far.

I agree with you on the Zytek. Good car but possibly a bit fragile. I am hopeful of the Creation package and, given the AIM deal, they will have the resources to develop it. (it is pretty quick out of the box already). They indicated earlier that 2007 was, largely, a testing year so it may transpire.

Do all the Pescas have the new suspension and aero packages?

[Liteweight]

As far as i'm aware (and stand to be correct my somebody more knowledgeable) the Rollcentre car is not running the latest aero and suspension packages. I think supplying these to rollcentre as well would have overly stretched Pescarolo and they would have lacked spares for their own LM attempt. Not sure about the Kruse car (being P2 can it benefit from these updates?)

[Mirage M6]

Pescarolo has developed their cars in small steps since Henri bought his first Courage C60 in 2001; this car wasn’t specially good but step by step they've transformed the car in a potential winner without any spectacular performance change…this ‘story’ continues now with Pescarolo 01 and probably in the future, I’m optimistic.

But, without any doubt, Creation has now a really great potential winner, and I’m very satisfied.

[Mirage M6]

Originally Posted by Liteweight

As far as i'm aware (and stand to be correct my somebody more knowledgeable) the Rollcentre car is not running the latest aero and suspension packages. I think supplying these to rollcentre as well would have overly stretched Pescarolo and they would have lacked spares for their own LM attempt. Not sure about the Kruse car (being P2 can it benefit from these updates?)

You are right, a Pescarolo’s driver –maybe Tiseau or Primat– commented in a recent interview (by planetlemans or EI, I don’t remember)

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Splendid Cat

What do you define as Group C territory?

Differing benchmarks since chicanes;

Alliot's 3:21 in 92 maybe out of reach, but already there vis a vis Blundell's 3:27 in 1990 and Schlesser's (ballasted) 3:31 in 91.

Only the best 3.5l atmo Group C cars are quicker than the current cars, over a single qualifying lap.

You could possibly add the Nissan R90c and Mercedes C11 to that list, but they're borderline.

The rest of the Group C brigade qualified in the mid 3.30's and above. Of course race pace was much slower in the Group C days.

It's better to compare on an unchanged circuit, i.e. Doninington Park.

Last years LMS pole was around 1.20, which compared well with the best 1989/90 turbo Group C times and '91 3.5 atmo cars.

I'd expect the 908 or R10 to run around 1.18 at Donington, which would be a second or two slower than the '92 905 Evo and Toyota TS010.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by canam

I thought it was accepted by many (on these forums) that this Audi petrol unit was supposed to be the basis for proving that there was no gap between petrol and diesels. Dr U. was, apparently going to point at this unit as a shining example, no proof that diesels had not advantage. Now, it is being indicated that that is not the case. Cake and eating it IMO.

It is strange how many of those voices are pretty silent on the issue of the Audi unit in the Swiss Spirit. Why?...'cos they all know it doesn't make the power of the oiler.

The Swiss Spirit car didn't put in any flying laps during the test day, they were............testing.

It seems the anti diesel brigade want these cars handicaped heavily, today, presumably as their arguments will become rather shallow the more the oilers take a beating in the ALMS from factory, petrol P2's, and before any factory, petrol P1 can show what it's made of.

We all know diesels have a power and torque advantage, but most of us would rather take a little more time to ascertain just how great of an advantage they really do have, rather than jumping to snap counclusions based on their performance's against privateer's.

And before anyone says petrol P1's need to be competitive for us to see a good race, bull, we need two factory teams competing for the whole race to sustain interest, rather than the predictable parades of recent years.

If Pescarolo, Zytek, Creation, RFH and the various Lola teams can run like clockwork for 24 hours, rather than packing up after 4 hr's, then we may see some of the diesel vulnerabilites highlighted.

[TheNewBob]

Originally Posted by JAG

Only the best 3.5l atmo Group C cars are quicker than the current cars, over a single qualifying lap.

You could possibly add the Nissan R90c and Mercedes C11 to that list, but they're borderline.

The rest of the Group C brigade qualified in the mid 3.30's and above. Of course race pace was much slower in the Group C days.

It's better to compare on an unchanged circuit, i.e. Doninington Park.

Last years LMS pole was around 1.20, which compared well with the best 1989/90 turbo Group C times and '91 3.5 atmo cars.

I'd expect the 908 or R10 to run around 1.18 at Donington, which would be a second or two slower than the '92 905 Evo and Toyota TS010.

Even Donington Park has changed, in the way of resurfacing. Is it still a fair comparison?

[JAG]

Originally Posted by SebringMG

Think Pesca was running older bodywork in Monza and possibly Valencia too - beleive there were a bunch of suspension modifications due as well which i don't think made it in time to be on the car at Valencia.

Collard confirmed on Motors TV the new aero/suspension(?) was running for the first time at the Le Mans test day. Apparenmtly it generated quite a bit more downforce.

Dumas also said they were setting the car up for the race and believed the pace was there.

[canam]

Originally Posted by TheNewBob

Even Donington Park has changed, in the way of resurfacing. Is it still a fair comparison?

These 3.5l atmo cars also had a minimum weight of 750kg and special qualifying engines (for LM).

[JAG]

Originally Posted by TheNewBob

Even Donington Park has changed, in the way of resurfacing. Is it still a fair comparison?

It's as close as you're likely to find as far as unchanged circuits go.


http://wsrp.ic.cz/wsc1989.html

http://wsrp.ic.cz/wsc1990.html

http://wsrp.ic.cz/wsc1992.html

http://wsrp.ic.cz/elms2001.html#2

It's clear from the Group C times which cars were running qualifying engines.