Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Le Mans/WEC 2020 Regulations (and beyond)


  • Please log in to reply
530 replies to this topic

#151 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 08 March 2019 - 20:07

Also, can anyone think of more money spent on a race program with fewer total race participations than the TS020? It raced 3 times, ever.

 

That Nissan front engine LMP thing.  It raced a single race. LM 2015.  Surely the cost of the Toyota spread over 3 races is less than the cost of this Nissan for a total of 1 race.



Advertisement

#152 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 9,634 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 March 2019 - 20:13

I wonder how much the CLR Merc would have cost to develop? Not much was carried over from the 98 CLK GTR/LM was it?



#153 Dan333SP

Dan333SP
  • Member

  • 2,972 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 08 March 2019 - 21:58

I wonder how much the CLR Merc would have cost to develop? Not much was carried over from the 98 CLK GTR/LM was it?

 

I'm thinking more in terms of race programs rather than just specific cars. You could look at the CLR as a natural continuation of the CLK GTR and CLK LM program, which involved full seasons of racing for each car (and a lot of wins), so although the CLR was a disaster and raced once, it didn't start from scratch in the same sense that the Toyota program did. I seem to remember people quoting figures for the Toyota LM budget back then of over $80 million for '99, which was equivalent to lower tier F1 teams...



#154 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 9,634 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 March 2019 - 22:08

I'm thinking more in terms of race programs rather than just specific cars. You could look at the CLR as a natural continuation of the CLK GTR and CLK LM program, which involved full seasons of racing for each car (and a lot of wins), so although the CLR was a disaster and raced once, it didn't start from scratch in the same sense that the Toyota program did. I seem to remember people quoting figures for the Toyota LM budget back then of over $80 million for '99, which was equivalent to lower tier F1 teams...

 

The engine for the TS020 wasn't a new design was it? I believe it was an upgraded Group C motor, but to then be spending that much on what was a effectively a single-race program is incredible... the chassis was a big step forward in that era though, I see it nowadays as the first 'modern' LMP car. I was blown away when I saw it in person, memories of LM 98 and 99 and hours and hours of Gran Turismo came flooding back...



#155 Dan333SP

Dan333SP
  • Member

  • 2,972 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 08 March 2019 - 22:19

The engine for the TS020 wasn't a new design was it? I believe it was an upgraded Group C motor, but to then be spending that much on what was a effectively a single-race program is incredible... the chassis was a big step forward in that era though, I see it nowadays as the first 'modern' LMP car. I was blown away when I saw it in person, memories of LM 98 and 99 and hours and hours of Gran Turismo came flooding back...

 

Yea, just looking at it is super evocative of my formative years as a race fan. One could reasonably argue that the investment in the car actually carried over into their F1 program, as they ran it out of the same offices in Cologne, sorta like the BMW/Williams collaboration on the LMR.



#156 Kalmake

Kalmake
  • Member

  • 3,444 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 15 March 2019 - 22:17

https://www.motorspo...update/4353468/

 

No design competition. They will just BoP it all.

 

So slow now that LMP2 has to be slowed down.

 

Aston Martin pictured in the article is aiming to beat Porches illegal car Nürburgring record. Idea of BoPing from that to 3:30 Le Mans is abhorrent.



#157 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 4,421 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 15 March 2019 - 22:25

Heard the ACO said that they’d be open to allowing DPi into the BoP frame of lap times end up being similar between them and Hypercar

Just work together properly already.

#158 TF110

TF110
  • Member

  • 2,973 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 15 March 2019 - 23:32

Not enthused by this. No one wants to slow the cars even more than what was suggested. Lots of people complained that they'd have to undo the things they did to the current lmp2's. Now they'll be even slower and creeped on by GTE. Just because VW had to spend a billion dollars to one-up eachother and then leave, were stuck with this appeasement to manufacturers who might not even enter. I don't want to see the McLaren 'Senna' (undeserved name btw) run against cars that look like prototypes. I prefer the GT3 car to it anyway. The Valkyrie Pro is a beast and could probably run with current lmp1s. So it seems were getting dumbed down cars because someone with a big name doesn't want to build something new to the rules proposed (which weren't even that great in the first place). 



#159 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 15 March 2019 - 23:55

 

The target race laptime at the Le Mans 24 Hours on the introduction of the new rules is now 3m30s.

 

Wow. So "hyper".  Who thinks this is a good idea, again?

 

ACO knows from the ELMS that you can easily run a P2/P3/GTE series.

 

IMSA also knows this, although they've slightly modified it.

 

The answer is staring these people in the face... :rolleyes:



Advertisement

#160 McLaren1702

McLaren1702
  • Member

  • 158 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 16 March 2019 - 00:04

So much for 1000 Miles. 3 hours and 55 minutes remaining instead.

Edit: wrong topic, I'm sorry! Wanted to post this in the race topic.

Edited by McLaren1702, 16 March 2019 - 00:16.


#161 TF110

TF110
  • Member

  • 2,973 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 16 March 2019 - 05:53

Wow. So "hyper".  Who thinks this is a good idea, again?

 

ACO knows from the ELMS that you can easily run a P2/P3/GTE series.

 

IMSA also knows this, although they've slightly modified it.

 

The answer is staring these people in the face... :rolleyes:

Right, lmp2 as the top class at Le Mans and the WEC would sell tickets...  :rolleyes:



#162 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 4,421 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 16 March 2019 - 06:19

Think the thing is, these rules have have ended up being very reactionary. They should have been visionary.

#163 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,568 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 16 March 2019 - 06:52

Right, lmp2 as the top class at Le Mans and the WEC would sell tickets... :rolleyes:

If it was LMP2 as DPi you know I think it might. Would also increase the class attractiveness and sports car popularity as you could race one in both WEC and IMSA.

I mean it looks like they’ve even abandoned mandating hybrid for these road based hypercars. The ACO has lost all control of these, they might as well admit IMSA have the better plan, unify the rules and then work *with* IMSA to create the next generation of prototypes for circa 2025-30.

#164 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 16 March 2019 - 09:08

Right, lmp2 as the top class at Le Mans and the WEC would sell tickets...  :rolleyes:

 

Le Mans sells its own tickets. The only time the WEC filled the stands anywhere else was in 2014-2016 or so. The reason is obvious.

 

Having BoP on souped-up GT cars and pretending that they're the fastest by slowing everyone else down is such a dumb idea it's almost shocking the ACO thought this was fit for print. And they even had to give up their hybrid component! Oh dear, such vision!

 

The ACO failed to build a sustainable LMP1 category by going all in on the enormously expensive hybrid hype. They've done a great job building the LMP2 category into something that's affordable, competitive, and properly fast while still being open to drivers that aren't super special. IMSA has taken a good look at that and, some would argue, refined the concept a bit to be even better. I don't necessarily agree, but it's something that works decently enough. I don't recall many people complaining that Daytona was a bad race because it didn't have LMP1 cars in it, but I could be mistaken.

 

The solution, for the time being, seems rather obvious. But we'll see.



#165 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 16 March 2019 - 09:19

Think the thing is, these rules have have ended up being very reactionary. They should have been visionary.

 

F1 and the WEC both need to figure out where they want to be in 2025-2030. Both are failing to do so.

 

Indycar and IMSA have a very sustainable vision, even if it's not earth-shattering. Formula E is building its own thing and laying a pretty strong groundwork while avoiding many of the pitfalls other attempts to start something new have tripped over.

 

F1 is so self-absorbed that this is no surprise, but the WEC is more puzzling. The sportscars scene is quite diverse, and there's plenty of places to take inspiration from.



#166 TennisUK

TennisUK
  • Member

  • 6,404 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 16 March 2019 - 11:04

Right, lmp2 as the top class at Le Mans and the WEC would sell tickets... :rolleyes:


Shhh. Most people buying tickets for Le Mans really don’t care what the spec of the top class is... (I know it’s different for us, but a huge number of people that go just go because it’s Le Mans and that is what they do).

#167 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 4,421 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 16 March 2019 - 12:33

F1 and the WEC both need to figure out where they want to be in 2025-2030. Both are failing to do so.

 

Indycar and IMSA have a very sustainable vision, even if it's not earth-shattering. Formula E is building its own thing and laying a pretty strong groundwork while avoiding many of the pitfalls other attempts to start something new have tripped over.

 

F1 is so self-absorbed that this is no surprise, but the WEC is more puzzling. The sportscars scene is quite diverse, and there's plenty of places to take inspiration from.

I do agree, it does seem as though the WEC rulemakers are looking at everyone else's solutions and just saying 'but we want our own solution.'



#168 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 16 March 2019 - 14:13

I do agree, it does seem as though the WEC rulemakers are looking at everyone else's solutions and just saying 'but we want our own solution.'

 

And what a shame it is. Sportscars on the whole is doing quite well, but it's so fragmented it's almost impossible for the average viewer to keep it all in focus.

 

Even just in Europe there's half a dozen championships that scratch that GT/LP itch. :stoned:

 

source.gif


Edited by Nonesuch, 16 March 2019 - 14:14.


#169 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,253 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 16 March 2019 - 14:22

The fragmentation of sports car racing seems to go hand in hand with what I see as a deep seated identity crisis in the entire genre. Should sports cars be raced by amateurs? By professionals? Sprint or endurance? Production or prototype? It’s fine that we have all those options and it’ll appeal to many, but when it comes to the top level, all those factors come together in a rather unsatisfying mess. Probably doesn’t help that the FIA, ACO and IMSA all have their own ideas about it.

#170 AlexPrime

AlexPrime
  • Member

  • 1,881 posts
  • Joined: September 17

Posted 16 March 2019 - 14:34

 

F1 is so self-absorbed that this is no surprise, but the WEC is more puzzling. 

FIA sanctioned series  :cry:



#171 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,568 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 16 March 2019 - 16:37

F1 and the WEC both need to figure out where they want to be in 2025-2030. Both are failing to do so.

 

Indycar and IMSA have a very sustainable vision, even if it's not earth-shattering. Formula E is building its own thing and laying a pretty strong groundwork while avoiding many of the pitfalls other attempts to start something new have tripped over.

First thing to ask is what do the ACO/FIA want manufacturers to get out competing in their class? Second question should be how much do they value protecting their independent/privateer entries? 

 

In answer to the first question, the aim of nearly the last decade or so has been to develop, learn from and showcase hybrid/electrified powertrains. With the way the automotive industry is going that is unlikely to change, so they should be looking at keeping that focus. That they're walking back a bit on mandating hybrids in this Hypercar class is a sign of how desperate they are right now. 

 

The demise of LMP1-H should be the basis of the answer the second question, they should value protecting and properly equipping the privateers a lot. 

 

​Do we really need much more (expensive) development on the aerodynamic front? No, not really. 

Do we really need more development on the chassis side? Not desperately. 

 

The answer then to me does seem to be to follow the IMSA/IndyCar/FE model. From all three, have a common chassis (or maybe two or three approved chassis) which can form the basis of every entry. Also from all three, allow manufacturers to develop a powertrain (though in this case ideally hybrid) which can then be attached to any of the chassis. From IMSA, allow manufacturers (or independents) to develop bodywork styling to their liking. Taking from Formula E, have all of these three main areas with a mandatory by rules of entry price-capped supply so that the total cost is palatable to privateers.That puts a common-sense limit on how much am OEM is willing to spend because of the risk that a privateer will beat them on only a fraction of the investment. 

 

That would be following a model that works and one which offers the best chance of unifying the global sportscar rulesets. Once everyone is on the same page, both investment and participation will be less fragmented and perhaps more visionary plans can then be considered. 



#172 TF110

TF110
  • Member

  • 2,973 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 16 March 2019 - 17:20

Apparently these new rules or the allowance of said cars was at the behest of certain big name manufacturers. Doesn't mean they're great but if there's cool looking cars that sound nice and are fast I'm going to watch. Not thrilled by bop and the like. That's why I don't like DPi as much. 



#173 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 4,421 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 16 March 2019 - 17:38

To play devils advocate for a quick moment, adopting a DPi-like approach would be good for consolidating what exists for stability and steady, limited growth. But I can’t see it expanding far beyond the existing sportscar racing fan base in the way utilising road based hypercars might.

In that sense if this hypercar thing is about capturing the imaginations of new fans in the short term before a more visionary rule set is carved out for the second half of the decade, that may yet be a decent strategy.

#174 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 17 March 2019 - 16:01

The answer then to me does seem to be to follow the IMSA/IndyCar/FE model.

 
Absolutely. There's no future in these absurd spending sprees that wrecked LMP1 and have reduced F1 to its most stagnant and dull decade ever.
 

I can’t see it expanding far beyond the existing sportscar racing fan base in the way utilising road based hypercars might.

 
Could it, really? That McLaren posted earlier just looks like a GTE car to me. It's fine, but there's nothing "hyper" about it. I don't get why they don't make this the basis of renewing the GTE class. It could do with some spicing up. Take away the LMP2-in-disguise that is the Ford GT and it's not all that inspiring a line-up. It's basically just the same old Aston Martins, Ferraris and Porsche 911s we've seen for 10+ years.

 

I think (or hope) that a more exciting GTE class can exist alongside the premier Prototype class. They might not fight for the overall win, but GTE could be more interesting than it is now. Maybe it's time to rethink the Pro/Am separation and implement it along different lines to attract the kind of limited manufacturer involvement that works in DPi and FE. Call it GTE-Hyper and GTE-Am if you must use the hyper term.


Edited by Nonesuch, 17 March 2019 - 16:02.


#175 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 4,421 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 17 March 2019 - 17:09

Could it, really? That McLaren posted earlier just looks like a GTE car to me. It's fine, but there's nothing "hyper" about it. I don't get why they don't make this the basis of renewing the GTE class. It could do with some spicing up. Take away the LMP2-in-disguise that is the Ford GT and it's not all that inspiring a line-up. It's basically just the same old Aston Martins, Ferraris and Porsche 911s we've seen for 10+ years.

I think (or hope) that a more exciting GTE class can exist alongside the premier Prototype class. They might not fight for the overall win, but GTE could be more interesting than it is now. Maybe it's time to rethink the Pro/Am separation and implement it along different lines to attract the kind of limited manufacturer involvement that works in DPi and FE. Call it GTE-Hyper and GTE-Am if you must use the hyper term.

I'm not necessarily advocating this path, more exploring some of its potential advantages. From an established sportscar fan point of view the Hypercar plan might appear like a bit of a dull prospect. But for new fans, the LMP/DPi shape is bit ungainly and inaccessible. Hypercars come with a built in, identifiable 'cool factor' to draw in potential fans and so to me has more growth potential, but also more risk. Also not all of these hypercars are GTE like, the Aston Martin Valkyrie is basically what an LMP1 would look like if the engineers didn't have pages and pages of technical regulations to conform to. On that note I do sort of see the logic.

However, personally I would indeed give every entrant and manufacturer something similar to one of these*, tell them to bolt a cost capped hybrid power-train and performance point conforming bodywork with a design philosophy of their choosing to it and let them go racing.

*Example is a LaFerrari monocoque. I'd say somewhere between that and a current LMP monocoque would be about right.


Edited by Vielleicht, 17 March 2019 - 17:09.


#176 ArrowsLivery

ArrowsLivery
  • Member

  • 3,171 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 17 March 2019 - 17:40

To me the top class is obvious. They need to adopt the Super GT model. Silhouette shell on a bespoke chassis. They actually look like cars, could run a 3:30 around LM, and are simple enough to be run by privateers. The middle class would be a derivative of LMP2 running at around 3:40, and the GT class would be akin to GT3 with many makes and with closer collaboration with the SRO.

#177 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 4,421 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 17 March 2019 - 19:26

Screen-Shot-2019-03-17-at-19-24-41.png



#178 Sacha

Sacha
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 17 March 2019 - 20:43

In motor racing the purpose of the issue can never be to build the most "beautiful" can imaginable. If it becomes that it no longer is motor racing. Instead you should try to build the fastest car possible, even if that amounts to Chaparral 2J or whatever.

Sure -- he meant that it's sheer MEGA AWESOME when both come together: blistering speed and beauty of form -- form shall follow function, sure -- foremost when spending dozens of millions for a handful of races



#179 Sacha

Sacha
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 17 March 2019 - 21:19

First thing to ask is what do the ACO/FIA want manufacturers to get out competing in their class? Second question should be how much do they value protecting their independent/privateer entries? 

 

In answer to the first question, the aim of nearly the last decade or so has been to develop, learn from and showcase hybrid/electrified powertrains. With the way the automotive industry is going that is unlikely to change, so they should be looking at keeping that focus. That they're walking back a bit on mandating hybrids in this Hypercar class is a sign of how desperate they are right now. 

 

The demise of LMP1-H should be the basis of the answer the second question, they should value protecting and properly equipping the privateers a lot. 

 

​Do we really need much more (expensive) development on the aerodynamic front? No, not really. 

Do we really need more development on the chassis side? Not desperately. 

 

The answer then to me does seem to be to follow the IMSA/IndyCar/FE model. From all three, have a common chassis (or maybe two or three approved chassis) which can form the basis of every entry. Also from all three, allow manufacturers to develop a powertrain (though in this case ideally hybrid) which can then be attached to any of the chassis. From IMSA, allow manufacturers (or independents) to develop bodywork styling to their liking. Taking from Formula E, have all of these three main areas with a mandatory by rules of entry price-capped supply so that the total cost is palatable to privateers.That puts a common-sense limit on how much am OEM is willing to spend because of the risk that a privateer will beat them on only a fraction of the investment. 

 

That would be following a model that works and one which offers the best chance of unifying the global sportscar rulesets. Once everyone is on the same page, both investment and participation will be less fragmented and perhaps more visionary plans can then be considered. 

 

Sounds all smart I think. Apart of the budget cap:

I don't think that it is policeable; imagine you want to survey the investment Ferrari or Ford make: how do you wanna analyse what they contrubute from all their plants and factories (or sister brands) ?

And the increase of efficiency / spending via 3 basic chassis would be enormeous already => limited optins for bodywork (whereby you could still put it 1000h in the windtunnel to find the best config of the last fin...)

 

Hence, I still believe that there cannot be "cheap" / cost-stable / controllable TOP-CLASS motorsport.

 

Still it needs to find a reasonable compromise to allow small-scale manufacturers / teams to compete with the very big boys.

 

What about this one:

per chassis there is one formula of ICE allowed (whereby it really would help following this race, if there were only 2 classes running)

per chassis / ICE there is one formula for KERS (all incorporating a minimum weight and maximum power / torque.

Then all / most R&D would go into fuel efficiency in orderto save weight.

Did I miss something ?



Advertisement

#180 Sacha

Sacha
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 17 March 2019 - 21:28

To me the top class is obvious. They need to adopt the Super GT model. Silhouette shell on a bespoke chassis. They actually look like cars, could run a 3:30 around LM, and are simple enough to be run by privateers. The middle class would be a derivative of LMP2 running at around 3:40, and the GT class would be akin to GT3 with many makes and with closer collaboration with the SRO.

 

Sounds good ! I just don't see the necessity to run these pseudo-prototypes which all look the same (rather looking like low-volume one-make race-cars)



#181 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,568 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 17 March 2019 - 21:52

Sounds all smart I think. Apart of the budget cap:
I don't think that it is policeable; imagine you want to survey the investment Ferrari or Ford make: how do you wanna analyse what they contrubute from all their plants and factories (or sister brands) ?
And the increase of efficiency / spending via 3 basic chassis would be enormeous already => limited optins for bodywork (whereby you could still put it 1000h in the windtunnel to find the best config of the last fin...)
 
Hence, I still believe that there cannot be "cheap" / cost-stable / controllable TOP-CLASS motorsport.
 
Still it needs to find a reasonable compromise to allow small-scale manufacturers / teams to compete with the very big boys.

 
The theory of cost capped customer supply in FE  is that you could spend €50m on the powertrain but if have to sell that powertrain like-for-like to any independent team who asks for no more than €500,000 ... you'd be mad to put that kind of money in. Even if one manufacturer did such a good job/spent so much that they dominate, privateers can fill any gaps in manufacturers in the short term by just buying that dominant powertrain. It seems to primarily encourage race team/manufacturer tie ups rather than pure works entries as well. 
 
It's worked for the independents in Formula E in that Techeetah bought a Renault powertrain, who had the package to beat in Seasons 2-3 and won a drivers title with it. Envision Virgin have now bought Audi powertrains, who had the package to beat at the end of Season 4 and are now winning up front in Season 5 alongside Audi. 
 
I actually think the ACO might be onto something with the performance point aero rules. It's a bit like the supply rule above but for aerodynamics. Again it's sort of free to spend, but the only development you need to do is to get it performing to a set drag/downforce parameter. Beyond that there is no particular competitive gain to be had in spending any more money on aero, so doing to would be a waste. If you have to sell the bodykit you use to any privateer as well then same applies as the powertrains. 
 
I think it doesn't completely solve costs escalating (if that's ever actually possible) but I think it would help dampen out the booms and busts which seem to plague sportscar racing.



#182 Sacha

Sacha
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 17 March 2019 - 22:31

 
The theory of cost capped customer supply in FE  is that you could spend €50m on the powertrain but if have to sell that powertrain like-for-like to any independent team who asks for no more than €500,000 ... you'd be mad to put that kind of money in. Even if one manufacturer did such a good job/spent so much that they dominate, privateers can fill any gaps in manufacturers in the short term by just buying that dominant powertrain. It seems to primarily encourage race team/manufacturer tie ups rather than pure works entries as well. 
 
It's worked for the independents in Formula E in that Techeetah bought a Renault powertrain, who had the package to beat in Seasons 2-3 and won a drivers title with it. Envision Virgin have now bought Audi powertrains, who had the package to beat at the end of Season 4 and are now winning up front in Season 5 alongside Audi. 
 
I actually think the ACO might be onto something with the performance point aero rules. It's a bit like the supply rule above but for aerodynamics. Again it's sort of free to spend, but the only development you need to do is to get it performing to a set drag/downforce parameter. Beyond that there is no particular competitive gain to be had in spending any more money on aero, so doing to would be a waste. If you have to sell the bodykit you use to any privateer as well then same applies as the powertrains. 
 
I think it doesn't completely solve costs escalating (if that's ever actually possible) but I think it would help dampen out the booms and busts which seem to plague sportscar racing.

true, aero could be framed, too.

But I am no friend of this F-e rule with "forced to sell your most precious piece of engineering genius to any and evry "garagist"  ;) 

That's too much of standard -- and it sounds wrong to me; like false competition or something like that



#183 Sacha

Sacha
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 17 March 2019 - 22:36

 
The theory of cost capped customer supply in FE  is that you could spend €50m on the powertrain but if have to sell that powertrain like-for-like to any independent team who asks for no more than €500,000 ... you'd be mad to put that kind of money in. Even if one manufacturer did such a good job/spent so much that they dominate, privateers can fill any gaps in manufacturers in the short term by just buying that dominant powertrain. It seems to primarily encourage race team/manufacturer tie ups rather than pure works entries as well. 
 
It's worked for the independents in Formula E in that Techeetah bought a Renault powertrain, who had the package to beat in Seasons 2-3 and won a drivers title with it. Envision Virgin have now bought Audi powertrains, who had the package to beat at the end of Season 4 and are now winning up front in Season 5 alongside Audi. 
 
I actually think the ACO might be onto something with the performance point aero rules. It's a bit like the supply rule above but for aerodynamics. Again it's sort of free to spend, but the only development you need to do is to get it performing to a set drag/downforce parameter. Beyond that there is no particular competitive gain to be had in spending any more money on aero, so doing to would be a waste. If you have to sell the bodykit you use to any privateer as well then same applies as the powertrains. 
 
I think it doesn't completely solve costs escalating (if that's ever actually possible) but I think it would help dampen out the booms and busts which seem to plague sportscar racing.

 

to make it just, this if-I-want-your-engine-you-have-to-sell-it scenario, in order to make sure that the customers don't receive weaker units, the FIA must randomly pick & allocate the engines, right ?



#184 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,568 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 17 March 2019 - 22:52

true, aero could be framed, too.
But I am no friend of this F-e rule with "forced to sell your most precious piece of engineering genius to any and evry "garagist"  ;)
That's too much of standard -- and it sounds wrong to me; like false competition or something like that

Maybe, but I struggle to see any other solutions that protects the interests of privateers (the lifeblood of sportscar racing) whist also keeping manufacturers (the driving force of sportscar racing) genuinely involved. The budget gap between manufacturers and privateers is way too great in this modern era. 
 
I might add that such a capped sale is only a maximum, generally you could expect manufacturers to offer price reductions in exchange for, say, putting a bigger logo of the manufacturer on the privateer car/overalls or taking on an affiliated driver. 
 
Any other way of keeping the privateers in with a genuine shout of winning a race? 
 

to make it just, this if-I-want-your-engine-you-have-to-sell-it scenario, in order to make sure that the customers don't receive weaker units, the FIA must randomly pick & allocate the engines, right ?

It is done to homologation and tightly controlled. Daniel Abt's (admittedly ridiculous) disqualification a while back was because Audi made a mistake on the part numbers in their technical log book so as far as the FIA was concerned they were not using the specific parts they had approved their use of. So I'm guessing yes?



#185 Sacha

Sacha
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 24 March 2019 - 15:05

Oh hello, ByKolles want to build a car for the HyperCar class that doesn't, I repeat, doesn't look like a mangled platypus.

https://sportscar365...ercar-revealed/

 

ByKolles2.jpg

I like this design -- whereby it seems that all Hypercars tend to look the same :rotfl:



#186 FLB

FLB
  • Member

  • 10,260 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 24 March 2019 - 15:07

I like this design -- whereby it seems that all Hypercars tend to look the same :rotfl:

Well, knowing ByKolles, it's likely to set itself on the first lap at Le Mans, though.



#187 Sacha

Sacha
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 24 March 2019 - 15:10

They would need some manufacturer to take part though?

Er -- and if the road car manufacturer against his plans does NOT produce these units ??? Will there then be a new podium ceremony in January ???



#188 V8 Fireworks

V8 Fireworks
  • Member

  • 10,759 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 24 March 2019 - 16:01

Show me one that’s been developed into a top class racing machine though and you have my interest. Because then the luxury and wealth aspects are stripped out and race performance is all that matters.

 

Hypercars rules are specifically to remove the need for development AFAIK.  Simply hit the required targets of downforce, drag, power and weight and your car should be competitive.  Straight forward.  :)

 

As (AFAIK) the first complete car designed for the new rules, I think the Toyota GR Concept looks like a tidy bit of kit, the powertrain is nicely packaged in the traditional F1 style with slanted radiator.  :up:  :up: '

 

 

https%3A%2F%2Fhypebeast.com%2Fimage%2F20

 

bruln59xplac2w6gocpx.jpg

 

798_d7c5a.jpg


Edited by V8 Fireworks, 24 March 2019 - 16:03.


#189 Sacha

Sacha
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 24 March 2019 - 16:02

Maybe, but I struggle to see any other solutions that protects the interests of privateers (the lifeblood of sportscar racing) whist also keeping manufacturers (the driving force of sportscar racing) genuinely involved. The budget gap between manufacturers and privateers is way too great in this modern era. 
 
I might add that such a capped sale is only a maximum, generally you could expect manufacturers to offer price reductions in exchange for, say, putting a bigger logo of the manufacturer on the privateer car/overalls or taking on an affiliated driver. 
 
Any other way of keeping the privateers in with a genuine shout of winning a race? 
 

It is done to homologation and tightly controlled. Daniel Abt's (admittedly ridiculous) disqualification a while back was because Audi made a mistake on the part numbers in their technical log book so as far as the FIA was concerned they were not using the specific parts they had approved their use of. So I'm guessing yes?

Legitimate idea.

 

Sponsorship could be another lever to lure & support the precious, creative privateer scene (the purest of all sportspeople):

  • directing some of the series' sponsorship income towards privateer teams (with the aim to harvest ROI via growth of the whole series)
  • prescribing that any sponsor of a manufacturer team has to sponsor a privateer outfit, too
  • a concerted effort by all associations involved (FIA/ACO/WEC): addressing all "usual suspects" in motorsports-sponsorship and urging them to support this WEC/LM-thing for some 3 yrs

Feedback would be nice, guys !

s



#190 Sacha

Sacha
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 24 March 2019 - 16:26

So, can someone please help me in visualising the class-grid, as planned ?

 

Like

  • Hypercar (road goings & not-so alike ? [BTW: which ones are track-only ?] Mandatory front-axle KERS ? what else ?)
    • LMP2 (rather "Hyper2" ?) with a handful of standard chassis, to be combined with a handful of standard engines ?
      • GTE PRO & GTE AM

Sorry, I couldn't enthuse myself to pick this together, and update, over time...



#191 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 4,421 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 27 March 2019 - 21:16

One of the more interesting things with future sports-car class structure is the push for the introduction of Hydrogen.

 

Apparently the plan is to set performance targets also at 3:30 lap times at Le Mans and integrate them into the top class for 2024/25.

http://www.dailyspor...n-tomorrow.html



#192 TF110

TF110
  • Member

  • 2,973 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 27 March 2019 - 23:23

Too slow imo.



#193 azza200

azza200
  • Member

  • 96 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted 27 March 2019 - 23:42

FIA/ACO are going the wrong way about it and will scare off a lot of fans possible manufactures with the route they are going IMO. It could be a potential failure in the long run



#194 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 4,421 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 28 March 2019 - 00:14

Too slow imo.

To be fair, that is only 5 years away.

 

And if you'd told me there was a shot at hydrogen cars in the top class of Le Mans by the mid 2020s ten years ago I would have thought you were pulling my leg.



#195 TF110

TF110
  • Member

  • 2,973 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 28 March 2019 - 02:11

I mean the top class in general at 3:30 is pathetic. They should be hovering around 3:15!



#196 DN5

DN5
  • Member

  • 392 posts
  • Joined: August 04

Posted 28 March 2019 - 14:19

I mean the top class in general at 3:30 is pathetic. They should be hovering around 3:15!

 

You are quoting the intended race pace - not qualifying times. In person I believe a 3:30 lap can still seem quick enough.



#197 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 4,421 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 28 March 2019 - 19:01

I mean the top class in general at 3:30 is pathetic. They should be hovering around 3:15!

Oh, my bad.

 

3:30 has always been top class of Le Mans in my head, but that might be an early-mid 2000s thing. I can see why they want to retreat back a bit given what has happened to LMP1-H.



#198 ArrowsLivery

ArrowsLivery
  • Member

  • 3,171 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 28 March 2019 - 19:27

The early diesels were doing 3:30s at best and those LMs were still quite a bit better than what we've had lately. 



#199 TF110

TF110
  • Member

  • 2,973 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 28 March 2019 - 22:38

3:30 is what lmp2 is doing, actually slower. So by having the top class go that slow, they'll have to slow lmp2. Which means cutting their power. That in turn leads to them taking risks in corners to pass GTE cars. For the FIA to be all about safety, this screams like the wrong direction to go. And 3:30 being race pace or qualifying pace is irrelevant. That's still slow in this day and age where the 2nd fastest class already exceeds that pace. When you think about the pace being what it was 20 years ago, it's quite sad as every other class is faster but the top class is going to go backwards. So it's not like the speeds are in a vacuum. There's no plans to slow GTE, just lmp2 and lmp1 or hypercar or whatever it's called. That's why I think it's a bad idea.



Advertisement

#200 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,253 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 28 March 2019 - 23:29

I'd have thought the safest thing to do would be to have a smaller speed difference between classes. Still, if the whole point of the Hypercar class is to bring more of a production slant to the top class, there's no point in having a super fast LMP2. I still don't get what LMP2 is even for. It's just for privateers to go racing so they can switch to a slower generic prototype without compromising their reason to exist.