Sportscar/GT (and Le Mans) Rumours and Repetition

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by Bcarr6

They seem to have the most sensible approach to P1 privateer in recent years, so I rate chances of seeing at least a few fairly high. Maybe not 5-10 next year though

If a couple run well in 18, maybe we will see more in 19

I think their goal is to build a competitive chassis for much less than what others would, help you plonk what engine you'd like in it (hello Nissan) and go compete...

Part of what P1P is missing is a 'volume' chassis builder like we had in the days of Lola.

[gert]

Originally Posted by Bcarr6

They seem to have the most sensible approach to P1 privateer in recent years, so I rate chances of seeing at least a few fairly high. Maybe not 5-10 next year though

If a couple run well in 18, maybe we will see more in 19

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

I think their goal is to build a competitive chassis for much less than what others would, help you plonk what engine you'd like in it (hello Nissan) and go compete...

Part of what P1P is missing is a 'volume' chassis builder like we had in the days of Lola.

I think a sensible approach will not be the only thing they need.
They need at least one strong and experienced team runnign one of their cars for it to be a success.

Who have they lined up for now?
I know it's early days, but still...

ARC Bratislava are rumored to be a potential Ginetta customer.
With all due respect to them, but what do you suppose will happen if they have to compete against the rumored Dallara fileded by SMP (and/or ART or AFCorse)?

And then what would YOU buy if need a car? the Dallara or the Ginetta?


They also need to be careful not to repeat their LMP3-mistake: be the first one out, get trounced and left behind and out in the next year.
And of course, that experience can also count against them if someone is contemplating which chassis to buy.

[seanyb505]

Prediction time: Toyota wins LM this year and drops out singing the "mission accomplished" song and dance. Porsche wins the following year and also drops out, singing the "no competition not worth the investment" song and dance.

That leaves LM open to win for privateers...essentially whoever has the best grip on how to run one of these Ginettas, or if SMP builds a cracker of a P1. Or Rebellion sees their only opportunity for a top step. 10/10ths declares WEC and P1 to be circling the drain/dead, again. And cries about why can't dp run at LM.

This attracts a few manufacturers back into play, since all you need to do is beat 3-4 privateers. Cycle again from 2012-2018 again.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by seanyb505

Prediction time: Toyota wins LM this year and drops out singing the "mission accomplished" song and dance. Porsche wins the following year and also drops out, singing the "no competition not worth the investment" song and dance.

That leaves LM open to win for privateers...essentially whoever has the best grip on how to run one of these Ginettas, or if SMP builds a cracker of a P1. Or Rebellion sees their only opportunity for a top step. 10/10ths declares WEC and P1 to be circling the drain/dead, again. And cries about why can't dp run at LM.

This attracts a few manufacturers back into play, since all you need to do is beat 3-4 privateers. Cycle again from 2012-2018 again.

Something like that. Though I don't think we'd see a fully manufacturer-less year. There will at least be one, more likely two low-budget manufacturer efforts - think early 2000s Chrysler-LMP or some such...

[Bcarr6]

Originally Posted by gert

I think a sensible approach will not be the only thing they need.
They need at least one strong and experienced team runnign one of their cars for it to be a success.

Who have they lined up for now?
I know it's early days, but still...

ARC Bratislava are rumored to be a potential Ginetta customer.
With all due respect to them, but what do you suppose will happen if they have to compete against the rumored Dallara fileded by SMP (and/or ART or AFCorse)?

And then what would YOU buy if need a car? the Dallara or the Ginetta?


They also need to be careful not to repeat their LMP3-mistake: be the first one out, get trounced and left behind and out in the next year.
And of course, that experience can also count against them if someone is contemplating which chassis to buy.

Manor Racing have said they want to run potential a couple of the Ginettas


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by seanyb505

Prediction time: Toyota wins LM this year and drops out singing the "mission accomplished" song and dance. Porsche wins the following year and also drops out, singing the "no competition not worth the investment" song and dance.

That leaves LM open to win for privateers...essentially whoever has the best grip on how to run one of these Ginettas, or if SMP builds a cracker of a P1. Or Rebellion sees their only opportunity for a top step. 10/10ths declares WEC and P1 to be circling the drain/dead, again. And cries about why can't dp run at LM.

This attracts a few manufacturers back into play, since all you need to do is beat 3-4 privateers. Cycle again from 2012-2018 again.

2007-2018 cycle. Fixed.
Anyway you're right, as soon as one among toyota or porsche drops, WEC is basically dead as well.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by canaglia

2007-2018 cycle. Fixed.
Anyway you're right, as soon as one among toyota or porsche drops, WEC is basically dead as well.

Doubt it. Toyota and Porsche are the only ones right now but that can change quickly. I don't know what leads people to believe either will leave when they have a car/chassis that is good for the regs until 2019. There has been no indication of them leaving either. Toyota is the hybrid leader in sales, no other racing series right now is able to run a hybrid car besides f1. That's off the table obviously. As for Porsche, they have a history of running the top class, and as long as they can win it or have a chance to, they'll be there until no one is there or they find something more interesting.

I think the wec knows what it has currently needs to be preserved and the private class needs to be competitive. If they allow it to have more power and more aero freedom than they can be right there.

[Makaze]

FCEV LMP1 in 2020 or 21.

Honda,GM,Toyota,Hyundai,VAG,MB and petrol/chemical/gas companies would be interested.

[carbsmith]

Originally Posted by gert

They need at least one strong and experienced team runnign one of their cars for it to be a success.

Who have they lined up for now?

KCMG and Manor seem like pretty good teams to me

[Bcarr6]

Aleshin Involved in Initial BR1 Development

http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/a...1-development/

Looks like things are moving in the Dallara / SMP camp too

Sounds like they are basing as much as possible off the Dallara P2 chasis

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Bcarr6

Aleshin Involved in Initial BR1 Development

http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/a...1-development/

Looks like things are moving in the Dallara / SMP camp too

Sounds like they are basing as much as possible off the Dallara P2 chasis

And sensibly so. A 2017 P2 car with less weight and more power should be faster, no need to reinvent the wheel on this. In theory, Oreca, Ligier and Riley could all put forth similar concepts if somebody where to appear with the funding.

[Bcarr6]

Originally Posted by joeb

And sensibly so. A 2017 P2 car with less weight and more power should be faster, no need to reinvent the wheel on this. In theory, Oreca, Ligier and Riley could all put forth similar concepts if somebody where to appear with the funding.

Very sensible, as Rebellion and Oreca proved previously

[TF110]

Hyundai sent out a tweet earlier stating that they are entering a car based on the i30 in to the TCR class.

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by TF110

Hyundai sent out a tweet earlier stating that they are entering a car based on the i30 in to the TCR class.

Michel Nandan said: “The beginning of our first project specifically for circuit racing is a very important step for Hyundai Motorsport."

And the second project is........

[Mike E]

More Peugeot possibilities...

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2017/0...p1-return.html

[TF110]

They better not standardize things that are currently free just for Peugeot. Things like a battery (not a flywheel) being the only storage solution for hybrids is ok, but not ok if it's a spec size or capacity or the worst case scenario a spec supplier.

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by TF110

They better not standardize things that are currently free just for Peugeot. Things like a battery (not a flywheel) being the only storage solution for hybrids is ok, but not ok if it's a spec size or capacity or the worst case scenario a spec supplier.

Some compromises will need to be made if everyone is serious about cutting costs. You can't cut costs and have everything stay the same, that's impossible.

[chernaudi]

Or if the ACO weren't so gung ho about setting and giving such huge incentives for hybrid systems. If one thought that the old 2011-2013 3.5MJ max hybrid systems were expensive, imagine trying to get more than twice that year one or two of the 2014 to present rules.

Not to mention that the ACO also closed up other areas where the same performance gains could've been made for cheaper. The ACO playing the green card just because two or three car makers liked the idea and placing incentive on one way to do things is largely why Audi left (being forced to copy Porsche and Toyota's lead, while Audi and Porsche are both owned by Volkswagen Group; redundancy and other avenues being a few years away probably made justification for the Audi Sport pullout easier to make, along with the BS ERS Incentive). Not to mention that the FIA did it with F1 and the past three seasons is a direct consequence of that.

Now the FIA are loosening up the fuel flow regs, going back to 2000mm wide cars and wider tires to try and bring up performance and spice up the show.

I'm still of the opinion that the ACO pushed too far, too fast, and that reduced the ROI of the teams, especially the private teams. If you're spending more money, time, energy and manpower while getting no better or less results, why play until something interesting comes along in the rules?

I personally think that the ACO should've stayed with sonic air restrictors and 2000mm wide cars, but that's my opinion.

But the new rules, to exploit them, has driven up everyone's budgets. I'd bet that TMG are spending nearly twice now what they spent in 2012 and '13. And their budget is probably more than what Peugeot want to sink down the tubes in a venture with an outcome that's far from certain, let alone what VAG allocated to Audi Sport and Porsche Motorsport.

[Dyson Mazda]

Originally Posted by Mike E

More Peugeot possibilities...

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2017/0...p1-return.html

That seems like the same possibility from the last time Graham published an article on this topic

[TF110]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Or if the ACO weren't so gung ho about setting and giving such huge incentives for hybrid systems. If one thought that the old 2011-2013 3.5MJ max hybrid systems were expensive, imagine trying to get more than twice that year one or two of the 2014 to present rules.

Not to mention that the ACO also closed up other areas where the same performance gains could've been made for cheaper. The ACO playing the green card just because two or three car makers liked the idea and placing incentive on one way to do things is largely why Audi left (being forced to copy Porsche and Toyota's lead, while Audi and Porsche are both owned by Volkswagen Group; redundancy and other avenues being a few years away probably made justification for the Audi Sport pullout easier to make, along with the BS ERS Incentive). Not to mention that the FIA did it with F1 and the past three seasons is a direct consequence of that.

Now the FIA are loosening up the fuel flow regs, going back to 2000mm wide cars and wider tires to try and bring up performance and spice up the show.

I'm still of the opinion that the ACO pushed too far, too fast, and that reduced the ROI of the teams, especially the private teams. If you're spending more money, time, energy and manpower while getting no better or less results, why play until something interesting comes along in the rules?

I personally think that the ACO should've stayed with sonic air restrictors and 2000mm wide cars, but that's my opinion.

But the new rules, to exploit them, has driven up everyone's budgets. I'd bet that TMG are spending nearly twice now what they spent in 2012 and '13. And their budget is probably more than what Peugeot want to sink down the tubes in a venture with an outcome that's far from certain, let alone what VAG allocated to Audi Sport and Porsche Motorsport.

I think you are jumping to conclusions. If Audi didn't pull out I bet we wouldn't hear any of these types of comments. They've only themselves to blame. Hybrids didn't do it, incentives didn't do it, fuel equivalence didn't do it. The VW group's cheating did it. They probably wouldn't even have pulled out if it weren't for the fact that Audi ran a diesel and that's what has a bad image for the company.

Every time something like costs come up, you blame the rules for it. In actuality it's not the rules. It's likely a combination of things like other manufacturers not wanting to spend on lmp1 for various reasons and the roi doing the wec. The same thing can be said about F1. I don't think it's inexpensive to do lmp1, but the rules are not the sole nor the biggest blame. I think most of it is manufacturers wanting to be cheap. Formula E Is getting more subscribers because of that. The WEC needs to be better at marketing itself to manufacturers to compete with that.

Originally Posted by Acid09

Some compromises will need to be made if everyone is serious about cutting costs. You can't cut costs and have everything stay the same, that's impossible.

I think I addressed that. Just a battery system required instead of a flywheel or capacitor will be ok. Two body kits, and a couple of other things like reducing the cost of participating or better media presence would be enough imo.

[chernaudi]

Yet you plead poverty with Toyota due to them spending the least amount of money of any current or recent LMP1 manufacturer, including likely Peugeot.

You seem to be conveniently forgetting VAG politics from another angle, that Audi and Porsche were allowed to race provided that they were able to use different solutions. The rules already forced Audi to ditch the flywheel and Toyota to ditch capacitors in favor of battery tech. To get much beyond 6MJ, Audi would've needed to run a gasoline engine. If that didn't kill off interest on the Audi Sport end for LMP1, I don't know what did. Already Audi weren't marketing diesel tech with their LMP1 cars since 2012. Also, when one considers that Audi have still made record profits in spite of diesel gate, I don't think they were hurting for money.

IMO, it's easy for you to ignore the rising costs and reduced ROI (unless you're Porsche) because Toyota, to a lesser degree, have benefited from the rules, and that Toyota have had to up their game in terms of tech and money spent because of the disaster that 2015 turned out to be for them. But even then, they were the first to cry poverty, even when the rules did benefit them as it did in 2014.

ROI is what drove the Audi decision, not dieselgate, IMO, dieselgate was just a good cover story for justification for the pull out. And should things go bad for Toyota or Porsche, can I see them pulling out, too.

The rules as they are now only appealed to a few car makers. If the ACO backed off on the ERS incentive and didn't encourage teams to go 8MJ ASAP--and the cost hikes associated with exploiting said technology--we wouldn't be having this discussion. It'd also be nice if they could leave a formula alone for more than 3-4 years.

Sadly, it took the Audi Sport pullout to serve as a wake up call to the ACO. But IMO, until 2020, it's too little, too late.

[TzeiTzei]

Just like bad ROI pushed VW out of WRC?

Everyone was raving about the hybrid regs two years ago and now, suddenly, they were bad from the start.

[chernaudi]

I wasn't raving about them. If we go back three years, I said about them what I said about IMSA's then prototype regs: They get it right, it'll be great. Get it wrong, it'll be very bad indeed.

I also think that the ACO's regs were also built too much around a gambler's mentality. A "he who dares wins" train of thought. That goes back to Audi and Peugeot gambling on the diesel regs working out for them, and Audi and Toyota (joined later by Porsche) hoping that the hybrid regs worked out and suited their ROI. Nothing wrong with that within certain limits. But the fact that the WEC never had more than three true factory teams at any given time does show IMO that the formula was a bit flawed, wouldn't you say?

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by TF110

I think I addressed that. Just a battery system required instead of a flywheel or capacitor will be ok. Two body kits, and a couple of other things like reducing the cost of participating or better media presence would be enough imo.

That's likely not enough, substantial cost-cutting is needed, not little things.

Flywheel & capacitors have stopped being feasible options anyways, what effect would banning them have? None. What you propose are just cover-ups that basically result in nothing.

Real cost cutting can only be archived by taking incentives for excessive spending on development away. And that means standardized components, among other things.

[Coach Ep]

cough, cough...

http://tentenths.com/forum/showthread.php?t=107659