Sportscar/GT (and Le Mans) Rumours and Repetition

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by seanyb505

Nissan?

In what capacity?

He has no LMP experience whatsoever so I can't see him as a candidate for their LMP1 programme.

It will probably be something US-centric, he was talking about how all this traveling back and forth to Europe was a drawback for him.

[Mal]

Ford?

[Rodger Davies]

Good shout that. I had assumed Corvette instead of Magnussen maybe, but Ford is a strong possibility. I can understand why they would drop him from DTM but I would have assumed BMW would still have a use for him in the US, so would be surprised if it wasn't his choice to leave.

[Mike E]

Originally Posted by Chiana

On Wednesday's WMSC decisions article there was an article regarding WEC and other than calendar it only said A series of changes were made to the sporting and technical regulations for 2015, which are available on fia.com.

I checked both the FIA regs page as well as endurance committee decisions and found nothing, anyone else have anything? Or are they just slow on updating as usual

Don't have a link but heard something about ballasting LMP cars if their average driver weight is below a certain level. So everyone is running at roughly the same weight and it is not a disadvantage to have tall/heavy drivers like Webber, Wurz, Hulk etc. Hulkenburg, not The Incredible Hulk.
But it was a rumour so maybe this isn't even in the new rules.

[seanyb505]

Originally Posted by Acid09

In what capacity?

He has no LMP experience whatsoever so I can't see him as a candidate for their LMP1 programme.

It will probably be something US-centric, he was talking about how all this traveling back and forth to Europe was a drawback for him.

True, though I wouldn't have a hard time believing Nissan doing something outside of the ordinary. Something crazy, like investing heavily in people who haven't raced a certain car/class/at all. Getting Hand in their roster doesn't really seem far fetched when you consider they also like to recruit from video gamers. Why not develop Hand for prototypes, if you're already developing people with a significantly less impressive resume anyway.

If such a match up were going to pan out, he'd be a big name American to go with a little name American that came through GT Academy.

Just a guess. It seems it would give him the opportunity to race sooner and at a higher profile than whatever Ford introduces in 2016.

[Mike Hedlund]

Saying a modern DTM driver can't quickly adapt to a modern LMP1 car is pretty daft.

-mike

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by Mike Hedlund

Saying a modern DTM driver can't quickly adapt to a modern LMP1 car is pretty daft.

-mike

One could argue that he wasn't the quickest guy in DTM exactly, so I'm not sure how that works in his favor.

I'm not saying he is a bad driver or that he couldn't be a good LMP1 driver, there's just nothing in his CV that suggests he will and as such he would be a risky pick for Nissan, especially considering that there's plenty of young drivers with substantial LMP experience out there.

[Rodger Davies]

Originally Posted by Acid09

One could argue that he wasn't the quickest guy in DTM exactly, so I'm not sure how that works in his favor.

One could argue that neither was Kristensen, but that's me playing Devils Advocate because I don't necessarily disagree with you, but its an angle I hasn't considered. We've seen how well SGT guys gave adapted and vice-versa.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by Rodger Davies

One could argue that neither was Kristensen, but that's me playing Devils Advocate because I don't necessarily disagree with you, but its an angle I hasn't considered. We've seen how well SGT guys gave adapted and vice-versa.

Kristensen won some races at least. Luhr was a real stinker in DTM (though that might have been to some extent down to him running in an older car), but he was quite quick in the RS Spyder.

[Rodger Davies]

Thanks, that's a better example!

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by Mike E

Don't have a link but heard something about ballasting LMP cars if their average driver weight is below a certain level. So everyone is running at roughly the same weight and it is not a disadvantage to have tall/heavy drivers like Webber, Wurz, Hulk etc. Hulkenburg, not The Incredible Hulk.
But it was a rumour so maybe this isn't even in the new rules.

French AutoHebdo magazine do report that it is contemplated to impose ballast if the average weight of the drivers is below 80kg.

There was also rumour some time ago that the technical regulations would be revised to allow DRS-like adjustable wing elements, but I haven't heard any confirmation of this recently.

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

There was also rumour some time ago that the technical regulations would be revised to allow DRS-like adjustable wing elements, but I haven't heard any confirmation of this recently.

Would this be in reply to the Toyota flexi-wing-mount thing? To be honest, if they want to go in this direction, I REALLY hope they go the full distance and allow proper active aerodynamics.

[J Jay]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

Would this be in reply to the Toyota flexi-wing-mount thing? To be honest, if they want to go in this direction, I REALLY hope they go the full distance and allow proper active aerodynamics.

It just makes sense doesn't it? Fits in with the drive for efficiency and it's not as if these cars aren't already massively complicated (and expensive). In fact, compared to the hybrid technology some form of unrestricted DRS would be much simpler to implement, so it'd be good for the privateer LMP1s as well.

Edit - Did we ever get clarification on how the wing worked? I remember the popular theory was that it rotated about the pivot with the help of some rear bodywork flexing, but obviously it was hushed up because that wing seemingly went the way of the dodo...

[Sodemo]

I'd be quite happy for DRS to stay well out of sportscar racing and any racing in fact to be honest.

[J Jay]

Even if it could be used anywhere on the track and there was no need to be close behind a following car? I think if I hadn't mentioned the name there'd be no problem here - I'm not interested in it as a way to facilitate overtaking or to keep cars close.

[Pontlieue]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I'd be quite happy for DRS to stay well out of sportscar racing and any racing in fact to be honest.

Movable aero to increase performance and efficiency is ok. Movable aero as a stupid artificial overtaking help needs to be removed from any kind of racing.

[MagVanisher]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

There was also rumour some time ago that the technical regulations would be revised to allow DRS-like adjustable wing elements, but I haven't heard any confirmation of this recently.

As long as it doesn't use it as a gimmick, I wanna see DRS in sports car racing.

[Graham Goodwin]

Why on earth would a plank on a hinge be of any use whatsoever in real racing - One thing sportscar racing doesn't have is an overtaking problem.

[MyNameIsNigel]

If movable aerodynamic devices do make it into the LMP1 rules, I do trust that this is going to be exploited as a means to further improve efficiency, not as some artifice to facilitate overtaking.

[Deleted]

It's stupid, but no stupider than joker laps and reference lap times and secret waiver lists and performance based specs and whatever else our side of the pond has. DRS people would equally laugh at much of our stuff.

[TF110]

Should probably wait to see what the rule modifications are. Innovation is a welcome. When road cars have more technology than a race car, I think it shows rules are a little too restrictive. They could allow a few things road cars have. VVT is one thing I dont understand the ban on.

[isynge]

Didn't the Porsche 917 have moveable aerodynamic devices?

DRS as implemented in F1 is absurd, aerodynamics that adapt themselves to their circumstances? That appeals - and if you look at how road cars work, nothing particularly new either.

[TRuss]

There are plenty of road going cars that have active aerodynamics and it isn't to help them overtake. I agree that the open and close DRS in F1 is dim, particularly in the terms that they are allowed to use it and the reasons that it was implemented in the first place. Ever since wings have been involved in racing engineers have wanted them to be adjustable throughout the lap. At first it was legal. Chaparral had an automatic trans and a foot adjusted trim 50 years ago. Even now we have had Toyota working outside of the regs with a wing that trims out under load and Red Bull getting busted for front wing elements that were engineered to flex in a beneficial way under load. It's ridiculous that this and many other things have been banned for so long and if you can't separate true active aero from F1's DRS then you should further educate yourself on the matter. It's really more interesting than you may realize. No matter it's all speculation for now so no need for anybody to get worked up regardless of opinion on the matter.

[PorscheFanNo1]

Active aerodynamics in LMP1 would be interesting, imagine what they could do with infinitely adjustable wings, being able to automaticly adjust them though every corner, for just the optimum downforce.

[Deleted]

I think adding any more complexity to those fuel flow hybrid cars is just going to increase the likelihood of drivers fiercely paying attention to their steering wheel buttons and other telemetry while their cars are crashing into Ferraris