 |
|
26 Nov 2003, 15:08
|
#1
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,616
|
Aston Martin
autosport and motorsport news report that prodrive have signed a deal to build an aston martin db9 gts car to compete at le mans in 2005.
would post the link but you need to register with the site anyway before you could open it.
|
|
__________________
I want you to drive flat out
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 15:22
|
#2
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,147
|
|
|
|
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean?
-Bill James
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 15:30
|
#3
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 656
|
Fantastic news!! 
|
|
|
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 15:49
|
#4
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,687
|
Yes indeed. Look forward to 2005.
Oh, and hello, gi_gav. How's things?
|
|
|
__________________
Interviewer: "Will the McLaren F1 be your answer to the Ferrari F40?"
Gordon Murray: "Hmm... I don't think we have anyone at McLaren who can weld that badly..."
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 16:13
|
#5
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,150
|
Good to see Aston will be racing something again. Does seem to eliminate any chance of seeing a Ford GT is GTS doesn't it.
|
|
|
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 16:19
|
#6
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,147
|
I thought it was the production supercharged 5.4 that eliminated that chance. 
|
|
|
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean?
-Bill James
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 16:25
|
#7
|
|
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 96
|
What is the displacement limit on forced induction motors in the GTS category??? 4.0l's?
|
|
|
__________________
The "kid"
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 17:08
|
#8
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,147
|
Yep. I doubt it would be worthwhile to sleeve out the cylinders.
It appears that they could remove the charger, though. (5.2.2(b) of the GTS regs)
http://www.lemans.org/sport/ressourc...ONS_GTS_GB.pdf
|
|
|
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean?
-Bill James
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 18:06
|
#9
|
|
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 96
|
so a 4.0L Supercharged Ford GT GTS contender could still be a possibility at least
|
|
|
__________________
The "kid"
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 18:06
|
#10
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,315
|
Great news, just a shame they cant go in 2004
|
|
|
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 18:36
|
#11
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 656
|
Quote:
Originally posted by BSchneiderFan
Yes indeed. Look forward to 2005.
Oh, and hello, gi_gav. How's things?
|
None too bad at all thanks!
Lancaster's a bit of a contrast with St Andrews, but its all good. Haven't found any rabid sportscar fans yet though...
|
|
|
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 18:46
|
#12
|
|
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Good to see BOTH AM and Lamborghini entering GTS rather than the less exciting GT class.
To me it seems only a matter of time before GTS cars are upgraded to compete with the LMPs.
The question is whether GTS will be upgraded or a new GT1 class will be introduced without the homologation pitfalls of the previous 'GT1' class as Ratel seems to prefer.
Last edited by JAG; 26 Nov 2003 at 18:50.
|
|
|
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 18:50
|
#13
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,147
|
Quote:
Originally posted by almzkid
so a 4.0L Supercharged Ford GT GTS contender could still be a possibility at least
|
Not knowing thing one about engine blocks, I'd guess it would make more sense to remove the s/c and bore out the engine. I'm assuming the block is somewhat substantial (since it can operate at the higher pressures required by the s/c), and if the Ferrari could get from 5.5 to 6, I'd think the Ford 5.6 could get to 6 at least, maybe even 6.5 if the geometry is right.
It's too bad they went with the 5.6 as the base for the 'charger. If they had've gone with the mod V8 (as used in the Panoz GT and the Multimatic DP among others) they'd only have to sleeve down 0.6L. I fear that 1.6L is a lot of displacement to sleeve out, and you'd end up with a pretty big 4.0L...
|
|
|
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean?
-Bill James
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 20:34
|
#14
|
|
Take That Fan
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 8,232
|
Fantastic News, roll on Le Mans 2005......
|
|
|
__________________
There is only one way of life and thats your own ! ! !
|
|
26 Nov 2003, 21:41
|
#15
|
|
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,217
|
Paul
If you are speaking of the four cam Ford, it will not go above 350 in. cubed. The engine is extremely heavy as it is which is why Ford did not give it a large heavier cyl. block.
If they do not allow destroking, the engine is already a long-stroke engine and sleeving down to 4l will make it internal geometry better suited to tractor-pulling than sports car racing.
At 330 in.cu. it is already a long-stroke engine.
Now the old push-rod engine used by Panoz and Saleen, that can be expanded quite a bit, if they use the tall-deck version.
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
