Lmp2 = Lmp675

[JAG]

'Elsewhere on the LMP front, don’t be surprised if there is a return to the principal behind the LMP675 rule, which was not when originally introduced a separate class, but rather an alternate approach to win overall. “Consider,” said the Bear’s source, “what the alternatives are.”

http://murphythebear.com/blog/2006/0...-2007/#more-27

So the ALMS/ACO's plans to have as many competitive LMP's as possible, competing for the overall win, is to leave P2 as is, and let them fight it out with the P1's?

Maybe P2's with purpose built racing engines could be classed as a P1, with cheaper 'stock block' engined P2's remaining in P2?

I guess it's an interesting route for Porsche with the Spyder, and a neccessity for the ALMS, but anyone starting afresh, aiming for overall wins, will have to go down the full P1 route if they want to seriously challenge the R10/Peugeot etc. especially on medium to high speed tracks.

[FIRE]

I would be very surprised if ACO agrees with this.

[duke_toaster]

I hope the ACO allow that and then phase out the current P1s.

[JAG]

They don't really need to agree, just leave P2 as it is.

If the ALMS P1 class had six competitive P1 cars the Porsche Spyders would struggle to achieve a podium, but there aren't, so we get these oddball results.

The fact the heavily restricted Highcroft 'MG' Lola was giving the Spyders a hell of a fight, and blowing them away on the straight (when reliable) these last few races, probably tells you how unsorted the current Dyson P1's are, rather than how good the Spyders are.

[canam]

I know that we are looking at 2007, but is not all this talk inconsistent with the, yet to be clarified, plans regarding coupes (P1) and other (P2 for Privateers) from the ACO. the ACO clearly wants some differentiation. I suppose that since current P1 and P2s look indistinguishable from each other, it makes sense to let either class take and overall victory. It still goes against what everyone had thought that the ACO never wanted--a P2 getting overall victory. I can see the arguments on both sides and, given the likely paucity of P1 (new reg) cars for next year, could make sense.

[JAG]

It's an ALMS issue.

Let's face it, without the Spyders, most of the ALMS LMP races would have been one sided up until a few races back.

The LMS has shown a well run P2 can reach the top 6 quite comfortably, but P1 numbers mean a P2 overall winner is highly unlikely.

Early season ALMS races against a restricted R8 and unsorted Dyson Lola were easy pickings for the Porsche, lately they've been quick but not really in with a shout of victory, despite there only being 4 competitive P1 cars.

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by canam

It still goes against what everyone had thought that the ACO never wanted--a P2 getting overall victory.

Wrong!!!!

P2s were designed to be competitive with P1s.

[paul-collins]

Originally Posted by JAG

It's an ALMS issue.

Let's face it, without the Spyders, most of the ALMS LMP races would have been one sided up until a few races back.

The LMS has shown a well run P2 can reach the top 6 quite comfortably, but P1 numbers mean a P2 overall winner is highly unlikely.

If the Porsche Spyders were to run at current pace in the LMS, they would win. Game Set Match.

[TWK]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

Wrong!!!!

P2s were designed to be competitive with P1s.

I'm sorry, you've gotten that turned around. The LMP675 was intended to produce designs that were competitive with LMP900. Later, when only the Lola-designed-and-built MG was forthcoming, all that changed with the advent of the new LMP1 and LMP2 rules, in which the power-to-weight targets where specifically intended to make LMP2 a less expensive, privateer-dominated class of its own which would not be able to challenge the (assumedly) much more expensive LMP1s for overall wins. At that time, the one "real" LMP675 (the MG Lola) was moved to the LMP1 class, since it was built to a rule that was intended to be competitive with those cars.

The upset in that has come with the advent of the most recent iteration of the rules, the full (not hybrid) "new rule" cars in both classes. The actual cars have turned out to be much faster than was foreseen, and to be well above the ACO's horsepower (and torque) "targets" in two cases (Porsche and the Audi diesel), and relatively slower in others (the gasoline powered LMP1s). Correction of those unforeseen disparities means "messing with" Porsche (and Audi), and everyone is loath to do that. So, the question is what is to be done now?

[dj choc ice]

in a way the ACO didnt want an LMP2 to claim an overall win but they knew that the way the cars would be built to meet the weight limit and with the much smaller engine's with around 450-500bhp like the 3.4 V8 judd and the 2.0 AER turbo means that a LMP2 could claim a overall win with the right conditions and a bit of luck on a tighter smaller track like mosport or lime rock were a LMP2 car wont have a chance at lemans against a LMP1 due to the huge power defficit the LMP1's to the new regs are quite a lot more powerful than the old spec LMP900 cars i believe the LMP900 cars had no more than 615bhp/620bhp while the new spec LMP1 cars have a slight bit more power, JUDD GV5 5.0 V10 has 630 bhp while the AER turbo has 610bhp thats the 3.6 biturbo btw and also the mugen and zytek V8's have about 620bhp but the audis diesel has about at least 650bhp and has been suggested to have as much as 700bhp which is as much as a underpowered group C car and im slowly begging to like the diesel audi R10's and im very antidiesel.

i loved the zytek and dyson MG lola's from 2004 and 2005 mainly because they were slightly adjusted LMP2/675 cars with wider tyres and a slight bit more downforce and tiny bit less drag and also more power (zytek had 475bhp in LMP2 spec while in LMP1 spec had 540bhp, dyson MG in LMP675 had about 500bhp but in LMP1 spec had around 520bhp as well) so i think if we could have say a modified lola B05/40 AER or JUDD V8 with wider tyres and more power would make for a great battle in LMP1, imagine the R10's pulling away on the straights and the modded lola B05/40 or courage C65's gaining on the R10's and pescarolo's on the brakes and through the corners reminds me of silverstone last year oreca audi R8 and creation DBA 03S JUDD V8 now that was a true david v goliath battle and one i will remember for a long time and me hanging over the brooklands VIP balcony cheering on creation and oreca my 2 favorite teams duking it out good days even though it was only a year ago now

[ger80]

If the ACO realy wants to different classes, why not using the same minimum weight with same maximum engine size but different restrictor. and less electronics for lmp2 and a minimum centre of gravity so they dont need very expensive materials

[jhansen]

Originally Posted by paul-collins

If the Porsche Spyders were to run at current pace in the LMS, they would win. Game Set Match.

Why is it a shock that a pro P2 team could win against small privateer P1 teams with unproven cars? No story there.

And I am pretty sure that Pescarolo would prove difficult to beat for Penske.

[minimangler]

LMP is screwed up big time- with audi wining everything, and no one really knowing what lmp675/900/1/2 actually stands for, maybe its time for mor simple ruling, and maybe a c1/c2 style strucutre, becsause that worked, until bernie worried it would kill f1.
im a big sportscar fan yet i have never got my hed round these latest lmp regs.
so what chance does joe bloggs have?

[JAG]

'If the Porsche Spyders were to run at current pace in the LMS, they would win. Game Set Match.'

I don't believe that to be true.
Other than Audi and Porsche the ALMS LMP line-up isn't upto much.

Dyson are top class but the Lolas appear off the pace compared to other customer cars.

Pescarolo were the only cars to be relatively competitive with Audi at Le Mans, but elsewere Creation, Courage and Zytek have been as quick, if not quicker than Pescarolo, they simply didn't show this pace at Le Mans.

But my original point about this being an ALMS problem is with regards to the ALMS's severe lack of P1 entries, they need Porsche to be competitive to put on a decent show at the head of the field.

In Europe there are enough P1's expected in 2007, including Audi and Peugeot, to put on a show without the P2's, so no worries about cutting P2 performance.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by jhansen

Why is it a shock that a pro P2 team could win against small privateer P1 teams with unproven cars? No story there.

And I am pretty sure that Pescarolo would prove difficult to beat for Penske.

Highcrofts restricted 'MG' Lola was a match for the Porsche, and had a visible bhp advantage on the straights, so who's to say Porsche have bigger than expected BHP etc?

Until you see Porsche up against RML or a top Radical, or Acura with their customer chassis, we'll not know where everyone really stands.

Same goes for P1, sure Audi and diesel power have an advantage, that will be dealt with, but is it correct to hold up the current Lola/AER as the standard for petrol P1's, seeing as the Chamberlain Lola has been way off the pace in Europe (admittedly I'm not comparing equal driver strength etc.)

My problem is conclusions are being drawn based on a LMP1/2 field totalling 7.

What will be said if the Radical turns out to be 1+ second quicker than Intersport, or Creation pulls out a similar margin on Dyson, do we get out the calculators again?

[awegrzyn]

This is a classic example showing what's wrong with the series.

Yeah, just keep changing the rules every race. Why not? You are doing this already for some cars. At this point, not realizing the fundamental problem for the series is plain ridicules on the ALMS management part. Anyone else can manage the series better at this point. This year is a disaster. As a car manufacturer I would never enter anything so unstable. Waste of money.

[Purist]

What would you do then, AWegrzyn? If concesions aren't made for those trying to go up against Audi or GM, no one will bother putting together an effort, because they will feel that they have no chance to compete, let alone win.

The LMP concessions have been minor in comparison to those in GT1, and the on-track results have shown them to be on-base given the current make up of the ALMS' prototype field.

As to GT1, I will say what I have said elsewhere. Road America is a track that favors the Astons over the Vettes more than any other on the ALMS schedule. Sebring has ONE really long straight (though with Sunset Bend, maybe you can call it two). Houston has NO straight of the length I'm talking about. Mid-Ohio has ONE such "straight". Lime Rock has NONE. Miller Motorsports Park has ONe (but honestly, I suspect the altitude exaggerated the effect of the Vette's smaller restrictor there in Utah). Portland I suppose has ONE long straight, but only just. Road America has TGREE very long "straights". Mosport Park and Road Atlanta have ONE "straight" each of great magnitude. The other really fast sections at those tracks are due to true high speed corners, so the advantage in those areas would be the Vette's. Laguna Seca is a handling track and has NO straight of great length.

[jhansen]

Originally Posted by JAG

My problem is conclusions are being drawn based on a LMP1/2 field totalling 7.

There isn't enough data from either series to draw any meaningful conclusions in regards to the differential in pace between P1 and P2. But I agree that this is especially true in the ALMS.

[Purist]

Before someone mentions it here as well, purely changing up minimum weights won't fix things entirely, or reduce costs on materials. As important as the overall weight is, that placement of that weight is paramount, so use of exotic materials would continue in LMP2 even if the minimum weight was increased.

[TheNewBob]

I'd say wait until we see how quick the Porsche is against the European cars. Whilst the ALMS is of high quality entries, the lack of numbers mean the top LMP2's will always be in with a shout.

What am I looking forward to at Le Mans next year? Amongst other things, it's certainly a Porsche/Acura/Radical/RML battle in LMP2. What's more, they won't be troubling Audi, Peugeot, Zytek, Pescarolo and co. in the P1 class unless there's a freak occurrance with reliability.

But in this style of racing you always have to accept fluctuations - the "lesser" LMP1 efforts will naturally be mixing in with the better LMP2's. It's been happening for ages, it's not really been a problem before, so why is it a problem now...?

[ger80]

Originally Posted by Purist

Before someone mentions it here as well, purely changing up minimum weights won't fix things entirely, or reduce costs on materials. As important as the overall weight is, that placement of that weight is paramount, so use of exotic materials would continue in LMP2 even if the minimum weight was increased.

Yes, thats why i want a minimum centre of gravity.