|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
29 May 2012, 12:00 (Ref:3081123) | #1 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,396
|
Quote:
Bernie: Just as planned! |
||
|
29 May 2012, 13:19 (Ref:3081177) | #2 | |
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 388
|
||
|
29 May 2012, 13:22 (Ref:3081179) | #3 | |
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
Bravo FIA, bravo... everything always starts to go downhill once you step in
|
|
|
29 May 2012, 14:22 (Ref:3081198) | #4 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,958
|
Well... I guess these small engines are going to be relevant... Not particularly interesting, but relevant. The sad part of this is that small high revving engines are going to heavily favour the manufacturers, while the boutique engine shops may have problems in comparison. Can I have back my six liter V10's and V12's please?
|
||
|
29 May 2012, 14:05 (Ref:3081193) | #5 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 824
|
This... very much this... It all seemed to be heading in the right direction, the formation of the world championship, the introduction of hybrids, the promise of returning to a fuel cap formula like the group C cars had. Then the FIA decides they want to see the same engines as the F1 cars have in LMP's and *poof* gone is the beauty and back is the crap they call FIA dictatorship...
|
||
|
29 May 2012, 14:10 (Ref:3081195) | #6 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,326
|
Playing devil's advocate here for a moment:
It makes sense for Porsche/Audi if one of them is going to go to F1 in the not so distant future. And it also might help to bring in Nissan, who could share engine developement costs with Renault. |
||
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam. |
30 May 2012, 07:55 (Ref:3081686) | #7 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,195
|
The funny thing is though that the entire Volkswagen Group made it repeatedly clear they are not going to enter Formula 1. Not now and not in the near future.
|
||
__________________
'Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines.' - Enzo Ferrari |
29 May 2012, 14:24 (Ref:3081199) | #8 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,958
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
29 May 2012, 15:05 (Ref:3081216) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,353
|
I hope this proves to be wrong, but if not it is clear that all the FIA want to do is veto sportscars in favour of F1 because they can see the manufacturers migrating to P1.
|
||
|
29 May 2012, 16:19 (Ref:3081246) | #10 | |
Rookie
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 13
|
||
|
29 May 2012, 17:37 (Ref:3081303) | #11 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,222
|
Quote:
|
||
|
29 May 2012, 18:06 (Ref:3081323) | #12 | |
Rookie
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 13
|
I have nothing against small displacement turbos, not at all. But restricting the entire LMP class to such engines would be madness IMO and goes against the very ethos of sportscar racing.
|
|
|
29 May 2012, 21:50 (Ref:3081487) | #13 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
29 May 2012, 12:04 (Ref:3081124) | #14 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,642
|
If true, I wonder if they will allow twin turbos?
Remember that the 1.5L V6 Twin Turbo TAG-Porsche engine developed 960bhp in race trim and 1,100bhp in qualifying. I'm not suggesting that we will see anything along those lines, but the potential is still there just as long as they allow reasonable turbo boost. |
||
|
29 May 2012, 12:41 (Ref:3081152) | #15 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,654
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
Hvil i Fred Allan. (Rest in Peace Allan) |
29 May 2012, 14:17 (Ref:3081197) | #16 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,460
|
need to remember that in f1 and group C mid '80 the boost setting was free, for this reason during qualifying the cars were able to reach 1000hp, while during the race because of reliability and consumes the engines were set 30-40% less powerfull.
I hope that a f1/WEC engine spec sharing won't happen anymore, but if this will happen forget to see turbo engines much more powerfull than the actual 2.0 ones. Last edited by alexkiller8; 29 May 2012 at 14:25. |
|
|
29 May 2012, 15:13 (Ref:3081218) | #17 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,642
|
Quote:
If the ACO would go with.... lets say 3.0 then it would still be quite interesting. Anyway, I suspect engines will put out about 650hp+ KERS. Last edited by Spyderman; 29 May 2012 at 15:19. |
|||
|
29 May 2012, 15:29 (Ref:3081222) | #18 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,460
|
me too think that the new 1.6 turbo engines will gain more torque but won't reach more than 700hp because of a lower revlimit, speaking about f1; if these engines will be used also for lmp i'm sure that because of bop and power control, will be still used restrictors.
|
|
|
29 May 2012, 17:36 (Ref:3081302) | #19 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,222
|
Quote:
|
||
|
29 May 2012, 15:15 (Ref:3081219) | #20 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 15,907
|
I would just like to point out that we have yet to see the final regs published, so try not to get too worked up. I know the information came from a well informed source, but im not going to rush to criticize until the announcement comes in a few weeks.
After all there were rumours a few weeks ago saying engine regs would be opened up with an energy formula applied. So is the new rumour more acurate because it is newer, or is it just newer? |
||
|
29 May 2012, 17:31 (Ref:3081299) | #21 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,222
|
Quote:
|
||
|
29 May 2012, 22:27 (Ref:3081507) | #22 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,569
|
How do we know this will be the ONLY option? it could just be one configuration available
|
|
|
29 May 2012, 22:32 (Ref:3081510) | #23 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,222
|
No? Accepting an engine vs. adopting full regs.
One could think that if Collins had heard the same thing Mike apparently has, then there would have been a newsstory already. Quote:
Still this sounds so odd because this is the first time this rumor has come up. There was that 5.0 L displacement limit thing (Autosport) and that Cotton column in RCE which seemed to draw too many conclusions (post #1939 above), but those were completely different details. Last edited by deggis; 29 May 2012 at 22:46. |
||
|
29 May 2012, 23:02 (Ref:3081528) | #24 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,831
|
12 hours later and the only thing I can add is that there is slightly more to what's going on than simply F1 engines for sportscars. The architecture will be the same apparently (1.6L. V6, turbo), beyond that no idea about KERS or EERS or diesel/alternate fuels, consumption regulations, fuel restrictors, etc. But it would seem the idea of "open" engine regulations is definitely gone (did we really think it would last though?).
The REALLY odd thing is that NO ONE is wanting to discuss this, even off the record. The FIA has brought a lack of transparency, and that's really unfortunate. I mean it's not like we don't already know there will be a distinct conflict of interest with whatever decision they make...;0) |
|
|
30 May 2012, 00:02 (Ref:3081552) | #25 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,833
|
So the FIA is going down the NASCAR route--in more ways than one it seems (namely the lack of transparency).
|
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[WEC] Glickenhaus Hypercar | Akrapovic | ACO Regulated Series | 1603 | 12 Apr 2024 21:24 |
[WEC] Aston Martin Hypercar Discussion | deggis | ACO Regulated Series | 175 | 23 Feb 2020 03:37 |
[WEC] SCG 007: Glickenhaus Le Mans LMP1 Hypercar | Bentley03 | ACO Regulated Series | 26 | 16 Nov 2018 02:35 |
ALMS Extends LMP Regulations | tblincoe | North American Racing | 33 | 26 Aug 2005 15:03 |
[LM24] Whats the future of LMP's at Le Mans?? | Garrett | 24 Heures du Mans | 59 | 8 Jul 2004 15:15 |