[LM24] Le Mans 2008 - Entry List/Driver News

[brielga]

it's official, the second epsilon is in!

http://www.planetlemans.com/2008/06/...euskadi-is-in/

[fish88]

Awesome news, it was a good call of them to take 2 cars with them.

[Sarthe82]

Great news, not just for the car but for three quality drivers being allowed to take part.
Presuming this will now be #21, how convenient that number was available....

[mattcat]

Hopefully the revisions that were being made to the car will allow them to have a good showing. I'd love to see these two beautiful prototypes surprising some people.

[The359]

ACO's website says that official confirmation of a possible replacement for the withdrawn Racing Box Lucchini will take place Wednesday.

[KA]

Originally Posted by Javi

I have a speculation...
Luchinni knew they will not compete safely, and they told the ACO before the test day. But, in order, perhaps, not to un-comply compromises with sponsors, they could not forfait before scrutineering, and they waited until now, even if they knew they would not race...
ACO told Epsilon to have the car ready, and they did. ACO can say they told Epsilon before deadline but due to respect to Lucchini, they could not officialy say until now...

You might be pretty close to the truth there....

If I was one of Racing Box's sponsors, I'd be mighty pee'd off with the team right now- and if I was the ACO I might just have suggested, as a parting shot, that they not bother to turn up for the rest of the LMS season either...

There's some interesting rule-bending going on here, but good for Epsilon- I just hope this doesn't backfire on them. It's a lovely car, with obvious potential, and they've got a top-notch lineup in no.21, but Le Mans is a tough place to try and run a second car for the first time, especially at such short notice...

[mattcat]

I'm going to say that the notice wasn't as short as it may seem...

[Ultimo]

Just a question to the more experienced guys here, what teams if any are gonna have trouble making the 107% barrier during qualifying?

Have I got this right?

[Aslak Vind]

Very interesting theory, and probably not so far off..

However, the ee1 project is early days, and racing the second chassis wwithout any training what so ever, is past risky. However, this lineup might secure Epsilon the sponsorship needed for the development of this beutiful car.

[AU N EGL]

anyone know what it was? With small things teams are allowed some time to fix or adjust the item, then re-go though scrutineering.

[KA]

Originally Posted by mattcat

I'm going to say that the notice wasn't as short as it may seem...

Having read some more recent posts, I think I agree with you. I suspect there's a very interesting story behind this turn of events- I can't help thinking that the handling of this situation hasn't been very clever though...

[isynge]

Regarding the Lucchini withdrawal, while pleased to see the second Epsilon in, I'm bewildered at the Racing Box thought process.

In the absence of hard and fast information it strikes me that there are a number of possibilities.

- Lucchini fails scrutineering. Possible, but how catastrophic does this have to be to send them home - and when did this last happen? Has there been a more recent occurence that the shambolic rebodied Chevron in the 1980s?

- Lucchini has a catastrophic technical fault that mean it's not going to be able to complete the 24 hours (as happened in 2006). As I said then, and will say again, if there's even the remotest chance of the car starting, or even trickling around then why not go for it. It keeps the sponsors and everyone happy. I see no reason to pull out for that reason.

- Racing Box knew the car would struggle and had zero chance in the race, knew it was a troubled car for which they have diminishing enthusiasm, and Epsilon Euzkadi is keen to race. A deal is done and the Italians go home.

In any event I suspect we've seen the last of a Lucchini at Le Mans for the foreseeable future, and Racing Box probably haven't done themselves a tremendous number of favours.

[KA]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

anyone know what it was? With small things teams are allowed some time to fix or adjust the item, then re-go though scrutineering.

According to DSC,

'eligibility paperwork requested by the ACO during the Test Weekend was not forthcoming'.

Sounds like they've failed scrutineering big-time......and possibly knew they were going to

Daniel Poissenot was asked if the ACO were angry with Racing Box over this turn of events- his reply was 'That is very much the case'

Looks like we won't be seeing the team or another Lucchini at Le Mans this side of Hell freezing over....

[isynge]

I found the "absence of paperwork" comment interesting.

It says to me that this could just be something administrative rather than failing scrutineering in terms of being outside the regs.

Based on this, and the clear level of ire that the ACO is expressing, I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was more to this than meets the eye.

Alternatively is this a case of the ACO bending over backwards to help Racing Box - allowing them to run at the test day, knowing the post-Monza revisions need paperwork, and asking them to submit it by scrutineering, then being profoundly annoyed when this doesn't happen.

Much as it saddens me to say, the Lucchini should never have been on the Le Mans entry list, and that it took up space on the LMS list it, it annoys me that this cost potentially solid entries such as the Graham Nash Radical an entry.

[Tom908V12]

In a sense it's sad, even if the car was rather a mobile chicane than a performing proto, it was made with endurance racing passion by the team...

[Francesco]

Lucchini and RB relation is not good at all... Giorgio was never at the race and his factory is in very bad financial waters... moreover after the team lost Didaio the operation might have had a "full stop" but one of the new drivers, which is also one of the main financers of the RB team probably wanted to go on even knowing that with the changes on the car made in May it would have been illegal without some statement from the constructor... a very bad story and i feel very angry for how italy has been represented by this team but... that's it...

[supermario21]

Originally Posted by isynge

- Lucchini fails scrutineering. Possible, but how catastrophic does this have to be to send them home - and when did this last happen? Has there been a more recent occurence that the shambolic rebodied Chevron in the 1980s?

Didn't Courage fail scrutineering in 1995 with the C41?

[Aysedasi]

It's not the first time a car/team, has dropped out like this and it probably won't be the last. What intrigues me is why the EE team thought it was worth having the second car ready when they (and we) knew the rules would prevent them from gaining the entry if a car dropped out. Definite conspiracy theories here - I wonder if we'll ever learn the truth?

Anyhow, it's worth the beer I owe Badger to see the second EE in.

[Aslak Vind]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

It's not the first time a car/team, has dropped out like this and it probably won't be the last. What intrigues me is why the EE team thought it was worth having the second car ready when they (and we) knew the rules would prevent them from gaining the entry if a car dropped out. Definite conspiracy theories here - I wonder if we'll ever learn the truth?

My thougths exactly..

Hrmm

[isynge]

Indeed re the C41 - Time and Two Seats refers to it as being "grotesquely underweight", which is probably saying something!

Thanks for the additional detail Francesco - always nice to get a fuller picture, especially with teams from outside the English speaking world.

[Aslak Vind]

Originally Posted by Francesco

Lucchini and RB relation is not good at all... Giorgio was never at the race and his factory is in very bad financial waters... moreover after the team lost Didaio the operation might have had a "full stop" but one of the new drivers, which is also one of the main financers of the RB team probably wanted to go on even knowing that with the changes on the car made in May it would have been illegal without some statement from the constructor... a very bad story and i feel very angry for how italy has been represented by this team but... that's it...

Thank you for the runddown on the Lucchini Racing Box situation. A truely sad situation, which by no means should been going on for so long...

[KA]

Originally Posted by isynge

I found the "absence of paperwork" comment interesting.

It says to me that this could just be something administrative rather than failing scrutineering in terms of being outside the regs.

Based on this, and the clear level of ire that the ACO is expressing, I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was more to this than meets the eye.

Alternatively is this a case of the ACO bending over backwards to help Racing Box - allowing them to run at the test day, knowing the post-Monza revisions need paperwork, and asking them to submit it by scrutineering, then being profoundly annoyed when this doesn't happen.

.

Funnily enough that was my first thought when I read the DSC report- they've modified the chassis and not had the changes approved....

[SL]

This is all very well but what about a ruling on the Ayse/Fab predictions?

Does the Lucchini now count as the first retirement?

I hope not as I have chosen an epilsion and therefore it has doubled my chances

[Sarthe82]

Originally Posted by SL

This is all very well but what about a ruling on the Ayse/Fab predictions?

Does the Lucchini now count as the first retirement?

I hope not as I have chosen an epilsion and therefore it has doubled my chances

If you check on the thread Ayse has given those who voted for the Lucchini the chance to change their vote via PM as only retirements from the race proper count. I'm in the same sort of boat as you by voting for the mobile oil leak that is the #23 Creation.

[skycafe]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I guess I shall have to buy Badger that pint after all

Oh, he already left so he isn't ready this, just don't tell him!