LMP2 Manufacturers and Engine Suppliers

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by Chiana

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2014/12/17/47182.html

Upgrades coming up for the old Zytek which sound like similar EVO that the Oreca 03 got this year and Oak-Pesca next year

Is the Z11SN actually gonna be rebranded as "Gibson 015S"?

Since the company is not really known as Zytek any longer, this rebranding actually makes sense.

[Deleted]

I guess so. I'd have retained some of the old name though

[Rodger Davies]

Its being un-bagineered!

[Giba]

Could the reason that Gibson haven't announced what the car will be called be because they are looking for a deal similar to the one with Morgan and onroak?

[Japanese Samurai]

According to Hiroshi Yuchi (Chief designer of Strakka Dome S103),
the front section of Ligier LS P2 is novel design.
But the rear section of the car is old-fashioned design.
Parts of old car is diverted to the rear section of the car.
In the regulations, a net has to be installed in the upper side of the drive shaft between the rear cowl and the rear diffuser.
Existence of the net means that there is a rear deck in the very high position.

[Bandicoot17]

Yeah if you look at the back of the Morgan it's very similar

[templer]

The rear end of the Ligier is nearly the same as on the old open top car. But that was purpose by Onroak as also the rear drivetrain is very similar. I don't see any disadvantage.
By the way the rear aero of the S103 is also not very innovative with high sided rear fenders and a low rear deck. Standard in modern LMP2 design.
Their innovations are also at the front and the side.
But Onroak managed to run their car this year sucessfully while Dome struggled with design issues and other problems

[TF110]

I didnt see that as a dig at the Ligier. He just stated the facts on the rear of the car being a carryover design. Im sure the Dome has some carryover designs too. Maybe they were ready to go but they were more concerned about the performance than reliability? As for them not running, why rush a car no one is buying? Getting it right before you are ready for customers is how it should be done always.

[Nick Woodbury]

I haven't seen this particular render before. I knew that TIGA was looking to re-enter the ranks of Le Mans Prototype racing, but ever since they released their first rendering back in the late summer of 2013, I haven't heard a peep from them since, until now.

This is an updated rendering of the TIGA LM214 LMP2.



From - http://mariantic.co.uk/lmp/

This is also an article that is relevant to the car, posted about 4 months ago though. http://tigaracecars.com/news/18-top-...cility-at-mira

[Pontlieue]

This article from Endurance-Info about Boutsen Ginion Racing mentions that LMP2 cars are now allowed in the VdeV series (last sentence). This is news to me, but the change was actually announced over a month ago.

[Deleted]

Who would've known couple of years ago that at-then-GT2 which competed in various international & national GT championships would only be allowed to compete about as in many places as purposedly built ACO prototype

LMP2 allowed: WEC, ELMS, USCC (bopped with P2&DW), AsLMS, 'African endurance series', VdeV (bopped with ???)

LMGTE allowed: WEC, ELMS, USCC, AsLMS (bopped with GT3&misc), 'African endurance series', IGTO (bopped with GT3&Corvette-specials), VLN/N24 (bopped with GT3) - maybe Super GT too as their GT300 regs mention both 'FIA and 'GT2' but not sure about that seeing as they also have GT1 there

And seeing that GTEs are already totally gone from AsLMS, Nurburgring and IGTO (apart from maybe V8R/SRT GT2 Corvette) P2s are actually more international than GTE already

[Mike E]

Has anyone heard any more rumours about the engine G-Drive will be using? Audi V8, Ferrari V8, Audi V8 badged as a Lambo etc?

[Deleted]

No, but it's only two and half weeks for the ACO press conference so it's about to come out regardless of what they want to say. Unless they change the engine later on.

Also notice that Pilbeam's FB page has reported nothing since that Killarney race early December. Business as usual for them

[joeb]

Work continues on the 2017 regs.

http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/2...for-next-week/

looks like the biggest two items are cost reduction and manufacturer involvement. The goal is 30% reduction in costs - but not sure how to do it yet. ACO doesn't want direct manu involvement, but IMSA does.

[Pandemonium]

IMSA should STFU and listen to the ACO. They are so useless, they have no clue what they are doing.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Pandemonium

IMSA should STFU and listen to the ACO. They are so useless, they have no clue what they are doing.

That is a pretty harsh opinion. I'm guessing IMSA knows who their support comes from on the manufacturer side and they want to keep them happy and engaged. The ACO has one opinion on things because they have the manufacturers in P1, IMSA just has their P class to engage manufacturers with on the proto side of things so both organizations have slightly different goals.

[Deleted]

ACO doesn't want manufacturers or manufacturer oriented stuff up there because they know they can't control em if they want to come play outside of their domestic bubble. But that view doesn't really make sense in world we live today since we are not talking about Porsche RS Spyder scenarios anymore where car manufacturer builds beast of a class killer machine. 'IMSA' wants manufacturers 'branding' cars like in stock cars but not really constructing anything themselves, hence the stupid bodywork and spec parts crap. So you have two ideologies conflicting, neither of which makes sense

[MagVanisher]

Originally Posted by joeb

Work continues on the 2017 regs.

http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/2...for-next-week/

looks like the biggest two items are cost reduction and manufacturer involvement. The goal is 30% reduction in costs - but not sure how to do it yet. ACO doesn't want direct manu involvement, but IMSA does.

I'll be okay if there's niche manufacturer like Alpine, Caterham and Morga involving in IMSA Prototype Class, but it's not okay when that class has Ford, Honda, and Chevrolet.

In regards to bodywork, I suspect that it'll have no downforce advantage other than branding, which is not good as IMSA is bringing NASCAR philosophy of "drivers are the stars" in sports-car racing.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by MagVanisher

I'll be okay if there's niche manufacturer like Alpine, Caterham and Morga involving in IMSA Prototype Class, but it's not okay when that class has Ford, Honda, and Chevrolet.

In regards to bodywork, I suspect that it'll have no downforce advantage other than branding, which is not good as IMSA is bringing NASCAR philosophy of "drivers are the stars" in sports-car racing.

Even if there was bodywork advantage it doesn't matter as IMSA/NASCAR takes these things for wind tunnel performance balancing tests as soon as someone makes modification. And since this is standard procedure for DP, it's ought to be for the inevitable LMP2 external bodywork

Anyway, Alpine & Caterham & Morgan & Ligier and other fake rebrand names P2 has today are not 'sexy', and they are not 'merican, so the series doen't want em. Can't fault them for that, but since the series is already running with policy where they primaly call the cars by their engine names ("that Nissan entry is really fast", "the Ford they have prepared is amazing", "look out for those Chevrolet powered prototypes" and "oh Mazda has hit problems") - it even says so in rulebook - so why not just do that instead of Sprint Cup bodywork and spec components. Call the cars by their engines but let the chassis' as they are. In full ACO LMP2 spec that is, maybe sped up but otherwise intact. And if it's Judd* inside or something "obscure" Billy Bob won't recognize then rebrand the engine, god knows that's going on behind the ACO fence as well.

* that one would be easy, as they are technically BMW =P

Decreasing the amounts of costs can be found elsewhere

[Coach Ep]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Even if there was bodywork advantage it doesn't matter as IMSA/NASCAR takes these things for wind tunnel performance balancing tests as soon as someone makes modification. And since this is standard procedure for DP, it's ought to be for the inevitable LMP2 external bodywork

Anyway, Alpine & Caterham & Morgan & Ligier and other fake rebrand names P2 has today are not 'sexy', and they are not 'merican, so the series doen't want em. Can't fault them for that, but since the series is already running with policy where they primaly call the cars by their engine names ("that Nissan entry is really fast", "the Ford they have prepared is amazing", "look out for those Chevrolet powered prototypes" and "oh Mazda has hit problems") - it even says so in rulebook - so why not just do that instead of Sprint Cup bodywork and spec components. Call the cars by their engines but let the chassis' as they are. In full ACO LMP2 spec that is, maybe sped up but otherwise intact. And if it's Judd* inside or something "obscure" Billy Bob won't recognize then rebrand the engine, god knows that's going on behind the ACO fence as well.

* that one would be easy, as they are technically BMW =P

Decreasing the amounts of costs can be found elsewhere

With budgets in TUSC sky rocketing last year (both for the former GA and ALMS entrants) it's hardly a surprise cost cutting is a big issue for IMSA.

Trimming back the schedule might help but not enough - the enduros are the big money burners and they're unlikely to be sacrificed; getting rid off 1 or 2 shorter events will hardly make a difference so the savings have to come from a different direction. More spec parts make sense in that regard, even if it takes the ultimate technical edge out of the designing business. Manufacturers involvement is needed as well, there's simply not enough money among all the privateers and gentlemen drivers to support a healthy US endurance racing series on their own.

What would be wrong with a bunch of Coyote, Riley, Zytek/Gibson, HPD, Ligier, etc. chassis (either rebranded as Ford, Corvette, Dodge, Morgan, Alpine, Mazda, whatever) eligible in all ACO sanctioned/supported series worldwide and more affordable to purchase and run? We could see a booming prototype class in the US - something that's desperately needed these days!

[seanyb505]

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

... Manufacturers involvement is needed as well...

IMSA wants manufacturer dollars, not involvement in racing. Involvement means one or two or all of the manufacturers just might try to engineer an advantage over the competition, which IMSA doesn't particularly let fly.

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

What would be wrong with a bunch of Coyote, Riley, Zytek/Gibson, HPD, Ligier, etc. chassis (either rebranded as Ford, Corvette, Dodge, Morgan, Alpine, Mazda, whatever) eligible in all ACO sanctioned/supported series worldwide and more affordable to purchase and run? We could see a booming prototype class in the US - something that's desperately needed these days!

Unfortunately ALMS was sold to NASCAR, not the other way around. We do things the NASCAR way now. (Does not include what the rest of the world values)

[Coach Ep]

Nascar is probably closer to the ACO than a lot of us feel it is, Jim France waving the French flag at LM last year to start the race (or was 2013?) and his attendance at the recent WEC press conference at the Detroit auto show is good proof of that.

Why would Nascar/IMSA continue to hold talks with the ACO if it wants to go it's own way? Because the manufacturers involved in their series also wanna race at Le Mans. Hence we still have the GTLM class and a couple of current P2 in the series as well. Nascar is not ruling the racing world in the US, GM and Ford (and Porsche, Toyota and Dodge/Chrysler to a lesser degree) are.

[TRspitfirefan]

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

With budgets in TUSC sky rocketing last year (both for the former GA and ALMS entrants) it's hardly a surprise cost cutting is a big issue for IMSA.

Trimming back the schedule might help but not enough - the enduros are the big money burners and they're unlikely to be sacrificed; getting rid off 1 or 2 shorter events will hardly make a difference so the savings have to come from a different direction. More spec parts make sense in that regard, even if it takes the ultimate technical edge out of the designing business. Manufacturers involvement is needed as well, there's simply not enough money among all the privateers and gentlemen drivers to support a healthy US endurance racing series on their own.

What would be wrong with a bunch of Coyote, Riley, Zytek/Gibson, HPD, Ligier, etc. chassis (either rebranded as Ford, Corvette, Dodge, Morgan, Alpine, Mazda, whatever) eligible in all ACO sanctioned/supported series worldwide and more affordable to purchase and run? We could see a booming prototype class in the US - something that's desperately needed these days!

Cost is only part of the issue. What IMSA needs, is to build a series popular enough, that the higher costs are justified. Sports car fans, love Awesome and advanced prototypes, where the rules allow innovation and technological diversity. A set of prototype regs, where the cars are all virtually the same, due to restrictive rules and spec parts, is a recipe for disaster. If the fans are not enthusiastic about the series, no amount of cost cutting will be sufficient.

[TRspitfirefan]

Interesting article from Gil De-Ferran, on the subject of cost in racing.
http://www.racer.com/more/viewpoints...n-raceconomics

[Pandemonium]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Anyway, Alpine & Caterham & Morgan & Ligier and other fake rebrand names P2 has today are not 'sexy', and they are not 'merican, so the series doen't want em. Can't fault them for that, but since the series is already running with policy where they primaly call the cars by their engine names ("that Nissan entry is really fast", "the Ford they have prepared is amazing", "look out for those Chevrolet powered prototypes" and "oh Mazda has hit problems") - it even says so in rulebook - so why not just do that instead of Sprint Cup bodywork and spec components. Call the cars by their engines but let the chassis' as they are. In full ACO LMP2 spec that is, maybe sped up but otherwise intact. And if it's Judd* inside or something "obscure" Billy Bob won't recognize then rebrand the engine, god knows that's going on behind the ACO fence as well.

Decreasing the amounts of costs can be found elsewhere

Chiana nailed thisone. You might all tell me that I am harsh and all with the IMSA but they are just very very dumb.


Also COACH EP you are pretty wrong. Aco and Fia actually care about the racing and not about money in their pockets. A serious manufacturer can´t be let in lmp2 or they will abuse just by having a better team... I mean even Oak racing is overpowered.
But dont worry guys I myself will sleep in peace knowing that the Idiot of Jim France is not touching the Wec and never will.