Evolution of the ACO regulations in 2007

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by paul-collins

The engineer is saying that Peugeot is behind the eight ball, and that - particularly with the level of technical detail required to run the diesel efficiently, they're not going to catch Audi - this year. Next year, who knows?

In their press releases Pug said they will go for victory in 2008.


In F1 people (and Renault ) say Ferrari has a big influence on FIA (Ferrari International Assistance). Maybe Audi has that influence on ACO (Audi Controlled Organisation).

[Bentley03]

Originally Posted by JAG

Absolutely, and complaints of petrol teams must be taken in the context of Dyson, and Porsche, being beaten by a heavily restricted R8 earlier this season.

I couldn't agree more. The R8 was embarassingly successful in it's heavily restricted state, both in the States and in Europe. I'll make no excuses for teams who fail to capitalise on the gift of such a rules break. It does highlight the lack of manufacturer involvement in our sport, however.

Which leads nicely on to Phil Bennett's piece on DSC!

[Hammerdown]

To go back to the comparison of petrol and diesel Beemers, I don't think it's that much off-topic.

I think the point here is that in 'real life' diesels are heavier and slower than their petrol counterparts but have better economy. Surely the ACO should frame their rules to reflect this natural state rather than trying to show that the diesel is a viable performance engine. So give them the same size tanks, but make them run on pump fuel and reduce their engine capacity, or whatever it takes to make them slower. They could then win by being more economical, which would probably give the manufacturers even better publicity.

Failing that, they should be made to tow caravans!

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Bentley03

I couldn't agree more. The R8 was embarassingly successful in it's heavily restricted state, both in the States and in Europe. I'll make no excuses for teams who fail to capitalise on the gift of such a rules break. It does highlight the lack of manufacturer involvement in our sport, however.

Which leads nicely on to Phil Bennett's piece on DSC!

Re. Bennets article, it may be harsh, but petrol privateers may have to settle for the best of the rest tag in 2007 (as they did against the petrol R8!), but in return recieve greater media/sponsorship coverage for their efforts.

By 2008 we should see greater petrol/diesel equivallence, customer R10's/Peugeots, and maybe new factory competitors (who will eventually make customer chassis available).

[SALEEN S7R]

We are back to the same old story, the manufacturers are coming back to the LMP classes and those 1 or 2 factory teams are going to dominate. It doesent matter if Audi use a diesel or a petrol engine, I suspect they would do just as well with a petrol engine as they would with a diesel but the diesel suits their needs in terms of selling more diesel turbo road cars and added to that they know they can make a diesel powered car quick enough to win Le Mans and set a few records whilst they are at it.

I do feel sorry for the privateer teams but it is the same in every category of motorsport that is a open formula, the manufacturer backed teams almost always end up on top. Still, Im hopeful for Le Mans next year, I really think that Zytek will give the Audis and Peugoets something to worry about providing Zytek get 2 entries with 1 car at least having a professional driving line up. Zytek have a new car in the pipe line for 2007 and I think they will be very competitve. Other than Zytek however who are going to challenge the factory teams? Pescarolo maybe, providing the new car is up to scratch.

Sportscar racing is slowly getting back to how it was back in 2001-2002 with lots of factory teams and competitve privateers in all classes. Long may it continue!

[JAG]

Originally Posted by SALEEN S7R

I do feel sorry for the privateer teams but it is the same in every category of motorsport that is a open formula, the manufacturer backed teams almost always end up on top.

Sportscar racing is slowly getting back to how it was back in 2001-2002 with lots of factory teams and competitve privateers in all classes. Long may it continue!

I wouldn't feel too sorry, who remembers RFH winning race after race in the FIA ISRS, yet everyones well aware of Dysons almost legendary fights against Audi in the ALMS.

Factory competition brings many benefits to the series and it's privateers, not least media and fan attention.

If the privateer ranks are large enough, teams can have great racing between themselves, even if the factories drive off into the distance (which I don't believe will happen).

Already we are seeing the benefits of Peugeots arrival, this months Evo magazines lead story is about the 908, while the 206 Cup is mentioned elsewere. Both articles also namecheck the Le Mans Series.

In recent years, other than a small mention about Audi, the focus has always been on the GM vs Astons battles, now the focus is on prototypes.

[JAG]

[QUOTE=JAG]I wouldn't feel too sorry, who remembers RFH winning race after race in the FIA ISRS, yet everyones well aware of Dysons almost legendary fights against Audi in the ALMS. [QUOTE]

Interview with Lammers on DSC:-

'So for us, 2007-08-09 is a build-up to where we want to be. I'd rather be a small player in a big programme than a big player in a small one'

[chewymonster]

The reason I posted the BMW 3 series coupe vs. 3 series gasoline to show that diesel engines with equal horsepower but much greater torque are just about as quick. You can also see that a diesel with 670 horsepower would probably have the same performance as a 650 horsepowre gasoline powered race car. Meaning that a horsepower difference is almost required for equal performance.

[gwyllion]

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/news.html has a good English translation of Henri's letter and some reaction from the paddock, including Serge Saulnier.

Saulnier is really wearing his Peugeot hat:

For me who has lived the 2006 season with a petrol powered prototype, I can tell you that the diesel has also some handicaps and some other problems to solve : the thermal exchanges for example, the weight phenomena on mass distribution because all is concentrated on the rear. On the aerodynamics side too, it's also needed to have 25 % bigger radiators… The tyres? Their use is more narrow with a diesel engine.

This clearly shows why privateers currently are not (technical or financial) capable to build a diesel prototype.

[gwyllion]

Porsche seems to be speculating for more rule changes in 2008 to make petrol and diesel truely equivalent.

When Murphy speculated – based on things heard around the paddock, of course – that Porsche would be ready to field a LMP1 “when the rules turned favorable for gasoline-power in that class,” he got the comment back “not before 2008,” but not a denial. Now with the preliminary announcement of 2007 rules from the ACO, it’s pretty clear what that meant. Especially when the Bear considers other things being said around the sport. The diesel “advantage” will continue through 2007 – how could it not, with Peugeot entering? Come 2008, there will be that “favorable turn” that Porsche is waiting for. Remember when the ACO said earlier this year that they wanted LMP1 to become a place for manufacturers?

source: http://murphythebear.com/blog/2006/1...another-acura/

[I love 04s]

Originally Posted by SALEEN S7R

I do feel sorry for the privateer teams but it is the same in every category of motorsport that is a open formula, the manufacturer backed teams almost always end up on top. Still, Im hopeful for Le Mans next year, I really think that Zytek will give the Audis and Peugoets something to worry about providing Zytek get 2 entries with 1 car at least having a professional driving line up. Zytek have a new car in the pipe line for 2007 and I think they will be very competitve. Other than Zytek however who are going to challenge the factory teams? Pescarolo maybe, providing the new car is up to scratch.

You are very confident in the new Zytek car - and you should be .............Its going to be very similar to this years though, pretty much a new tub and some other tit-bits etc, most of the development for it was done this year with new suspension/engine/drivetrain etc - very beneficial to have a years solid racing for the new car. As for challenging the Audis and Peugoets at Le Mans though......not so confident, lets keep to the tighter tracks if we are going to say that!!!

[Hammerdown]

A while back someone mentioned bigger restrictors for the closed cars because of air conditioning. I vaguely remember reading somewhere (Autosport?) that the Pescas ran in 2006 with air-con and the bigger restrictors because the rules didn't specify that it was only for closed cars. Is this true or just an urban myth?

On another tack, someone else mentioned the difference between European and US octane ratings (102 vs 96 I think). How much effect would this have on the power output? Are the Euro teams allowed to take their own fuel to ALMS, or is that privilege just accorded to the Audis?

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by Hammerdown

A while back someone mentioned bigger restrictors for the closed cars because of air conditioning. I vaguely remember reading somewhere (Autosport?) that the Pescas ran in 2006 with air-con and the bigger restrictors because the rules didn't specify that it was only for closed cars. Is this true or just an urban myth?

Perhaps you read it on http://www.mulsannescorner.com/newsjune06.html

I am very sure this was not the case, because the ACO rules really mention the car has to be a coupe to get the bigger restrictor.

[chewymonster]

Reducing the tank size by 10% has almost no effect because the increased refueling time is offset by the reduced weight of fuel carried. In a short race a more important factor is that the car with the longest tank range can make the earliest final stop and therefore gain track position for the final stint. Even with a 10% reduction the Audis will still have an advantage in consumption over the petrol cars. I don't have exact laps between stops from Laguna yet but I believe the evidence is there."

Extremely lame. Yes the Audi will still get better fuel economy. It is a diesel. Make a more fuel efficient engine, use direct injection. The Audi R8 was more fuel efficient than the competition (because of FSI direct injection) Maybe all cars should have tanks adjusted so they all go 10 laps, that will take away ALL of the great aspects of the24 hour Le Mans race.

[gwyllion]

I don't understand his reasoning either. This guy seem to forget that Audi really turned down the consumption (and pace) at the end of Laguna to avoid a last splash and dash. And Audi still had its 90 litre tank; only the refuelling restrictor is smaller.

9 litre less fuel indeed means around -9 kg when the tank is completely full; in the middle of the stint it will be 4.5 kg lighter. But the R10 is already 10 kg too heavy.

[old man]

Question to all you experts:

I am aware that the LM 24 is always oversubscribed, hence the success of the various races that have an entry as the prize. Suppose the race were just run for LMP1 and 2, leave the GTs out of it as they have the SPA 24, would the ACO get enough takers to give them a full grid?

Do they ever publish the full list of applications for an entry or the actual entry fee(s)

[Graham Goodwin]

Originally Posted by old man

Question to all you experts:

I am aware that the LM 24 is always oversubscribed, hence the success of the various races that have an entry as the prize. Suppose the race were just run for LMP1 and 2, leave the GTs out of it as they have the SPA 24, would the ACO get enough takers to give them a full grid?

Do they ever publish the full list of applications for an entry or the actual entry fee(s)

There would be something of a struggle for a full grid of LMPs and I hope it doesn't take that route - There is sometimes info available about the number of applications in each class but a full entry list has seldom if ever been made available

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by Graham Goodwin

There would be something of a struggle for a full grid of LMPs and I hope it doesn't take that route - There is sometimes info available about the number of applications in each class but a full entry list has seldom if ever been made available

There is a list of entries with alternates that is published. I wonder how many more teams actully apply to the event?

[JAG]

Originally Posted by old man

Question to all you experts:

I am aware that the LM 24 is always oversubscribed, hence the success of the various races that have an entry as the prize. Suppose the race were just run for LMP1 and 2, leave the GTs out of it as they have the SPA 24, would the ACO get enough takers to give them a full grid?

Do they ever publish the full list of applications for an entry or the actual entry fee(s)

In an ideal world I, and I believe the ACO, would like an all prototype field, but lessons have been learned from 91/92.

The modern prototype (3.5l Group C onwards) are very expensive to buy and run so we couldn't rely on 15-20 'filler' cars as they did with the 962/Spice (which were also competitive) back in the day.

It's preferable to have quality GT1 and GT2 entrants than a dozen old SR2 Lolas and Pilbeams.

[Bentley03]

I like things as they are at the moment. One of the beauties of the current four class system is that there is almost always a significant battle for position going on in one of the classes. It really is four races in one, hard to follow trackside, but immensely entertaining if you can keep up with what's happening.



(Or is that five races in one for next year? )

[I love 04s]

Although I am very pro going all protos, cant help but feel there would be an element missing without the GTs. Have to say some of the most entertaining racing happens with the LMPs weaving through traffic - cant imagine it being as exciting without them.........

[isynge]

My knee jerk reaction was to say I'd like to see an all prototype field thinking about it briefly comes up with a very different answer.

First off, having different battles that really mean something makes the race come alive. Seeing LNT slowly but surely overhaul Seikel kept me fascinated even although the race for overall P1 was long since done and dusted. Equally at Donington sitting under the Spitfire and watching Aston Martin sneak it past Corvette at the death counts as incredibly memorable.

Second, diversity counts. Okay prototypes haven't yet been polluted in the way single seaters have with identikit chassis, but a good mix of the exotic, the familiar, the wierd, and the wonderful is what gives sportscar racing its richness.

Third, impartial observers like watching cars they recognise. More Ferraris, Aston Martins, Porsches, and TVRs will keep this valuable constituency happy.

And finally, echoing JAG, in one word - 1992. Eurosport's commentary that year, desperately hyping it on the warm up lap claiming it was a small field "but a quality one" teetered on the brink of having me chuck a shoe at the television.

[SALEEN S7R]

As most of you know I am a big GT fan and whilst I dont like the LMP's as much I still think they also have their place at the big race. Getting rid of GT cars would just be plain wrong in my mind, sure they arent as fast as some of the LMP's but thats mainly down to the rules rather than the cars ability. Give them 16 inch wide tyres like the LMP1's use and a slightly bigger restrictor and the differnce between the 2 classes would be minimal.

Part of what makes sportscar racing special to me as has already been mentioned is its diversety, what other form of motorsport is there that has 4 classes of cars racing at the same time on the same track? None that I know of. It is fun watching the differnt classes of cars trip each other up as they battle for class postition. Yes normally it is the LMP's going past the GT cars but how often have we seen in recent years GT1 cars overtaking LMP2 class cars on the mulsanne and indeed outpacing them at Le Mans?

Things are good as they are at the moment, manufacturers are coming back into sportscar racing and the manufacturers that are already here look like they are staying. As they saying goes, if it aint broke, dont fix it.

[old man]

OK, that started a nice little debate, I tend to agree that the diverse field is good and allows more teams to sample the great race. Driver qualifications sometimes leave a little to be desired but again 'twas ever thus I suspect.

Nobody answered my question on entry fees, do they all pay the same? I believe it is 30.000 Euro with a 5k non returnable deposit with entry, balance when you get a slot, is that correct? Fuel is supplied by the organisers, is that paid for in the entry fee or an added extra?

My point is that GT entreis are vital to the continued success of the great race and so deserve the same attention from all comentators and the press and MC makes a great point on dsc about the way GT entries are treated by the "Worlds Leading Motorsport Magazine" and others. It is correct to say 4 races in one and the mix adds considerably to the skill required to survive and the spectator interest but why should sponsors and drivers pay the same money for no recognition of their efforts? Quite correct that the public identify with cars they can recognise but do we really need GT1 and 2? Would it not be great to see what unrestricted GT2 cars could do against the AM and GM cars?

There again, if a certain configuration in an otherwise equal spec gives a team an advantage in reducing the pit stops why should we penalise them? The concern today is on carbon emissions and motor racing must be seen to be part of that battle or we will find it being the subject of negative legislation. Heaven forbid that we have an economy run but perhaps we should think of something along these lines, a diesel 997 RSR perhaps?

[eddsc]

I could probably put an argument together that in these global warming times, most of the pollution at motor sport events comes from the spectators' cars (getting there) not the race cars - at least it should do!
So logically fewer, longer events creates less pollution than more shorter ones - so the LMS (and Le Mans) fits that argument.
Longer races then please - ie. fewer, bigger events (you other series).
Sorry - that was a bit off topic.