Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Saloon & Sportscar Racing > Sportscar & GT Racing > ACO Regulated Series

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 20 Dec 2007, 23:08 (Ref:2093040)   #51
jhansen
Veteran
 
jhansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
United States
California
Posts: 6,699
jhansen should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridjhansen should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridjhansen should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAG
Because someone will maintain Penske or Andretti Green are 'privateers'.
That's great, but intent doesn't clear that up. They need to spell it out so we do not get interpretations (ie Penske, AGR, Porsche & Acura).
jhansen is offline  
__________________
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein
Quote
Old 20 Dec 2007, 23:10 (Ref:2093041)   #52
JAG
Veteran
 
JAG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
England
Posts: 10,500
JAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridJAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridJAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul-collins
http://www.lemans.org/24heuresdumans...D_2505_gb.html

So ACO is trying to rein in IMSA... pffft.
Why so much contempt from those in the US for the ACO?

Haven't IMSA been given all the help and freehand they need?

Despite little being said in public, IMSA have been lobbying equally as hard as the ACO to ease Porsche and Acura into P1, without rocking the boat.
JAG is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Dec 2007, 23:25 (Ref:2093048)   #53
JAG
Veteran
 
JAG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
England
Posts: 10,500
JAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridJAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridJAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhansen
That's great, but intent doesn't clear that up. They need to spell it out so we do not get interpretations (ie Penske, AGR, Porsche & Acura).
Penske are still in P2 only because they can win overall, when that chance is removed they'll either move to P1 or Penske will withdraw while Porsche continues to supply customer P2 cars.

The free're technology, P1 vs P2 performance gap, and greater efforts to performance balance and restrict P2 costs will see a natural balancing of the field.
JAG is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Dec 2007, 23:56 (Ref:2093058)   #54
HORNDAWG
Veteran
 
HORNDAWG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
United States
Oregon
Posts: 8,919
HORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAG
Why so much contempt from those in the US for the ACO?

Haven't IMSA been given all the help and freehand they need?

Despite little being said in public, IMSA have been lobbying equally as hard as the ACO to ease Porsche and Acura into P1, without rocking the boat.
I really do not believe that the generalization in that comment is necessary nor appropriate, when there are people on both sides of the Pond who express that general sentiment in their posts! And some of the people that you are referencing live North of the border so it is not just a U.S. thing!

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhansen
That's great, but intent doesn't clear that up. They need to spell it out so we do not get interpretations (ie Penske, AGR, Porsche & Acura).
But they have spelled it out.
They made it clear that they know that everything does not come in the same neat little box and they will retain the ability, as is their right, to oversee and manage what is "LeMans" and make sure of its health and continued longevity on its storied quest to preserve Sports Car racing.

L.P.
HORNDAWG is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Dec 2007, 23:59 (Ref:2093060)   #55
TWK
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,306
TWK should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTWK should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
If IMSA too abruptly follows the ACO lead, they'll lose the competition at the front that they had in 2007, and lose the gains in fans they got as a consequence. They know they can't do that.

ALMS draws more fans than any other sports car racing in the world, and by a lot. They'd be pretty stupid not to tread softly, particularly since their grids are, ah, let's say tenuous, at best.

"Long term interests" of the ACO, IMSA and the manufacturers may, in fact, converge. Just not in 2008.

Since ACO ignored any mention of the LMP1 "evo" coupe rules, I'll hope they're smart enough to be communicating "back channel" with GM/Corvette.
TWK is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 01:12 (Ref:2093078)   #56
AU N EGL
Veteran
 
AU N EGL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
United States
Raleigh, North Carolina
Posts: 4,418
AU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridAU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by TWK

"Long term interests" of the ACO, IMSA and the manufacturers may, in fact, converge. Just not in 2008.
Wonder how much Money ALMS/ MSA sends to support the ACO ?
AU N EGL is offline  
__________________
"When the fear of death out weighs the thrill of speed, brake." LG
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 12:43 (Ref:2093302)   #57
EuropaBambaataa
Racer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Portugal
Posts: 107
EuropaBambaataa should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwyllion
I highly doubt you can squeeze 500+ bhp out of a 4 cilinder turbo diesel.
http://www.autobild.de/artikel/herol...-s2_36551.html

Of course, that car doesn't have a restrictor and is made for sprint races.
EuropaBambaataa is offline  
__________________
Europa Bambaataa

I like electronic boom-boom-boom sounds. So what?
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 14:13 (Ref:2093362)   #58
gwyllion
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Belgium
Posts: 8,738
gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EuropaBambaataa
http://www.autobild.de/artikel/herol...-s2_36551.html

Of course, that car doesn't have a restrictor and is made for sprint races.
That is a petrol engine with a diesel block and crankshaft
gwyllion is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 16:05 (Ref:2093395)   #59
Truckosaurus
Veteran
 
Truckosaurus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
England
North Hampshire
Posts: 2,475
Truckosaurus should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridTruckosaurus should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridTruckosaurus should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridTruckosaurus should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
So, these "production GT1 engines in LMP1" then...

It seems you can have a bespoke 6.0 race engine running 32.5mm restrictors, or a 4 valve per cylinder homologated engine (eg. Aston V12) using 33mm restrictors, or a 2-valve lump (eg. Chevy C6R based engine) using 34mm holes.

Is this likely to make a Chevy engine a cheaper (yet as powerful) option than an off-the-shelf lump from Judd, Zytek or AER?
Truckosaurus is offline  
__________________
"Not the pronoun but a player with the unlikely name of Who is on first."
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 16:08 (Ref:2093396)   #60
gwyllion
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Belgium
Posts: 8,738
gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!
The C6R engine is 7 liter and the LMP1 rules only allows 6 liter
gwyllion is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 16:10 (Ref:2093398)   #61
paul-collins
Veteran
 
paul-collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Canada
Mosport on a good day
Posts: 5,147
paul-collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridpaul-collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridpaul-collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
Yes, that's probably a hint, isn't it?

I see that dailysportscar has picked up on my thoughts regarding Pesca / Rollcentre / RML / etc being gently guided (er, shoved?) to P2...
paul-collins is offline  
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean?

-Bill James
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 16:14 (Ref:2093401)   #62
MulsanneMike
Veteran
 
MulsanneMike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
United States
Posts: 1,831
MulsanneMike has a real shot at the podium!MulsanneMike has a real shot at the podium!MulsanneMike has a real shot at the podium!MulsanneMike has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul-collins
Yes, that's probably a hint, isn't it?

I see that dailysportscar has picked up on my thoughts regarding Pesca / Rollcentre / RML / etc being gently guided (er, shoved?) to P2...
Exchanging some emails today and there seems to be a undercurrent thought that perhaps the 2010 Evo regulations are dead, that what we're seeing now is it...so subtle changes to the regulations and not a large change looming for 2010, just as things are gaining momentum. Though some damage has already been done for sure with the ACO hinting at major changes for 2 years now.
MulsanneMike is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 16:44 (Ref:2093412)   #63
paul-collins
Veteran
 
paul-collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Canada
Mosport on a good day
Posts: 5,147
paul-collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridpaul-collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridpaul-collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
Sheesh, the worst of both worlds - instability because of suggested changes/improvements, and then no improvements after all.
paul-collins is offline  
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean?

-Bill James
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 16:45 (Ref:2093413)   #64
gwyllion
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Belgium
Posts: 8,738
gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!
So you thinik that because Lola, Dome and Epsilon Euskadi are coming with a LMP1 coupe, the LMP1 Evo rules are delayed/canned.

Last edited by gwyllion; 21 Dec 2007 at 16:55.
gwyllion is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 16:55 (Ref:2093420)   #65
paul-collins
Veteran
 
paul-collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Canada
Mosport on a good day
Posts: 5,147
paul-collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridpaul-collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridpaul-collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
... except they're not manufacturers?
paul-collins is offline  
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean?

-Bill James
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 17:03 (Ref:2093422)   #66
JAG
Veteran
 
JAG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
England
Posts: 10,500
JAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridJAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridJAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul-collins
Sheesh, the worst of both worlds - instability because of suggested changes/improvements, and then no improvements after all.
Really think you're going way over the top on all of this.

Regardless of P1 Evo rules, current cars can compete upto, and including, 2010. In that timeframe manufactuers will have changed their chassis at least once.

The underpinnings and engine regs are unchanged, any change would be to the bodywork only, which may ultimately require a new tub due to the wider cockpit.

All we've seen are snippets in the press, Evo regs are intended to attract manufactuers, the ACO will have been in discussions with manufactuers from day one, it's their influence that may have pushed the ACO to keep current P1 chassis, seeing as the trend is to coupes anyhow, while enouraging GM/Aston etc. with favourable production engine regs.

If DSC are correct, manufactuers have persuaded the ACO to slowly modify current cars, so both parties are happy.

Last edited by JAG; 21 Dec 2007 at 17:10.
JAG is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 17:08 (Ref:2093428)   #67
JAG
Veteran
 
JAG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
England
Posts: 10,500
JAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridJAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridJAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwyllion
So you thinik that because Lola, Dome and Epsilon Euskadi are coming with a LMP1 coupe, the LMP1 Evo rules are delayed/canned.

DSC:-

Quote:
And the closed cars are coming. Assuming that our conclusions are correct, and we’re absolutely convinced that they are, this is no less than the race car manufacturer concerned deserves, for having the foresight to push on with an LMP1 coupe, at a time when the ACO was giving every indication that its 2010 target was a closed coupe of a significantly different sort.
GM surely, in which case a manufactuer coupe with a production based engine, which ultimately negates the need for EVO P1's, at least for the next 3-4 years.

Add to this Acura's stated intent to push ahead with a 2009 P1, despite their worry about 'Evo' regs, and recent discussions with the ACO.

It all points to a delay or gradual move to EVO type cars, rather than a complete switch.

Last edited by JAG; 21 Dec 2007 at 17:13.
JAG is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 17:14 (Ref:2093430)   #68
Hammerdown
Racer
 
Hammerdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
United Kingdom
Clevedon, UK
Posts: 402
Hammerdown should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truckosaurus
So, these "production GT1 engines in LMP1" then...

It seems you can have a bespoke 6.0 race engine running 32.5mm restrictors, or a 4 valve per cylinder homologated engine (eg. Aston V12) using 33mm restrictors, or a 2-valve lump (eg. Chevy C6R based engine) using 34mm holes.
I read it as 33.3mm, but then there follows this:

For an engine having more than 8 cylinders, the restrictors’ diameter above must be increased by:
- 0.6 mm for 1 restrictor,
- 0.4 mm for 2 restrictors;

For closed cars equipped with an air conditioning system, the restrictors diameter above must be increased by :
- 0.5 mm for 1 restrictor,
- 0.3 mm for 2 restrictors;

which would mean the Aston can use 34mm holes, a 9.4% increase in area over the GT1 engine, giving maybe 655hp. Nice, but still no Diesel!
Hammerdown is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 17:25 (Ref:2093436)   #69
JAG
Veteran
 
JAG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
England
Posts: 10,500
JAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridJAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridJAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
Quote:
DSC:-


Quote:
And the closed cars are coming. Assuming that our conclusions are correct, and we’re absolutely convinced that they are, this is no less than the race car manufacturer concerned deserves, for having the foresight to push on with an LMP1 coupe, at a time when the ACO was giving every indication that its 2010 target was a closed coupe of a significantly different sort.
Edit, do they mean Lola, and them securing a deal with a manufactuer, i.e Aston?
JAG is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 17:52 (Ref:2093445)   #70
HORNDAWG
Veteran
 
HORNDAWG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
United States
Oregon
Posts: 8,919
HORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAG
Really think you're going way over the top on all of this.

Regardless of P1 Evo rules, current cars can compete upto, and including, 2010. In that timeframe manufactuers will have changed their chassis at least once.

The underpinnings and engine regs are unchanged, any change would be to the bodywork only, which may ultimately require a new tub due to the wider cockpit.

All we've seen are snippets in the press, Evo regs are intended to attract manufactuers, the ACO will have been in discussions with manufactuers from day one, it's their influence that may have pushed the ACO to keep current P1 chassis, seeing as the trend is to coupes anyhow, while enouraging GM/Aston etc. with favourable production engine regs.

If DSC are correct, manufactuers have persuaded the ACO to slowly modify current cars, so both parties are happy.
I would agree.

L.P.
HORNDAWG is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 18:09 (Ref:2093449)   #71
paul-collins
Veteran
 
paul-collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Canada
Mosport on a good day
Posts: 5,147
paul-collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridpaul-collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridpaul-collins should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
I'm actually not saddened at all that this seems to be the end of the Evo rules. And, frankly, from a practical perspective, I think you're right, Jag, about both the need to update chassis between now and 2010 and the apparent fact that manufacturers have dissuaded the ACO from making any rash moves. (I think your reading of a possible need for a new tub is wrong, because that would kind of rule out the "only bodywork and restrictors" phrase, but that's a minor quibble.)

However, the one thing that I think you're overlooking is that this was done out in the open, played to the press, rather than using quiet negotiations with the manufacturers. That's where my main quibble lies. It gives the appearance of poor management IMO. (The ACO are hardly unique though.)

The amount of public resistance shown by the existing competitors both times around (remember how the original image had Corvette livery, and that fairly quickly disappeared?) should give you an idea of what I'm talking about.

I thought the Evo rules idea was not without merit, but the ACO should never have found themselves in the position of making a pronouncement ("All P1s will be coupes by 2010") that they ultimately had to withdraw.

Poor PR, not poor rulesmaking.
paul-collins is offline  
__________________
... Since all men live in darkness, who believes something is not a test of whether it is true or false. I have spent years trying to get people to ask simple questions: What is the evidence, and what does it mean?

-Bill James
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 18:27 (Ref:2093461)   #72
AU N EGL
Veteran
 
AU N EGL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
United States
Raleigh, North Carolina
Posts: 4,418
AU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridAU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by MulsanneMike
Exchanging some emails today and there seems to be a undercurrent thought that perhaps the 2010 Evo regulations are dead, that what we're seeing now is it...so subtle changes to the regulations and not a large change looming for 2010,
That is GREAT NEWS. Leave the rules in place, with very minor adjustments as needed.
AU N EGL is offline  
__________________
"When the fear of death out weighs the thrill of speed, brake." LG
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 18:29 (Ref:2093463)   #73
HORNDAWG
Veteran
 
HORNDAWG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
United States
Oregon
Posts: 8,919
HORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwyllion
The C6R engine is 7 liter and the LMP1 rules only allows 6 liter
Yes, but it is well rumored in the tuner industry that the LS7 is on the way out at GM. Also to this point is the current release of the new ZR-1 Corvette which has the LS9 engine in it which is a 6.2L. and not the LS7 which is the current 7L. engine. The LS9 is basically a Super charged LS3, also Lou Gigliotti will be utilizing a LS-3 engine downsized to 6.0L in the Riley built GT-2 Corvette.

L.P.
HORNDAWG is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 18:31 (Ref:2093465)   #74
AU N EGL
Veteran
 
AU N EGL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
United States
Raleigh, North Carolina
Posts: 4,418
AU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridAU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwyllion
So you thinik that because Lola, Dome and Epsilon Euskadi are coming with a LMP1 coupe, the LMP1 Evo rules are delayed/canned.
They are manufactures in thier own rights. Look at rule 1.1.2

Quote:
ART. 1 - DÉFINITIONS
1.1 - "LE MANS" PROTOTYPE ("LM"P / "LM"GTP) is a racing car
with no production minimum required and meeting the
prescriptions regarding :
a/ The safety regulations issued by FIA ;
b/ The Technical Regulations issued by the
AUTOMOBILE-CLUB DE L'OUEST (ACO).
1.1.1. - "LE MANS" PROTOTYPE category includes :
a/ "LE MANS" PROTOTYPE 1 ("LM"P1): open or closed
(*) car, destined more especially to manufacturers.
b/ "LE MANS" PROTOTYPE 2 ("LM"P2): open or closed
(*) car, destined more especially to privateers.
(*) Closed car must have a windscreen, a roof and one door
on each side ;
1.1.2. - Non conventional specifications (LMP1 only):
Cars the specifications of which are considered today as
unusual in motor racing may be eligible :
a/ On the basis of special regulations made by the
ACO so as to maintain the balance of performance
between the cars.
b/ Provided the rules established by the administration
and by the ASN of the country where the event is
organised are respected.
AU N EGL is offline  
__________________
"When the fear of death out weighs the thrill of speed, brake." LG
Quote
Old 21 Dec 2007, 19:06 (Ref:2093482)   #75
Fogelhund
Veteran
 
Fogelhund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Canada
Binbrook, ON Canada
Posts: 6,958
Fogelhund has a real shot at the championship!Fogelhund has a real shot at the championship!Fogelhund has a real shot at the championship!Fogelhund has a real shot at the championship!Fogelhund has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AU N EGL
They are manufactures in thier own rights. Look at rule 1.1.2

That's most certainly how I would read it. Lola etc. mostly build cars for privateer entry, not manufacturers. If they build cars for manufacturers, that is a different story.
Fogelhund is offline  
Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2008 sporting and technical regulations updated Marbot Formula One 31 3 Jan 2008 03:21
ACO Regulations for 2007 AU N EGL ACO Regulated Series 83 30 Dec 2006 06:05
2007 ACO Supplementary Regulations AU N EGL ACO Regulated Series 2 23 Dec 2006 00:04
ACO regulations for 2006 released Alistair_Ryder ACO Regulated Series 96 14 Nov 2006 08:10
Evolution of the ACO regulations in 2007 Bentley03 ACO Regulated Series 177 27 Oct 2006 17:17


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:36.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.