LM24 The changes to Le Mans - Page 2

**Aysedasi** · 31 Oct 2001, 17:14 (Ref:167971)

Four-poster......!!!

(Snore, snore.....!).

paulzinho · 31 Oct 2001, 17:19 (Ref:167972)

Quote:

Originally posted by Aysedasi
Four-poster......!!!

(Snore, snore.....!).

huh? :confused:

**Aysedasi** · 31 Oct 2001, 18:01 (Ref:167990)

Double post, triple post - four poster....

four poster....

four poster bed, geddit?

Perhaps I'm not getting enough sleep for my own good!

paulzinho · 1 Nov 2001, 09:07 (Ref:168242)

Ahhh now i get it!

Julien · 2 Nov 2001, 15:41 (Ref:168828)

I hate those chicanes at Mulsanne straight because they came from a political decision (the security was an aliby). Maybe one day they will reconsider the thing and let the cars shunt them... The same year FIA (Ballestre) did impose that the parc ferme was closed to the fans. And the new stand was **** because people couldn't stand just up to the stands and see what's hapening anymore. 1991 was really a bad year for the track.

Speedworx · 2 Nov 2001, 20:34 (Ref:168943)

The chicanes are for safety and the Mulsanne needs them!

The hump should never have been flattened. I am waiting for sportscar racing to pick up again and have one set of rules (like in gt1 days) before I venture to Le Mans, also money would help.

Kpy · 2 Nov 2001, 21:39 (Ref:168969)

Quote:

Originally posted by hakkiman
The chicanes are for safety and the Mulsanne needs them!

The hump should never have been flattened. I am waiting for sportscar racing to pick up again and have one set of rules (like in gt1 days) before I venture to Le Mans, also money would help.

I'd love to help (have no money). But what are you asking for ??

Kpy · 2 Nov 2001, 21:44 (Ref:168972)

Just realised you're the guy who wouldn't answer my question before !
NOW ......................
When were you last at Le Mans ??? - a simple question.

Speedworx · 2 Nov 2001, 22:30 (Ref:168999)

Why are you still asking?

I just answered it!!!!

I'll put it in simple terms for you

I have never been to Le Mans, because I have only left school a year ago and only passed my driving test in July, so still getting used to freedom.

I was not asking for money, I was stating that i need money to be able to go to Le Mans. Until then, I'll make do with Eurosport and Radio Le Mans.

paulzinho · 2 Nov 2001, 23:21 (Ref:169059)

*rants like a child without candy*

I wanna go, its not fair!!!

Speedworx · 3 Nov 2001, 09:55 (Ref:169229)

What??????

paulzinho · 3 Nov 2001, 10:19 (Ref:169240)

I want to go to Le Mans but can't until 2003 because i've got stupid exams.

Speedworx · 3 Nov 2001, 10:26 (Ref:169249)

Exams may be stupid, but are important.

paulzinho · 3 Nov 2001, 10:38 (Ref:169257)

They may be important but they shouldn't be timetabled for Le Mans week!

**Aysedasi** · 3 Nov 2001, 21:53 (Ref:169412)

Quote:

Originally posted by hakkiman
Exams may be stupid, but are important.

Exams are indeed important, Mr. H., and I know that Paulzinho will do what he has to do.

But at the first available opportunity, get yourself there!! (Getting to Le Mans transcends mere mortal's conceptions of "importance"!!).

paulzinho · 3 Nov 2001, 23:01 (Ref:169439)

I might see you there in 2003 fingers crossed!

FastJoel31 · 4 Nov 2001, 02:58 (Ref:169515)

Quote:

Originally posted by hakkiman
The chicanes are for safety and the Mulsanne needs them!

Sorry I didn't get to this sooner...
The main reason to put the chicanes in was because that was when the "Big Cats" were reaching speeds of 240+ mph. Nowadays the cars wouldn't and couldn't go that fast. So the chicanes are pretty much just a big waste of tarmac.

racer69 · 4 Nov 2001, 13:35 (Ref:169658)

The chicanes are rather pointless. They were only put in there because the FIA threatened not to sanction the race at late notice. If they are that hell bent on a chicane on Mulsanne, leave in the second one, that at least would slow down the approach to the kink and hump towards Mulsanne corner. ( be better if they were both gone and the hump was back

)

And that Dunlop chicane, if it was put there for safety, it didn't help Boutsen in 1998. leave it for the bikes, let the cars go the real way.

As for Group C, don't let me get started on that, i'll only say the sooner we see it or a style of it back the better.

**Adam43** · 5 Nov 2001, 09:12 (Ref:170052)

While I think that the chicanes should go, they do slow the cars down! I think that if the chicanes were removed then the top speeds would increase again up to a mark not far from 240mph. If you compare lap times then nowadays the cars are on a similar pace to the Group Cs were when the chicanes were first brought in.

If the chicanes were removed it would not only bring back the long straight on which the top speeds can be unchecked, but also the cars would be designed and set-up with a different emphasis on them. Top speed would be more important because of the three mile straight and cars would be set-up accordingly.

**Aysedasi** · 5 Nov 2001, 19:43 (Ref:170360)

I agree Adam. I well remember when the chicanes were added

, Martin Brundle observed that it was no longer a case of getting down the straight as fast as you can, and getting around the circuit as best you can (I think that's close to his quote!), but Le Mans had become an ordinary (if long) racing circuit. "The whole complexion of Le Mans has changed" he said.

You can be sure that if the chicanes were taken away (and sadly, I don't believe they ever will), the complexion would chanbe (back) again. The cars would change (the need for more downforce would largely disappear, that's for sure) and the top speeds would rise again very quickly to the levels we saw prior to the chicanes.

It wasn't just the Jags that were doing 240 or thereabouts, the works Porsches had been around that mark for some time. And then you had creatures like the WM-Peugeot which were capable of even greater speeds (for a lap or two), with bits likely to fall off at any time!! I think racer is right about the rationale for the chicanes - it was just another episode in the then spat between the ACO and the FISA - unfortunately the legacy is that we are saddled with them for good.

FastJoel31 · 5 Nov 2001, 21:52 (Ref:170445)

Quote:

Originally posted by racer69
And that Dunlop chicane, if it was put there for safety, it didn't help Boutsen in 1998. leave it for the bikes, let the cars go the real way.

Wasn't that in 1999...

paulzinho · 6 Nov 2001, 00:03 (Ref:170535)

What happened?

**Aysedasi** · 6 Nov 2001, 21:52 (Ref:171150)

Boutsen was running well in the Toyota before he was taken off by a 911 at Dunlop. (The Estoril Porsche if my memory serves me right without looking it up). Boutsen was injured, back and/or neck, I believe. It prompted his retirement from racing.

More importantly, it handed the win on a plate to BMW. (And I had really wanted to see Toyota win that one!).

FastJoel31 · 7 Nov 2001, 00:59 (Ref:171209)

Yeah, I did too, too bad for Katayama's blown tire.

racer69 · 7 Nov 2001, 04:09 (Ref:171247)

yeah it was 1999, pressed the wrong number.

Group C was a big shame to see go. Especially as in 92 or 93, only 28 cars started the 24 hours.

View Poll Results: The changes to Le Mans
The switch from Group C to the 3.5 Litre Category	3	20.00%
The deletion of the infamous Maison Blanche section	1	6.67%
The deletion of the traditional Le mans start	0	0%
The introduction of the chicanes at Mulsanne	11	73.33%
Voters: 15. You may not vote on this poll

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
News just in from Le Mans (well Jase at Le Mans, actually)	Sheila M	Marshals Forum	42	4 Jul 2005 07:48
[LM24] If you're not going to Le Mans, then why not??	Racer_kyle	24 Heures du Mans	39	21 Jun 2005 18:35
RML MG Lola for 1000km Le Mans, LMES and Le Mans 24 hour 2004	Wout	ACO Regulated Series	21	27 Sep 2003 15:26
How many of you actually go to Le Mans?	rlinter	Trackside	7	27 Dec 2002 23:40
[LM24] Le Mans live at Radio Le Mans	Valve Bounce	24 Heures du Mans	12	25 Jun 2001 12:30