|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
6 Jan 2009, 03:35 (Ref:2366048) | #26 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
6 Jan 2009, 03:47 (Ref:2366052) | #27 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
Quote:
You say it was an old Reynard design ..... but a very much updated old reynard design too . Please stop kidding yoursrlf . Last edited by The Badger; 6 Jan 2009 at 03:51. |
|||
|
6 Jan 2009, 15:49 (Ref:2366437) | #28 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,827
|
Updated or not, the tub for one of the cars they had was the same one they Reynard built in '02 before they went bankrupt. They had to redesign their car for 2007, and though it was based on the old Reynard design(like the Zytek), they were of new construction and were of an updated design, optimized for the ACO's rules.
As I said, the ACO didn't say that Creation could run LMP2 tires on their car-upgrading it from an old LMP675 car to an LMP1 hybrid, they didn't have the time or money to upgrade to the LMP1 spec tires-ironically, the LMP2 Michelin tires seemed to agree with their car better than the LMP1 Dunlops did. What I'm trying to say is that Porsche, as a factory, should've had the resources to run the GT2 spec tires and still be successful-and there are still opinions that the RS Spyder absorbed enough resources that Porsche's GT2 teams couldn't make either tires/weight/restrictor setup work in '07-only when Porsche did additional R&D work on the GT3 RSR did it become rightfuly competitive in '08. |
||
|
6 Jan 2009, 16:31 (Ref:2366460) | #29 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,348
|
Just to get this straight: Did Porsche ask for special dispensation to run the tires, or was it written in the rules so everyone could choose to do it and take the weight penalty?
|
|
|
6 Jan 2009, 16:41 (Ref:2366464) | #30 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,827
|
That's the root of the argument-did Porsche ask for the rules, or did the ACO already have them written for '07?
There was no rule that said that Creation had to run the LMP2 tires on their car in '06 insofar as the max tire width was 16 inches for an LMP1 car-so LMP2 tires could be used by anyone who wanted to. But Creation didn't want to-they ran out of time converting the car from LMP675 to an LMP1 hybrid. Porsche obviously wanted the wider tires on their car-did the ACO bend to them, or did the ACO have a similar rule already in place? |
||
|
6 Jan 2009, 20:52 (Ref:2366588) | #31 | |||
Rookie
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7
|
Quote:
One thing to note however is that Porsche only use the GT1 tires in the back but they still received the full weight penalty. this may be the reason for the weight reduction they are receiving. |
|||
|
7 Jan 2009, 07:54 (Ref:2366832) | #32 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,618
|
so what's stopping them using GT1 tyres at the front too ?? .. take full advantage of them .. unless is not an advantage
|
||
__________________
Apocalypse becomes creation / Gor-Gor shall erase the nation Before you leap into his gizzard / Fall and worship Tyrant lizard Ciao Marco |
7 Jan 2009, 13:03 (Ref:2367004) | #33 | |||
Rookie
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
20 Jan 2009, 20:48 (Ref:2375573) | #34 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,487
|
Humm, doesnt seem like Porsche are being assisted at all.
"Other regulation changes require that the Porsches run 20 kilograms heavier than 2008, and we have a minimum 15mm gurney (wicker) requirement and a 5mm higher ride height than 2008. |
||
|
21 Jan 2009, 07:12 (Ref:2375818) | #35 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,618
|
only that ????
|
||
__________________
Apocalypse becomes creation / Gor-Gor shall erase the nation Before you leap into his gizzard / Fall and worship Tyrant lizard Ciao Marco |
21 Jan 2009, 13:59 (Ref:2376124) | #36 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,078
|
then again, there's another corner to think about...
the upcoming BMW M3. Now, where does this fit in the calculations as far as competitive balance? Just a thought... |
||
__________________
Here's to the new age of Sports car/Prototypes... |
21 Jan 2009, 17:50 (Ref:2376289) | #37 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 785
|
It's not been officially written anywhere, but my understanding is that the new M3 is illegal with the ACO and FIA rules because of it's gearbox placement: they installed a transaxle whereas the road car has its six speed placed directly behind the engine. The ALMS is letting them in as GT2S cars I think...
Not that BMW ever wanted to make their sportscars legal/optimized for all racing series (M3 GTR, 2000 LMR) |
||
|
21 Jan 2009, 22:28 (Ref:2376439) | #38 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,735
|
BMW hopes to change the ACO to allow the car, ie, change the rules.
|
||
|
31 Jul 2009, 22:18 (Ref:2512801) | #39 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
Hmm, illegal engine with the addition of steel bore liners to keep the all aluminum block from destructing itself with the larger bore to 4.0L? So I guess the question now is, will this get swept under the rug??
L.P. |
||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
31 Jul 2009, 22:27 (Ref:2512806) | #40 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 931
|
Not exactly a minor modification. I don't quite understand how its taken this long to be found out.
|
||
__________________
Go the mighty Flying Lizards "A good way to gauge the strength of your argument is to weight the quality of the rebuttals. Strong arguments have low quality rebuttals." David Heinemeier Hansson |
31 Jul 2009, 22:56 (Ref:2512824) | #41 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,595
|
Why did this thread get bumped? It was just an attack on other posters waiting to happen.
|
|
|
31 Jul 2009, 23:46 (Ref:2512852) | #42 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
Quote:
This thread got bumped for the obvious reason, that this is a significant development and needs to be kept in the light of day and not swept back into the dark recess from which it came! Most here realize this and can have a legitimate discourse on the subject. L.P. |
|||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
1 Aug 2009, 05:10 (Ref:2512936) | #43 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 254
|
Quote:
Adding sleeves is legal. There are specific rules which allow the machining of the block to add sleeves if the engine does not already come with them. (5.2.3 in the ACO GT2 rulebook for those so inclined) |
|||
|
1 Aug 2009, 09:42 (Ref:2513017) | #44 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 153
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
1 Aug 2009, 10:10 (Ref:2513038) | #45 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,642
|
...and here is the wording of the rule:
5.2.3 – Cylinder heads may be modified by machining, provided that the original part remains identifiable. The valve tappet guides may be fitted with sleeves if not originally. The cylinder block may be modified by machining : • for the modification of the bore or for sleeving if the original block is not fitted with sleeves. • Below the horizontal plane passing through the axle of the crankshaft bearings for the mounting of the dry sump. The oil sump is free and may include the crankshaft bearing caps. |
||
|
1 Aug 2009, 12:03 (Ref:2513138) | #46 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,900
|
ok if everything is leagal why is hindy talkink about it, and why has porsche been given a waivur by aco
just listend to andy at le mans series quali http://audio.mpix.org.uk/lms2009/2009_alg_q.mp3 around fifth of the way trough the file, they talk about it, they say its iligal, and that the fia has given porsche the wright to race with the posibility of exclusion from the championships until they make a desision at the end of august Last edited by arakis; 1 Aug 2009 at 12:31. |
||
__________________
To launch a new FIA GT2 category based on strict technical rules, with limited wavers and ‘balance of performance' limited to success ballast. A category where GT manufacturers will prove through competition they can produce the best road going GT car. |
1 Aug 2009, 12:59 (Ref:2513177) | #47 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,900
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyderman View Post • for the modification of the bore or for sleeving if the original block is not fitted with sleeves. it says you can sleeve it only if the block was not sleeved already and porsches gt3 block is sleeved from the new gt3 "The cylinder cases are made of a light alloy featuring aluminum, with Nikasil®-coated liners. For improved efficiency, including better fuel economy, the engine's compression ratio was raised to 12.0:1." I guess those aluminium nikasil liners were not strong enough so they put in steel ones wich is against the rules, the parts must remain original |
||
__________________
To launch a new FIA GT2 category based on strict technical rules, with limited wavers and ‘balance of performance' limited to success ballast. A category where GT manufacturers will prove through competition they can produce the best road going GT car. |
1 Aug 2009, 13:34 (Ref:2513192) | #48 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,642
|
No mention of "sleeve".
Also - relax Arakis, it doesn't give Porsche any performance enhancement. It just strengthens the cylinder casings, thus better engine endurance. As Ferrari has already won all the really long distance races, it wont really make much difference. |
||
|
1 Aug 2009, 14:39 (Ref:2513222) | #49 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,054
|
Any improvement in performances, arakis.
Porsche and Ratel hate one each other, and that's the last chapter of a long war. Rathel would not like to see Porsche to win in FIA GT, because Porsche was not agree with Rathel's politics. So, he would not allow to Porsche to win. Porsche uses this system from the first season of the 997. Three years... and now it's irregular? Oh, in 2008 Porsche has won two races in FIA GT, but there were other polemics... about suspensions... All to stop the Porsche. Why Porsche is not irregular in all the other series??? Does it mean something to your ears? |
||
__________________
Le Mans, 23/06/2013, 15:00, Allan we miss you! Porsche 1°-2° in GTE-Pro class with 991 GT3 RSR Porsche 1st. place in GTE-Am class with 997 GT3 RSR |
1 Aug 2009, 14:44 (Ref:2513224) | #50 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,054
|
The rules are not clear about this point and, so, Porsche has recoursed against FIA decision. Autosprint is a pro-Ferrari magazine, but they are with Porsche in this case.
Does it mean something? |
||
__________________
Le Mans, 23/06/2013, 15:00, Allan we miss you! Porsche 1°-2° in GTE-Pro class with 991 GT3 RSR Porsche 1st. place in GTE-Am class with 997 GT3 RSR |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ACO 2009 regs | zac510 | ACO Regulated Series | 2 | 16 Sep 2008 13:36 |
GT2 replaced by GT3 ..... ACO new idea | The Badger | ACO Regulated Series | 315 | 4 Sep 2008 16:31 |
Porsche GT2 domination | Garp | Sportscar & GT Racing | 60 | 14 Sep 2005 15:35 |
New GT2 porsche | pink69 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 6 | 1 May 2002 14:31 |