ASR to race Two Lola B2K/40's in ALMS 04'

[Fogelhund]

http://www.theracesite.com/index.cfm...m_article=5987

Article states that they don't want to be a development team for one of the specific made LMP2's.

Isn't there going to be quite a bit of work required to make the B2K/40 eligible for LMP2? That seems like quite a bit of development work to me???:confused:

[paul-collins]

Unless there are separate grandfathering clauses for FIA SR2s, which haven't been announced yet? I notice that the motors are 3.0L (FIA max size) rather than 3.4 (ACO).

[LouisTheShark]

I think they are going to rely on reliability of a proven package. I don't think there is anyone coming out for the full ALMS season with a true LMP-2 next year, so this does make sense.

Funny how 4 plus year old extruded aluminum spaceframe chassis is getting some ALMS fans so excited.

[GTsports]

So will they run in LMP1 if the cars are not allowed in LMP2?

Louis, what is wrong with 4 year old spaceframe cars meant to run in a secondary class?

This team is going to be one of the highlights for the ALMS prototype category in '04, so try to enjoy this bit of good news.

[cybersdorf]

Originally posted by LouisTheShark
Funny how 4 plus year old extruded aluminum spaceframe chassis is getting some ALMS fans so excited.

If it had a roof it would get some GA fans so excited.

[paul-collins]

Originally posted by LouisTheShark
Funny how 4 plus year old extruded aluminum spaceframe chassis is getting some ALMS fans so excited.

I think the thing that excites me about the team is its expansion. 2 cars from 1 (from none a year ago).

As should be obvious, it takes time for teams to come to grips with new rulesets. Jon Lewis is being very sensible in growing his team, I'd say.

[gttouring]

it is good to see growth, where ever in ALMS...space frame or not its an LMP 1-2-750-675 whateevr

[Fogelhund]

So, back to the point, how easy is it going to be to covert this to LMP2 spec?

[Tim Northcutt]

That's the $64,000 question.....

It has been said in many threads that converting a 2003 specs car to the 2004 rregs would not be an easy, or possibly even a practical task...

Maybe this Lola chassis, since it is a tube frame, can have different bodywork, undercarriage and front diffuser parts made by a fabricator to meet 2004 specs....but I would think that doing so would change the whole aero geometry or the car and would require tunnel testing, etc...sounds expensive to me....

I hope the "owner" Mr. Lewis checks this site like the "driver" Mr. Lewis has in the past, so that he can answer some of these questions for us....

[Fogelhund]

Sent ASR an email.

This is how MuslanneMike described it last time the question came up.

The main issue converting a '03 spec car to '04 is the underfloor rules. The new "tunnel/diffuser" now begins some 1000 mm in front of the rear wheel (as opposed to at the rear wheel centerline for '03 and later). The downforce-reducing/yaw-stability-increasing chamfer that runs down the side of the car also is a major change. Essentially the outer edge of the car is some 100 mm above the reference plane as the chamfer's 7 degree angle bring's that point up.

This was stated by another.

The current crop of cars would require extensive modification to meet the new LMP2 rules (or LMP1 for that matter) The ACO has substantially changed the overhangs at both ends of the car from the 2003 ruleset. Enough that it would require new tubs on the carbon fiber chassis cars, and new crash testing, not to mention the changes to the cockpit area (double roll hoops).

[Tim Northcutt]

Let us know what you hear back from ASR....sounds like a monumental task to convert these Lolas to LMP2 specs...

[Fogelhund]

ASR believes that the Aluminum tub cars, the Lola B2K/40 and the Pilbeam are grandfathered into LMP2.

That certainly makes it interesting, and provides a decent number of very reasonable cars to run for a championship.

Good Luck to ASR and thanks to Jon Lewis for a very prompt response.

[Tim Northcutt]

WOW...that is news....but it makes good sense if they would grandfather in the 2003 LMP675s and the 900s into LMP1....

I second Fogelhund's "Very Best Wishes" to ASR, and the big thanks to Jon Lewis for this info....I'll bet he has racing fuel running through his veins!!!! A true purist in this great sport....

[LouisTheShark]

My point was to show that privateers have to make choices and have to consider budgets. Something many ALMS fans just don't get.

Jon Lewis basically admitted in the interview on theracesite.com that they don't have the resources, financially and technically (somewhat related issues), to continue a LMP-1 program. Now they are jumping to a step that makes more sense for them but they have to go back in chassis technology to do it. How is a prototype that is not really a prototype going to further advance the idea that the ALMS represents the latest technology? They are going from a one car team to a two car team because it costs the same to run two cars in a lesser class. This is progress in the ALMS now? How many times have those of us been told that always suggested you need lesser technology to give privateers a chance to compete, we are wrong and this is not what the fans want to see. Now you celebrate that such a privateer "expanded" his operation by going back in technology just because he is running 2 cars, likely with paying drivers (hobbyists). And here I thought that ALMS fans refuse to pay to see hobbyists because it isn't any different than going to a SCCA regional race. At least that is what I have been told in the past, but I assume that is changing now?

In 2000 there were a dozen of these guys (SRP1 and SRP2) running in another series and those guys were called every name in book.

The hypocrisy is amazing.

[full throttle]

Louis:

I know you don't get it. The main point for most ALMS/'purists' is that a spec class goes against most everything that we hold to be exciting and important in sportscar racing. The technology is great when its economically feasible, but the diversity is just as important. Nothing hypocritical about being excited that a team has taken an alternate path. The car ASR ran last year was years old as will be the cars they run next year. But there will apparently be 2, which is a net gain which is growth, which is good for ALMS.

As far as 'sportsman' drivers, thay have been around since the inception and always will be with the possible exception of all out factory efforts. They are in many ways the life blood of sportscars. Some are better than others.
This is the case in ALL sportscar racing. Reality, not hypocrisy...

[Fogelhund]

Louis/Reality Check - Your line is tired.

We like privateers, and gentleman racers, this is acknowledged by all as a backbone to the sport. However, we don't expect that such drivers will regularly compete for overall. This isn't for overall, it is for a class designed for privateers, the gentleman racers. It is not a dumbed down, spec class, nor will it be filled with ugly duck Road Racers.

As usual you are trying to create an argument for the DP's. As nice a guy as Forest Barber is, he should not be competing for overall wins in a "Professional" level series. Yes, I will be critical of any series where a regular winner, could not win on his own merits in SCCA and lower level racing.


That these people are allowed to compete, and can compete are always welcomed, so your usual attempt to twist around what people may have said, once again fails. Perhaps one day you'll suprise us all, and have something positive to say, instead of pointing out how nobody is as smart as those industry professionals.

[LouisTheShark]

Nowhere in my post did I bring up DP. Again you guys are missing the point. The issue I raise has NOTHING to do with DPs.

I referred back to the year 2000 where privateers ran FIA SRP/SRP2 cars that most of you hated. Now they are welcome. That is my point. You didn't like it then because these cars ran in another series, but you like it now because it is in your series. THAT is the hypocrisy!

All the other excuses provided in the past why a series with rules that help privateers compete is never going to work is just turning out to be bogus propoganda as usual. When the manufacturers played, most of you didn't care much about the privateers and their struggles, now that the manufacturers have left, the privateers become the rallying cry. Maybe one day you guys will understand why it is so hard to sell this sport to sponsors, they don't know if you guys like the drivers, cars, series, or whatever because the focus of the fanbase is so screwed up.

[paul-collins]

Originally posted by LouisTheShark
I referred back to the year 2000 where privateers ran FIA SRP/SRP2 cars that most of you hated.

user full throttle: Registered: Jan 2003
user Fogelhund: Registered: Oct 2002
user Tim Northcutt: Registered: Jan 2003
user paul-collins: Registered: May 2002
user gttouring: Registered: Jan 2003
user cybersdorf: Registered: Oct 2001
user LouisTheShark: Registered: Jan 2003

:confused:

[LouisTheShark]

Let me add this. When Panoz started the idea of the ALMS he was on the right track by trying to combine the interests of the U.S. privateers with the ACO and the manufacturers. His originally idea was hijacked by people in his own organization and by the ACO's self serving interests. Now that the ACO and the FIA had to come together in Europe, what is happening in Europe is exactly what he should have done in the first place in the U.S.

[Fogelhund]

RE:2000 - When given the choice of top flight privateers and factories, vs. Tired old cars with a few top flight privateers and a bunch of average teams, it is easy to see which is going to be cheered for. Of course nobody liked the USRCC/IMSA split, it reduced entries, and IMSA had the better entries. USRCC had nothing new, and nothing top flight in the way of cars.

Of course, some 4 years down the road, and the whole thing has suffered, though I'm not going to draw conclusions. Unfortunately, 04' IMSA is starting to look a bunch like USRCC of 00', old cars, nothing new, and no factories in the top classes. A bit like the movie Ground Hog Day no?

I'll call a spade a spade, it is not hypocrisy , it is what it is, when people have options, they'll choose the superior product. USRCC was inferior to IMSA in 00', by a long shot. IMSA 04' LMP is inferior to IMSA LMP 01' in particular.

As far as LMES doing something right, I still see they are really missing the boat so far. What is it you see that is so good that they are doing, that ALMS people aren't?

[BobN]

nm

[LouisTheShark]

I think the ACO has finally realized it needed a true privateer class with the LMP-2 class for the average privateer team. The teams that never really have a chance to win overall because they just don't have the resources/funds are not forced to run in the same class as the manufacturers or the "super-privateers". Technology is limited in LMP-2 to avoid MG like efforts to outclass the whole class. In LMP675, the ACO invited manufacturer support, but in LMP-2 they seem to discourage it.

[full throttle]

Louis: Its like talking to a wall??? Have fun..

Paul: That was the best response I've seen!! LMAO but probably lost on those it was aimed at...

[LouisTheShark]

"Paul: That was the best response I've seen!! LMAO but probably lost on those it was aimed at..."

It wasn't lost on me, I just chose to ignore it because it was an irrelevant argument. And if you don't understand why it is an irrelevant argument...

[paul-collins]

Not irrelevant. You've been painting me with a brush that perhaps you meant for others for the past month.

I haven't been posting for long enough (in history terms) for you to be asserting what you are. Some of these members (like Fogelhund) have, but they can defend themselves; most of them have not.

Don't lecture us on how we're hypocrites based on opinions that you assert we held 3 years ago.