|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
19 Feb 2013, 03:36 (Ref:3206998) | #226 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,336
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
19 Feb 2013, 07:40 (Ref:3207057) | #227 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 278
|
Use GT3 as a base, with BOP and all. The top mfg class can then be GT3 with larger restrictorplates, carbon brakes and an upgraded aeroopack (optimized from GT3 spec.), and a weight limit at the current GTE spec.
|
||
|
19 Feb 2013, 07:55 (Ref:3207061) | #228 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,559
|
1200kg, 2100mm width, road car based engine/drivetrain, GT3 aero rules and call it a day.
|
|
|
19 Feb 2013, 08:01 (Ref:3207065) | #229 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 49
|
|||
|
19 Feb 2013, 08:23 (Ref:3207083) | #230 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,559
|
That's the point. Let them bring what they want to bring. Innovative parts are appealing.
|
|
|
19 Feb 2013, 09:28 (Ref:3207127) | #231 | ||
Racer
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 396
|
Why not have the same car for both GT3/ GTE? Like the WRC/ RRC in Rallying – all that changes are the brakes, restrictor, front & rear wing.
|
||
|
19 Feb 2013, 09:53 (Ref:3207143) | #232 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,334
|
Quote:
Also, what's the price difference between an RRC and a WRC? Does it really make the kind of difference that the GT rules makers are interested in? |
|||
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam. |
19 Feb 2013, 12:56 (Ref:3207283) | #233 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,884
|
One thing I do hope comes of the new regs is the return of the plucky little manufacturer who just want the honour of racing their car at Le Mans. Spyker, Morgan, TVR, Lister...I love seeing cars like those at LM. The current Pro/Am set up doesn't really work for them. To get a car to be an "AM" car, where they belong, they'd have to spend a year racing against manufacturer teams with F1 drivers around the globe.
|
||
|
19 Feb 2013, 13:27 (Ref:3207299) | #234 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,617
|
|||
__________________
Nitropteron - Fly fast or get crushed! by NaBUrean Prodooktionz naburu38.itch.io |
19 Feb 2013, 14:18 (Ref:3207329) | #235 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,192
|
In my opinion, the best success of GT3 si the freedom to develope a car minimum in the AM category, so a certain freedom against GTE is required, personally i would use the same platform with slighly more rules for the GTE or GT3+ version of the pros, so the same car with expensiver updates for the pros. But both cars on sale by the manufacturers.
|
||
|
19 Feb 2013, 15:15 (Ref:3207345) | #236 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 49
|
|||
|
19 Feb 2013, 16:03 (Ref:3207368) | #237 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,638
|
|||
|
19 Feb 2013, 16:51 (Ref:3207386) | #238 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
Same base car in the GT (4, 3 & GTE) classes per mfg.
A ruleset for GT-3 safety, aero, with the rest in a BIG box to keep them on the same page. Then they can be BoP per series to the particular sanctioning bodies need/desire. Driver classification would also be determined by the individual sanctioning body w/ Le Mans being Pro/Am only. More than likely with an inter-class BoP with GTE GTE as a Pro class, also allowing Pro/Am, with basically the current technical ruleset. L.P. |
||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
19 Feb 2013, 17:35 (Ref:3207401) | #239 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,099
|
Quote:
X eleventybillion - this is one of the "charms" of LeMans that is now missing in action... In my mind this also includes Pescarolo, Dome, Epsilon Euskadi, WR ect... Last edited by Livininthinair; 19 Feb 2013 at 17:48. |
|||
|
19 Feb 2013, 18:33 (Ref:3207421) | #240 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,203
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
19 Feb 2013, 19:48 (Ref:3207439) | #241 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 36
|
Ditch the paddles! That is my only gripe...
|
|
|
19 Feb 2013, 20:32 (Ref:3207452) | #242 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,474
|
|||
|
19 Feb 2013, 20:44 (Ref:3207461) | #243 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 36
|
||
|
19 Feb 2013, 21:59 (Ref:3207518) | #244 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,559
|
That's a step backwards. The paddles allow the drivers to keep their hands on the wheel instead of having to reach over to shift. Another safety feature that also comes with quicker shifts.
|
|
|
19 Feb 2013, 23:46 (Ref:3207571) | #245 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,336
|
|||
|
20 Feb 2013, 00:29 (Ref:3207586) | #246 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 36
|
I'd rather see them do something that requires skill. I know all things evolve, but it's a lot more fun to watch a driver go through the gears on an h-pattern.
|
|
|
20 Feb 2013, 00:53 (Ref:3207593) | #247 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,559
|
I'm not even aware of the last time they used an H pattern in the series these cars race.
|
|
|
20 Feb 2013, 01:03 (Ref:3207599) | #248 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 44
|
Clutch, stick, talent...no paddles.
|
||
|
20 Feb 2013, 01:03 (Ref:3207600) | #249 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,474
|
|||
|
20 Feb 2013, 02:18 (Ref:3207607) | #250 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,334
|
|||
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Re-introduction of multi-class GT structure in ACO-style racing? | Deleted | ACO Regulated Series | 49 | 21 Apr 2014 16:46 |
[FIA GT] FIA/ACO GT regulations | ger80 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 4 | 14 Jul 2006 23:23 |
[FIA GT] why did the FIA kill the GT1 class in FIA GT? | CVT | Sportscar & GT Racing | 42 | 16 Nov 2003 01:48 |
Seqential Tranny in ACO GT class? | RacingManiac | ACO Regulated Series | 12 | 4 Jul 2003 02:27 |