LMP2 Manufacturers and Engine Suppliers

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Dyson Mazda

Is LMP2 headed in this direction for 2017 and if so would anyone be opposed to it?

No for both questions

[Simmi]

Three completely different cars? One a spec racer. One a personal crusade/labour of love/money pit. The other got burnt to a crisp.

[Deleted]

Furai was originally built from Courage P2 platform, P4/5 Comp from Ferrari 430 and the Renault has allegedly some LMP1 level of design in it. So I guess he was referring to LMP2 manufacturers/teams modding existing chassis' for their own purposes - kinda like what IMSA/NASCAR want for their 2017 manufacturer specific DP-clone bodykits - but with more freedom, not all spec under? Or something, I don't know.

That, or if there's general direction of prototypes starting to bear more resemblance to road cars - not that such makes sense when we think of current and upcoming LMP2...

[Maelochs]

If there is no difference between a prototype and a GT car--both being built from existing modified road-car platforms--then No, I don't want P2 to go that way.

This whole "Make it look like a street car" is obnoxious BS to me. Prototypes should be designed to race, not to look like anything.

If a manufacturer wants to slap a distinctive grille shape (see the Lola Aston, or the Cadillac LMP featured in another thread here) then fine. If a manufacturer wants to build a whole body designed to look like a street car instead of a body designed to maximize effect and effciency fine. And if that car loses to a car designed to go fast, fine.

The who notion of a "prototype" class as I understand it is a class of vehicles designed not for production and sales for use on public roads, but of cars designed and built purely for racing.

I want P1 to be the all-out, anything-goes, maximum-power, spare-no-expense, damn-the-torpedoes racetrack spaceships which they pretty much always have been--from a Jag D-Type to a 907 to a 917 to a 956/962 to the Pugs and Audis which have dominated Le Mans in this century.

GT1 is the place for over-the-top mods of street cars; GT2 (GTE, GTLM) is the class for serious but not ridiculously radical mods of those same street cars.

If manufacturers want to build crazy versions of street cars, resurrect GT1. Don't emasculate the prototype classes---none of the people who are really paying attention will be fooled ("Corvette" DP??? hahahaha the people occasionally noticing will just be confused ("It says a Corvette won two classes but there is only Corvette there, the yellow one") and the people not paying attention don't know and don't care.

The idea that more people will buy Corvettes or even GM products if the front of the rear fenders looks vaguely like a drunk person's imagination of a particular street car is a screaming joke---a joke that makes one scream in pain instead of laugh with mirth. If the C7.Rs don't say "Corvette" enough the DPs are speaking in tongues---it ain't working--it won't work.

Because I love to repeat myself: WEC can get away with P2 as a glorified PC class because they have P1. TUSC is going to get basically PC Normal (P3) and PC Vente ("P2"), and fans are going to watch real cars doing real racing instead of TUSC, which will be the IndyCar of North American racing---a great tradition screwed over by bad management and dying with spec cars which excite no one.

Of course by then IndyCar will further down the road to recovery, making TUSC look even worse.

Yeah .... wow. I can hardly wait.

[Deleted]

I think there are certain manufacturers that instead of having these fake NASCAR "street car" bodyworks sitting on top of prototypes, would love to have such high dollar GT1 class again for top positions, like McLaren. But the ACO doesn't want to have GT cars outpacing their own prototypes now that they have the desired numbers, AND making their existing BoP-GTs look slow ass turtles (which they obviously are). Which is also why I think GT500 has been told time and time again they're not welcome to play and why the 2000's GT1 was slowed down year after year once they started threatening Le Mans overall podium

Anyway, back to LMP2

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by Chiana

But the ACO doesn't want to have GT cars outpacing their own prototypes now that they have the desired numbers, AND making their existing GTs look slow ass turtles (which they obviously are). Which is also why I think GT500 has been told time and time again they're not welcome to play and why the 2000's GT1 was slowed down year after year once they started threatening Le Mans overall podium

GT500 might have the measure of LMP1-L around Fuji, but at Le Mans they'd struggle mightily to keep up with any full-blooded P1 car. As for 2000s GT1, they weren't slowed down by the ACO, the final slowdown was from Ratel's 2010 GT1 regs; in 2009 there was no competition to drive record pace, the fastest GT1 cars were in 2008 and they were relegated down the order compared to previous years by sheer numbers of LMP1 and the performance of the RS Spyders in P2.

Not everything has to be a conspiracy to make things worse, y'know.

And tbh, I don't fancy the proposed direction for P2 in 2017. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, and ELMS are proving that for the last couple of years.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

GT500 might have the measure of LMP1-L around Fuji, but at Le Mans they'd struggle mightily to keep up with any full-blooded P1 car. As for 2000s GT1, they weren't slowed down by the ACO, the final slowdown was from Ratel's 2010 GT1 regs; in 2009 there was no competition to drive record pace, the fastest GT1 cars were in 2008 and they were relegated down the order compared to previous years by sheer numbers of LMP1 and the performance of the RS Spyders in P2.

Not everything has to be a conspiracy to make things worse, y'know.

And tbh, I don't fancy the proposed direction for P2 in 2017. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, and ELMS are proving that for the last couple of years.

GT500 car being little slower or about as equally fast as privateer P1, faster than any LMP2 and 15-25 seconds faster than top LMGTE would make the ACO cars look slow ass. Of course it would. And why do you think when AsLMS had that one off Super GT integration they only had GT300 there...

After 2005 new-GT1s (and GT2s in less extent) as a class were slowed down year after year by restrictor and weight penalties to make up space for LMP2, check your own facts. Just because their lap times were up in 2008 tells you nothing thanks to track upgrades and stuff (also #6)).

It's not "conspiracy", it's clearly what they desire to have in the race, any idiot can see it.

Your last paragraph makes little sense considering they ARE changing it quite a bit from what we have now.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

This whole "Make it look like a street car" is obnoxious BS to me. Prototypes should be designed to race, not to look like anything.

The who notion of a "prototype" class as I understand it is a class of vehicles designed not for production and sales for use on public roads, but of cars designed and built purely for racing.

I want P1 to be the all-out, anything-goes, maximum-power, spare-no-expense, damn-the-torpedoes racetrack spaceships which they pretty much always have been--from a Jag D-Type to a 907 to a 917 to a 956/962 to the Pugs and Audis which have dominated Le Mans in this century.

pro·to·type/ˈprōdəˌtīp/
noun
a first, typical or preliminary model of something, especially a machine, from which other forms are developed or copied.

My gripe about prototype racing is that for many years, they have been prototypes of nothing.

The old homologation rules were aimed at keeping the prototypes from having no connection to anything. In my opinion, the concept went wrong when they dumped the homologation requirement. The D Type Jag and Ford GT 40 were entirely different things from a 917. If you had the money, you could buy a road-going version of the D Type and the GT 40. Not so with the 917.

My perspective on this subject is almost the opposite. I think the whole "prototype" (of nothing) concept should be dumped and replaced by a supercar class. To allow there to be some sort of order to it, there would need to be fuel consumption limits they all have to meet, but then it would be a battle of the best between Bugatti, Lamborghini, McLaren, Stryker, anybody who wanted to design a supercar that would also have a decent shot at winning Le Mans. Of course they would need a good deal of safety improvements before they took the track, but a supercar approach to the top class would actually generate a lot more buzz than these purpose-built prototypes of nothing that race now.

Or, a true prototype class like G56, but have some really basic rules and there would be several of them battling it out.

[Gingers4Justice]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

The who notion of a "prototype" class as I understand it is a class of vehicles designed not for production and sales for use on public roads, but of cars designed and built purely for racing.

I want P1 to be the all-out, anything-goes, maximum-power, spare-no-expense, damn-the-torpedoes racetrack spaceships which they pretty much always have been--from a Jag D-Type to a 907 to a 917 to a 956/962 to the Pugs and Audis which have dominated Le Mans in this century.

The term "prototype" was first used in reference to Le Mans sports cars in the immediate post-war period. Up until then, Le Mans was a race for road cars (indeed, effectively touring cars when it first started). After the war, manufacturers were in a rebuilding process and entering road cars wasn't an option for all of them - so instead, some were allowed to race early "prototypes" of cars they intended to build for the road.

Throughout the 50s, 60s and 70s the cars known as "prototypes" may have been at the forefront of technology but the rules still ensured the cars had close links to their road-going counterparts. The cars through this period carried space for passengers (as they theoretically do now) and had to have the ground clearance for speed bumps. Even in the 1980s, watch clips of Le Mans and you'll see 962s using their indicators to pull out of traffic.

The point being, this notion of "prototypes" being completely unhinged, thoroughbred racers is a relatively recent one in the world of motor sport, and I think sports car racing loses its way when this happens. Be careful what you wish for. The last time that happened was the early 90s, which produced some spectacular cars, but nearly killed the sport. The 905 for example was a fantastic car but it had no relevance to anything - it was an F1 car with a roof and wheel covers. The 962 you cited was designed to the original Group C fuel consumption formula with a stock block engine as a response to rising fuel prices - that's not a 'maximum power, all-out' thoroughbred racing car, but it's an icon from our last true golden era of sports car racing.

I really like the current rules set, although there are things I would change - for example, I would make cockpits wider so they really could carry a passenger. But if you're advocating thoroughbred, to-hell-with-the-road-cars attitude, why shouldn't prototype cockpits just be single-seat canopy with the driver sat in the middle?

One thing I do agree with in your post - prototypes shouldn't look like road cars for the sake of it, ala Daytona Prototypes.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

As for 2000s GT1, they weren't slowed down by the ACO

Originally Posted by Chiana

After 2005 new-GT1s (and GT2s in less extent) as a class were slowed down year after year by restrictor and weight penalties to make up space for LMP2, check your own facts.

Just to follow up from this

Originally Posted by 2006/2007/2008/2009 (ACO)

REGLEMENT TECHNIQUE ACO - ACO TECHNICAL REGULATIONS 2006(-2009)
In order to maximise equality of performance and to maintain the current level of performance as well, the following adjustments must be carried out :

Aston Martin DB9 Coupe (ACO homologation N°: LMGT1-01) :
- Addition of 25 Kg to their minimum weight ;

Corvette C6/ZO6 (ACO homologation N°: LMGT1-02) :
- Addition of 25 Kg to their minimum weight ;

Originally Posted by 2006 (ACO's weight-restrictor table in comparison to 2005 table)

Minimum weight increased by 25kg for all models

Originally Posted by 2007 (ACO)

The A.C.O wants to ensure that the performances in each category and group of cars are respected as follows:

- 1st level of performance: LM P1
- 2nd level of performance: LM P2
- 3rd level of performance: LM GT1
- 4th level of performance: LM GT2

---
LM GT1: Given that the performance and top speed of these cars are constantly increasing approaching those of the LM P2s, their air restrictors will be reduced by 5%. As the capacity of the fuel tanks has to be adjusted according to the type of energy used (petrol or ethanol; see 'fuels' below), the amount of fuel on board the car must not exceed 90 litres (-10).
LM GT2: To maintain a reasonable gap to the GT1s the air restrictors will also be reduced by 5%. As the capacity of the fuel tanks has to be adjusted according to the type of energy used (petrol or ethanol; see 'fuels' below), the amount of fuel on board the car must not exceed 90 litres (-10).

Originally Posted by 2009 (ACO)

- A weight increase of 25 kilos in LM GT1 and 20 kilos in LM GT2.
- A 25mm Gurney flap minimum in LM GT1, and 15mm minimum in LM GT2 will be obligatory.
- The air restrictors will be reduced by 2% in LM GT1 and 5% in LM GT2.

Originally Posted by 2010 (ACO)

ACCEPTED CARS
In LMGT1, cars in compliance with the FIA 2010 regulations and 2009 cars equipped with a performance kit.

[TF110]

I think gt500 would be in between p1-H and -L. They have a 1020kg minimum weight, with that difference between p1-L (800kg!) in mind, the privateer cars look a bit sad. Itd be interesting to see what gt500's could go with 200kg less weight. At Fuji they were over 300kmh in the speed traps and the GTR's pole time was in the 1:29's, faster than both Rebellions.

[Deleted]

Yup. Also have to remember SGT running with success ballast there

ACO in bold

Fuji 2014 Q Fastest
1:22.572 SF
1:26.473 LMP1-H
1:29.794 GT500
1:30.403 LMP1-L
1:32.658 LMP2
1:34.799 JF3
1:38.078 GT300/GT300
1:38.109 GT3/GT300
1:39.147 LMGTE-PRO
1:39.495 LMGTE-AM
1:40.026 GT3 AsLMS
1:40.124 CN
1:40.354 STX Super Taikuy
1:40.966 GT3 GTA
1:43.217 Audi R8 Cup
1:44.570 Ferrari Challenge
1:45.411 Inter Proto

[hondafan37]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Yup. Also have to remember SGT running with success ballast there

ACO in bold

Fuji 2014 Q Fastest
1:22.572 SF
1:26.473 LMP1-H
1:29.794 GT500
1:30.403 LMP1-L
1:32.658 LMP2
1:34.799 JF3
1:38.078 GT300/GT300
1:38.109 GT3/GT300
1:39.147 LMGTE-PRO
1:39.495 LMGTE-AM
1:40.026 GT3 AsLMS
1:40.124 CN
1:40.354 STX Super Taikuy
1:40.966 GT3 GTA
1:43.217 Audi R8 Cup
1:44.570 Ferrari Challenge
1:45.411 Inter Proto

1:29:794 was the pole time of Nissan GTR GT500, it had 1020+22=1042 Kg.
1:30:403 was the time for the Revellion, it had 800 Kg.
Incredible the GT500 was 242kg heavier than LMP1-L and was 0.609 faster.
I have the sensation that the new Nissan GTR LMP1 with front engine like GT 500 and 870 Kg. will be very competitive.

[TF110]

We have to look at fuel flows also. Not sure the rate gt500's run, but theyre probably making a little bit more power. Interesting thing is the low drag wing they use for Fuji should decrease corner speed, and the straight line speed is only as good or slightly less than lmp1-L.

[Mike Hedlund]

Keep in mind there's no competition in LMP1-L and the cars are brand new and still in development. Pretty much the exact opposite of the GT500 cars. There's a bunch of time left in the LMP1-L cars given proper development and some competition.

-mike

[TF110]

The GT500's are new for 2014 also Theyll be even faster next year, as will lmp1-L. But I think that shows the level of performance difference between a private team like Rebellion vs the factory developed gt500 cars. If thats the route lmp2 goes (which i doubt) at least they have speed.

[Deleted]

Being mere 3 seconds down from the fastest sportscar category on Earth, which itself is only behind F1 & to less extent GP2 & FR3.5 & Super Formula I think, + beating all the other prototypes and whatnot you have while still being -technically- a GT(/DTM alteration 'touring car') is the real headline. And for a national series to have such machines against a backdrop of these other major international headline series... that's why ACO would be afraid of them for making their classes look slow me thinks

[TF110]

If they truly combine with DTM and become a seperate series, I can imagine the ACO taking a hard look at it. Especially if all 6 manufacturers participate. No series has 6 auto manufacturers in one class, besides gt3.

[MagVanisher]

I think ACO should do is make connections towards the GTA/ITR instead of antagonizing them just because their LMP1-L/LMP2 class is slower than GT500/DTM cars.

There's no need for ACO to just tell both GTA/ITR to slow their cars down. All they need is to have more power on LMP2s.

[Deleted]

It's not only the protos, if GT500 would have any affiliation with the ACO cars it'd make the LMGTEs and factory teams there look like crap. Hell even the GT300 is faster.

Back in the 90's with the old fire breathing GT1, their difference to then-GT2 (to-be-GTS/GT1) which involved the likes of factory Vipers was from top-to-top 20+ seconds at LM too, but at least both of them were actual ACO/FIA categories and the multi class GT structure was common day element, as well as major factory focus being in GT1

[Deleted]

See, there are (major as well) manufacturers wanting to race these higher end up production cars, but with no GT1 or other place to run them

Originally Posted by Sportscar365

Walliser, who acted as project manager for the Porsche 918, was reluctant to confer a new 911 RSR for the upcoming 2016 GTE regulations. “I would love to race [the 918 Spyder], no question,” he said. “But this not a GTE car. If you look at the price of a street car, it’s material, R&D costs and everything around that… It would definitely not be cheaper than the street car, for sure. This is not possible. It’s way to early to be in a position to make a decision.”

And since Ratel came up with that Ultracar thingy due to the requests of some individuals, the desire does exist. And we know McLaren's ambitions.

But just to go back to LMP2 since this is technically their thread, I think if you're looking at the Pilbeam project and it not making much sense (in all likelihood the last new open top LMP car of any kind for the next X years), there is still a long time until it gets totally banned... you get 2015/16 for full eglibility, then 2017 at least under grandfathering rules, and beyond that you can probably still run it at some hillbilly events and probably these South African ones, if they still exists.

[Simmi]

SMP have shown the first images of their BR01:

http://sportscar365.com/industry/exc...-car-unveiled/

[GT6]

Well first glance it looks like all the other LMP2 coupe's it really needs something to make it stand out.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by GT6

Well first glance it looks like all the other LMP2 coupe's it really needs something to make it stand out.

Yes, like regs that allowed more design diversity

[Pontlieue]

The Ligier, Dome and HPD all look very different compared to each other. The BR01 is less distinctive, but a nice looking prototype. I think it has some similarities with the Dome, but the design looks less radical.