Audi R10

[Smokey 6 litre]

just looks like an F1 car with some bodywork, lights and two rollhoops.

[tblincoe]

As a car, the Bentley 03 was a completely different vehicle than the Audi R8. The Bentley cars may have been run by a lot of the same people, and shared engine architecture and a few other components with the R8, but thats it.

[jhansen]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

No, not at all. In fact quite possibly the opposite as it allows more scope for improved air management.

Regarding the vertical area, not sure, though I saw this:

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/Audi%20R10-2b.jpg

More than likely a trick of the light and paint job, but it caught my eye.

Mike, you might find some better views here:

http://www.sportscarpros.com/notes-f...-1/default.htm

Specifically:

http://www.sportscarpros.com/notes-f....captio-4.html

and

http://www.sportscarpros.com/notes-f....captio-2.html

[JAG]

Originally Posted by EliseGT1

Indeed, I had expected a roof as well....

At this stage I'd say its odds on that the Peugeot P1 will be a coupe.

a. To distinguish it from the Audi

b. To follow on from the heritage of the 905 Group C cars

c. Peugeot have already built a one make diesal prototype racer that is a coupe.

d. Coupes seem to suit Peugeots road car image.

[jhansen]

But a coupe would suit any make's road car image better. We shall see. I'd love to see a coupe, but I wouldn't be surprised if we get another spyder.

[Tim Northcutt]

Forgive me for this question in case it seems stupid, but:

With those rigid horizontal panels between the front fenders and the nose/front end of the car, how do those pieces affect the upward/downward travel of the suspension???

Or are there slots or spaces on the underside of those that allows for those parts to travel when they hit a curb, or whatever???

[JAG]

Originally Posted by jhansen

But a coupe would suit any make's road car image better. We shall see. I'd love to see a coupe, but I wouldn't be surprised if we get another spyder.

But Peugeot make a big deal of their various coupes and convertables, such as the 206cc, 307cc, 407 coupe, even the 907 concept.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by Tim Northcutt

Forgive me for this question in case it seems stupid, but:

With those rigid horizontal panels between the front fenders and the nose/front end of the car, how do those pieces affect the upward/downward travel of the suspension???

Or are there slots or spaces on the underside of those that allows for those parts to travel when they hit a curb, or whatever???

As I understand it, the shroud covering the suspension is fixed to the car, the suspension floats within it. If the whole ensamble were to move it would make it a moveable aerodynamic device, a no no.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by TigerII

Wouldn't the vertical flat area enhance the effect of the front splitter?

Yes, in theory the vertical area would allow for more flow into the splitter/diffuser. A poor analagy, but think of it as a front gurney.

[Tim Northcutt]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

As I understand it, the shroud covering the suspension is fixed to the car, the suspension floats within it. If the whole ensamble were to move it would make it a moveable aerodynamic device, a no no.

You answered my question, Mike, but I think you misunderstood portions within my text....

I knew that the shroud is fixed from seeing the photos, and that those pieces would not be allowed to move per the rules.....

I was just wondering how the actual suspension pieces were able to move since they are housed within that shroud....I didn't know if there were slots cut on the bottom of the shroud to allow the suspension to move, or if those parts moved inside the shroud itself...

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by Tim Northcutt

You answered my question, Mike, but I think you misunderstood portions within my text....

I knew that the shroud is fixed from seeing the photos, and that those pieces would not be allowed to move per the rules.....

I was just wondering how the actual suspension pieces were able to move since they are housed within that shroud....I didn't know if there were slots cut on the bottom of the shroud to allow the suspension to move, or if those parts moved inside the shroud itself...

Hard to tell. On the Bentley I beleive the shroud was open at the bottom. Can't say for sure here, though I think there is a tricky aspect of the regulations to deal with in that the x-section of the shroud can't be "wing" sectioned, hence it was open on the Bentley.

[Garrett]

With the new P1 regulations for LM, I thought that the dual roll hoops would push designers towards the closed bodywork concept? I don't know about everyone else, but minus the "stupid" second roll hoop and the R10 looks MUCH better! It would be nice to see some major manufactures to do a closed P1, maybe Peugeot, after their announcement for a factory return! And what about Porsche and Audi racing in the same series? Aren't they connected together through VW?

[JAG]

Am I the only one who thinks the new reg cars look far, far better than the old LMP900/675s?

The old cars look like single seaters with enclosed bodywork, the new cars have a more aggresseive, sportscar like appearance.

IMO, they look more like Can Am or Group C cars.

Prosche/Audi have some family links, but Porsche are NOT part of the VW group.

[Dauer 962]

Originally Posted by JAG

Porsche are NOT part of the VW group.

Porsche bought some VW shares ( almost 19% ) some weeks ago and became the biggest single shareholder of VW.

[nobster]

I always thought the R8 was boring but man this looks the real thing, these new regulation cars are looking better and better.

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by Dauer 962

Porsche bought some VW shares ( almost 19% ) some weeks ago and became the biggest single shareholder of VW.

Any link to an online source?

[ger80]

every german newspaper was writing about that. Niedersachen has about 18% and Porsche between 19 and 21, think 21 was the target. But there is a special "VW law" in germany witch says that the staat niedersachen is every time the biggest shareholder, also if others have more shares
for example:
http://www1.ndr.de/ndr_pages_std/0,2...822510,00.html

[hindy]

Reason is that VW is Porsche's biggest supplier and also Porsche were looking undervalued. This buy in effectively protects Porsche from a full-blown Takeover by VW. Alos means Porsche has influence (and knowledge) of any possible hostile interest in VW.

JH

[Dauer 962]

Originally Posted by ger80

every german newspaper was writing about that. Niedersachen has about 18% and Porsche between 19 and 21, think 21 was the target. But there is a special "VW law" in germany witch says that the staat niedersachen is every time the biggest shareholder, also if others have more shares
for example:
http://www1.ndr.de/ndr_pages_std/0,2...822510,00.html

But your linked articles states this different. It’s only written that no shareholder is allowed to hold more than 20% of the enfranchised shares. The state Niedersachen has according to the link 18 %, Porsche holds 19%. It’s expected that the VW law will be cancelled in 2007 by the European government.

[Garrett]

Jag, the new cars are looking more "aggressive" as the years go by and they do look good, but their appearance would look much better if the cars did not have to have all of that unnecessary aero work on the rear, the front splitter didn't have to be a certain height, and the under body didn't have to be a certain height from the ground. The dual roll hoops is kind of stupid, but that does not bother me as much as the under body ride height and the rear end aero crap.

[ss_collins]

Porsche and VW have huge family links! And technical (Toerag and Cayenne)! and now official Porsche the company own 19% and Porsche-Piech familay own substantial shares too.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Garrett

Jag, the new cars are looking more "aggressive" as the years go by and they do look good, but their appearance would look much better if the cars did not have to have all of that unnecessary aero work on the rear, the front splitter didn't have to be a certain height, and the under body didn't have to be a certain height from the ground. The dual roll hoops is kind of stupid, but that does not bother me as much as the under body ride height and the rear end aero crap.

Thats another thing, I really like the rears of these cars, they 'appear' to be much more intricate with lots of nice aero details. They remind me of the wild DTM cars and 3.5l Group C cars.

Take your point about the ride height, but on track it isn't noticeable.

[jhansen]

I think the twin rollhoops are necessary for the open top cars. It definitely helps separate them from single-seaters. And JAG, thanks for reminding me that the old Can-Am cars like the 917-30 had double rollhoops. How easily we forget. As for the ride height, I liked them lower, but it doesn't bother me. Especially when they are on track.

[cmk]

Originally Posted by JAG

Thats another thing, I really like the rears of these cars, they 'appear' to be much more intricate with lots of nice aero details. They remind me of the wild DTM cars and 3.5l Group C cars.

Take your point about the ride height, but on track it isn't noticeable.

I find that the lack of long tails really takes something away for me. I appreciate seeing what can be done behind the rear wheels. The Zytek had lovely lines here, for instance. Made the cars look more balanced too, IMO.

[JAG]

How many Group C cars had long tails, early Porsches and...............?

Theres no better or worse, just different.

Personally I've had enough of the current gen cars, anything new and interesting is good.