2004 Regulations just released

[paul-collins]

Originally posted by SALEEN S7R
Yes but Paul, LMP900 and LMP675 cars will have 80 litre fuel tanks. GTS cars will have 100 litres,

I explicitly took that into account. 3 laps difference. That's what the extra pitstops / fewer pitstops mean.

Originally posted by SALEEN S7R
also worth remembering is the rear wings as u have mentioned. Remember in 2004 GTS cars have 2002 spec restrictors too, LMP 900/675 cars have this years restrictors.

No they're not. You're thinking about LMPs. GT and GTS never had reduction in restrictors IIRC; even if they had, the restrictors are exactly the same between 2003 and 2004.

http://www.lemans.org/sport/ressourc...ts_2004_gb.pdf

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/ACOrg...003annexea.pdf

Originally posted by SALEEN S7R
Oh and by the way if I remember rightly the Prodrive crew sat the car in the garage for 40 minutes cleaning it before the end of the race, so u can take off some of the time it was in the pits overall.

I don't think 40 minutes. You must be thinking of Corvette 2001.

They spent a total of 65 minutes in the pits - are you suggesting they're capable of doing the 24 hours on 25 minutes in the pits? Bentley #7 had absolutely nothing go wrong, and they spent over 30...

Even so, if you allow 20 minutes in the pits for grooming, that's 6 laps at the most. They had 24 to make up to Panoz, and another 12 to the Champion Audi.

[SALEEN S7R]

Paul, with regards to the Restrictors, the GTS cars and GT cars DID run with a 10% power reduction this year over 2002. (All classess did) I remember a Interview with Jamie Davies in the race and he was saying that the Ferrari 550 was around 10kmh slower than in 2002. Now its my understanding that for LM GTS and LM GT the restrictor sizes for 2004 are the same as in 2002, at least thats what we were told would happen when the 2003 restrictors came into place, not the same situation for the LMP cars though.

[Fab]

Seeing the LMP1 field (at least 3 Audis, two strong Domes, two Pesca, at least one Courage C60, and now two fast Listers) it will be tough for GTS to fight for more than the fast LMP2/LMP675 : those ones are less reliable, and use to spent a lot of time in their pits.

But the "big ones" are, for now, too fast, too reliable, t far beyond.

If the weather is really bad, and if we have a lot of dramas, we could have the best GTS around 5th overall at the end (2001's race)... if, if, if...

[paul-collins]

Well, look at my links. The restrictor sizes for 2003 and 2004 are the same. For what it's worth.

[SALEEN S7R]

If thats the case Im dissapointed. That wasnt what was going to happen orignally, and would have made the GTS cars a lot faster than what they were this year. I know that the restrictors changed this year from 2002 for LM and ALMS and FIA SCC, but they didnt for FIA GT as the restrictors were supposed to change back to 2002 spec for 2004 anyway. Shame.

[JAG]

The GTS cars already have plenty of power, what they need are better chassis, which the Zonda, Masarati etc. have.

Engine power will always go up with development.

[Fab]

We always have power in mind, but we use to forget the weight : you can't imagine, if you didn't see it in flesh on the track, how faster are the prototypes in the curves ; the Courage Evo pilots said that they had difficulties to take over the Maranellos in the Hunaudières, but there was no problem on one lap, the Courage was much faster... weight and chassis, that's the difference !

[Fab]

I can't resist to post this gossip (on Jérôme Mugnier's site), even if it's founded on "sand" : due to the 2004 specs, and advantages for GTS, a german factory could be back faster than previously planned... WHAT ???

[paul-collins]

Oh oh oh Car oh er oh ra...

[paul-collins]

Having read Jérôme's post, I'd have to say it's his own speculation.

[JAG]

Am i right in thinking that 2003 spec cars will compete in exactly the same spec as in 2003 apart from a slightly smaller rear wing.

If so this indicates that the 2004 spec cars will be quicker than anticipated and the regulations have been designed to make the cars 'safer' rather than just slower, which is not nessecarilly safer.

[paul-collins]

Also the smaller fuel tank.

[MulsanneMike]

The rear wing changes on a car such as the Audi will be...interesting. Not sure how they will make out considering the deep endplates. This will completely change the rear aero. architecture. On a car like the Audi they will then have to move the endplates 10 cm inboard and that would necessitate a redesign of the rear bodywork in some form in order to mount them properly. Or they simply remove the deep endplates (and put the postage stamp-sized ones back on) and decrease the wing width to the 180 cm.

[RacingManiac]

I think Audi's problem would be small compared to Pescarolo's car(if they are running it that is). The car's rear bodywork have been modified so much that the engine cover, and the 2 endplate equipped fenders are seperate pieces(http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/pic.m...um=12&num=1795)...

Maybe they'll just run the original spec bodywork for the C60 Evo....

[Fab]

Originally posted by paul-collins
Having read Jérôme's post, I'd have to say it's his own speculation.

Come on Paul, let us dream !

[Fab]

Originally posted by MulsanneMike
The rear wing changes on a car such as the Audi will be...interesting. Not sure how they will make out considering the deep endplates. This will completely change the rear aero. architecture. On a car like the Audi they will then have to move the endplates 10 cm inboard and that would necessitate a redesign of the rear bodywork in some form in order to mount them properly. Or they simply remove the deep endplates (and put the postage stamp-sized ones back on) and decrease the wing width to the 180 cm.

Is it a way to closer performances at the top of the grid, between favourites and outsiders ? I was thinking about the RFH Dome...

[The Badger]

The Lister should be interesting to see how they get around this !!!

[paul-collins]

I'm hearing some discontent is out there amongst teams who were promised that they'd be able to run in 2004 in '03 spec.

[Fab]

Another comment from David Legangneux on Jérôme Mugnier's site : he spoted that the ACO rules are mentionning "restriction of performances for cars build before 2004" ; ACO will do their best to decrease the performances of the 2003' specs cars, to encourage teams to run 2004' specs cars, and that 'till the end of 2005, when the 2003 cars should definitively disparear.

They clearly push teams to abandon as fats as possible the LMP900/LMP675, possibily giving them balast to 950kg for the first ones...

[gsmith2424]

Originally posted by paul-collins
I'm hearing some discontent is out there amongst teams who were promised that they'd be able to run in 2004 in '03 spec.

I think the big team must be Dyson. I think he bought the MG's thinking that the rules would stay the same from 03 and transfer to 04 and 05.

[Tim Northcutt]

Originally posted by MulsanneMike
The rear wing changes on a car such as the Audi will be...interesting. Not sure how they will make out considering the deep endplates. This will completely change the rear aero. architecture. On a car like the Audi they will then have to move the endplates 10 cm inboard and that would necessitate a redesign of the rear bodywork in some form in order to mount them properly. Or they simply remove the deep endplates (and put the postage stamp-sized ones back on) and decrease the wing width to the 180 cm.

I've spent a lot of time looking at the endplate images on Mike's site for the following:

Audi
Dome
Courage C60 Evo (pescarolo)
Lister
R&S MkIIIC

I agree that the changes will be "interesting, not only for Audi, but also for Pescarolo and the Domes, because they use the same format to attach them as "extended Bodywork" via planes that protrude from the bottom areas of the rear fenders...

I believe that the key will be exactly where that 10 cm. distance will bring the endplates in relation to the rear fender areas of these cars....because that is exactly where or how they may have to mount them to get them to work....

Without knowing the exact width of those places where the upright "endplate extensions" are mounted, it seems that simply moving them in along that bottom-mounted location will not be viable, because it will bring them way too close to the side of the rear fenders and they will interfere with the air flow there

Maybe all three will need to look at how R&S has mounted theirs and take a similar approach....especially Pescarolo....it may not be that simple for Audi and Dome...

The changes R&S would have to make seem to be moving them in along the horizontal plane of the top of the rear fender line while ensuring that these portions do not interfete with airflow around the fender sides themselves (how close they would be to the inner or outer edges), plus the portions that extend back under the wing also line up with the air flow from the rear diffusers

They also might have to change their tail lights so that this new postion doesn't interfere with seeing them....

For Lister the question seems to me to be whether they change the "extended Bodywork" that directly attaches to the top of the fender from the agled one to a vertical one, and move the angled piece higher up on the "extended bodywork", as opposed to having that angled part at the bottom where it attaches to the fender now...

Merely shortening that current angled piece to meet the new wing width might cause air turbulence on that vertical "extended bodywork" in relation to the fender itself......


Regardless, it will dramatically affect the rear aero on all of these cars and the sunsequent architecture of the rear portion of the car....

[Dani Filth]

Originally posted by RacingManiac
For LMP1 only, 4 liter gas turbo, 6 liter gas N/A , and 5.5 liter diesel....

5.5 .. N/A Diesel .. or turbo Diesel .. if it Turbo .. then .. i think it's the way to go ...
i think that the FIA formula for echivalent(sp?) .. is N/A petrol=1.5 Turbo Diesel=1.7 Turbo petrol so

will the Turbo Diesel engines have the same restrictors as Turbo petrol?????

[Tim Northcutt]

They are turbo or supercharged diesels...

The restrictor charts are in an appendix at the end of the 2004 regs...

They are on many sites....Mulsanne Mike's site breaks them out into the New Chassis regs and the "grandfathered" chasis regs....makes it easier to weed through it..

[Tim Northcutt]

The restrictors for diesels vary depending on the number of restrictors utilized....

But overall, I belive that the Diesels have larger openings than the gasoline turbos on their restrictors...

[JAG]

Are the team who have bought 'new' LMPs such as Creation and Rollcentre going to convert there cars to Hybrids in time for the 2005 season. If not the cars will be uncompetitive with the extra weight and restrictor penalties that will be applied from 2005.

Nasamax are converitng there old Reynard so it must be relatively easy to build a Hybrid LMP?