AF Corse in 2007

[The Real DMN]

Put it this way 360, if I owned BMS, seeing Prodrive and privateer Astons do a lot better than my own, would really **** me off. It would also make me doubt if I wanted to stay with Aston for another season......

[F360]

Getting back on topic......my best estimates are that AF Corse will run in the ALMS next year with a 2 car team. They'll leave the FIA series to Ecosse, JMB, Edil Cris etc...
They may keep a single car entry in FIA, they do have 3 chassis'....

[cmk]

The 'bits' that BMS need off the Phoenix car are the Michelin tires. Too bad for them that Pirelli is paying the bills in the "works" capacity, since you can be darn sure FoMoCo isn't coughing up the cash.

Look at the relative performance of the BMS 'works' car on Pirellis at Le Mans compared to the two AMR cars. Pescatori, Gollin and Babini was a great lineup, but still adrift on pace. Also look at the experience Race Alliance had on Dunlops. If you want to Aston, you also want to Michelin. I'm sure Cirtek/Team Modena would also agree. AMR at Le Mans certainly did.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by F360

Getting back on topic......my best estimates are that AF Corse will run in the ALMS next year with a 2 car team. They'll leave the FIA series to Ecosse, JMB, Edil Cris etc...
They may keep a single car entry in FIA, they do have 3 chassis'....

Is there anything behind your estimate? Have they hinted at this? Apparently Ecosse is looking at the ALMS, if they can find funding.

AF Corse, Scuderia and Risi, vs. the Porsche's and all the other GT2's would be pretty significant.

[Mal]

Originally Posted by SALEEN S7R

Why woudnt any sportscar team race at Le Mans? Its a sponsors dream! Anyone with half a brain can work out the potential financial benefits of racing at Le Mans,

Havent you killed your own argument with this statement - the reason it is a sponsors dream and has huge financial significance is that it means more to those that compete, those that pay the bills and those that watch

[TheNewBob]

Hmmm don't get much chance to post here at the min! But my thoughts anyway...

BMS, by the looks of things, are having a pretty bad season. They've not been competitve all that often. So to repeat that they're a real factory team isn't really giving either AM nor BMS much credit (and to put credit where it's due, I'm sure both parties put immense amounts of effort in). It doesn't do FIA GT that much credit either in this argument (and this argument alone), since the supposed high quality factory Aston team hasn't won anywhere, whilst probably-cash-strapped privateers have taken the chequered flag in both FIA and LMS races.

I do agree that FIA GT probably has the highest quality GT1 field altogether, though, not least because it has the largest GT1 field. However, I'd say ALMS has the highest quality when it comes to GT2. Comparing Porsche teams against each other, and doing the same for Panoz and Ferrari teams, you'd have to present a very watertight argument to persuade me into believing FIA GT has the higher quality entries.

[F360]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Is there anything behind your estimate? Have they hinted at this? Apparently Ecosse is looking at the ALMS, if they can find funding.

AF Corse, Scuderia and Risi, vs. the Porsche's and all the other GT2's would be pretty significant.

Nothing concrete behind my statement, just a gut feel I'm afraid. Its based on the U.S. being Ferrari's biggest market and the benefit of potentially winning in the ALMS would be much greater to Ferrari. Plus AF Corse have previous experience running the MC12 and what with Risi not running the same driver line-ups, this has hurt their title bid in all but the teams championship. Risi regulars Salo and Melo have a good knowledge of a fair chunk of the ALMS circuits from this season and of course they are AF Corse drivers this year.
I guess you could say that I have everything crossed that it happens - as you say Risi, Ecosse and AF against the new Porsche's, the Panoz and with luck the Spykers would make it the most diverse (and probably strongest) GT2 field anywhere.

[AU N EGL]

Risi is running two F430s in GT2. Why would they change to the AF Course ?

[F360]

They wouldn't change....AF Corse would be in addition to Risi.

[cmk]

Originally Posted by F360

They wouldn't change....AF Corse would be in addition to Risi.

I don't know how much support beyond drivers Risi has been getting from Ferrari this year. Do you? I only ask because it seems as though the Factory wouldn't fully back both teams. Assuming that is that AF Corse wouldn't be drawing their support from only Pirelli and taking drivers with Pirelli connections...would Risi not then be in a sponsorship lurch?

I know I'm kind of precluding Risi finding their own sponsors, but other than the Forza II branding and LP Italy on the side of 62, and the temporary AMD branding on 61, the only sponsorship on the Risi cars this year has been from dealers (Houston, Silicon Valley, Toronto/Ferri).

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by cmk

the only sponsorship on the Risi cars this year has been from dealers (Houston, Silicon Valley, Toronto/Ferri).

The Dealers are the entrants and car owners.

[old man]

Originally Posted by cmk

The 'bits' that BMS need off the Phoenix car are the Michelin tires. Too bad for them that Pirelli is paying the bills in the "works" capacity, since you can be darn sure FoMoCo isn't coughing up the cash.

Look at the relative performance of the BMS 'works' car on Pirellis at Le Mans compared to the two AMR cars. Pescatori, Gollin and Babini was a great lineup, but still adrift on pace. Also look at the experience Race Alliance had on Dunlops. If you want to Aston, you also want to Michelin. I'm sure Cirtek/Team Modena would also agree. AMR at Le Mans certainly did.

Absolutely right, Michelin are worth at least a second per lap, in GT2 compare the lap times of Collard last year with GruppeM and this year when they run at the same circuits.

[Schumi19]

Will AF Corse be always sponsored by PlayStation? Will Risi be always sponsored by Xbox?

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Schumi19

Will AF Corse be always sponsored by PlayStation? Will Risi be always sponsored by Xbox?

Their sponsorship contracts would be of a fixed time nature, so the answer would be no. They might be signed for 2007, but the details of these contracts are not public.

PlayStation North America isn't progressive enough to recognize racing as a reasonable method to advertise.

[Schumi19]

Ah? Thus would PlayStation leave AF Corse at the end of the year? And Xbox with Risi? At the end of the year too?

[old man]

Intersting discussion between Folgelhund and Schumi but surely the fact that AF Corse is factory backed and all the rest are not will help them get the sponsors and Ferrari provided (and mostly paid) the drivers just as Porsche have done for years. What they do in 2007 will depend who finishes up running the new Porsche because Ferrari will not want to see Porsche return to doninate again.

The Ferrari works deal will not go outside Italy but the Porsche deal could go anywhere there is a team with enough money to run it. I expect a good battle next year between two top teams, one for each make, three if Panoz can see advantage outside Le Mans (doubtful) but will that bring in other teams when they may decide that they are only picking up the crumbs.

[cmk]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

The Dealers are the entrants and car owners.

I'm well-aware of this. The point being, they are making an investment in return for exposure, which is essentially what sponsorship is.

[marcush.]

Originally Posted by old man

Absolutely right, Michelin are worth at least a second per lap, in GT2 compare the lap times of Collard last year with GruppeM and this year when they run at the same circuits.

I certainly agree that if you run the car with the Michelin Setups on dunlops or pirellis you will be lucky to loose only one second per lap.
Why so called Professional Teams foolish enough to think they could stick on some rubber and be competitive is beyond me. Of course those teams would never ever get the most out of the Michelins if they had them.It´s more than
tyre pressures that makes a tyre work or not.

[cmk]

Originally Posted by marcush.

I certainly agree that if you run the car with the Michelin Setups on dunlops or pirellis you will be lucky to loose only one second per lap.
Why so called Professional Teams foolish enough to think they could stick on some rubber and be competitive is beyond me. Of course those teams would never ever get the most out of the Michelins if they had them.It´s more than
tyre pressures that makes a tyre work or not.

Are you seriously suggesting that (to take old man's example) Ebimotors are not capable of setting up a car for Pirelli tyres, despite being a factory-backed Porsche team? I'm sorry, but I don't buy that for a second.

[old man]

Quite right CMK, Ebimotors and Collard are far too professional to try to run a car on the same settings even with different compounds and/or constructions. To suggest this for any of the teams in GT2 is ridiculous, the fact is that the Michelin tyre used by Scuderia Ecosse was far better than the Pirelli supplied to the other Ferrari teams. Look at Mika Salo's reaction to the American Michelin after he used it at Laguna.

[marcush.]

Look ,those cars were developed for a special tyre and of course all development was focused on optimising the car for the tyre .If you put something different on the rims you are going to get the whole process starting from new.If you are lucky ,the Tyre manufacturer has picked you as a development partner ,this way you are working the problem from two directions,see Formula 1.But this only works when you actually know what the tyre really needs on your particular car.And again it´s more than pressures ,springs etc....You really need to know what the tyres need to perform and maybe this is impossible with the range of adjustability your car has in terms of rollcentres,ackerman,cambergains etc..so the tyre is easy to blame ,but look at some very striking examples of teams converting from known second best tyres to the so called good ones and still not performing .
It´s as complicated as it gets,and even the best loose a second per lap overnight with falling or raising temps in F1 ,so why should it be different in GTs? and those have done more testing than the average GT Team has competition miles per year...So I only said that it is not the tyre that is at fault ,it is the lack of development to make the combo work.

[old man]

Originally Posted by marcush.

Look ,those cars were developed for a special tyre and of course all development was focused on optimising the car for the tyre .If you put something different on the rims you are going to get the whole process starting from new.If you are lucky ,the Tyre manufacturer has picked you as a development partner ,this way you are working the problem from two directions,see Formula 1.But this only works when you actually know what the tyre really needs on your particular car.And again it´s more than pressures ,springs etc....You really need to know what the tyres need to perform and maybe this is impossible with the range of adjustability your car has in terms of rollcentres,ackerman,cambergains etc..so the tyre is easy to blame ,but look at some very striking examples of teams converting from known second best tyres to the so called good ones and still not performing .
It´s as complicated as it gets,and even the best loose a second per lap overnight with falling or raising temps in F1 ,so why should it be different in GTs? and those have done more testing than the average GT Team has competition miles per year...So I only said that it is not the tyre that is at fault ,it is the lack of development to make the combo work.

Everything you say is quite true but the Michelin would be the tyre of choice for most teams, certainly in GT2. The Ebimotors cars were not as quick as the GruppeM cars anywhere they could be measured and Collard reckoned up to 1.5 seconds. OK the Porsche was perhaps developed using Michelin and so Ebimotors perhaps could not get it to work as well on Pirelli but they are no fools and had Porsche engineers in the pit. Similarly the Ferrari was developed using Pirelli and the "works" cars used them but never got pole and I don't think ever got fastest lap. Had accidents not intervened AF corse would not have won the series, Scuderia Ecosse would and if I were a team manager next year I would run Michelins by choice.

In GT1 the Austrian car switched to Michelin with great effect and that car was developed on Pirelli so far as I know. I don't think comparisons between F1 and GTs is possible, GT cars do not have the range of variation, but the engineering skills are not lacking in my opinion and the teams certianly not thick, underfunded yes, thick no

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by marcush.

I certainly agree that if you run the car with the Michelin Setups on dunlops or pirellis you will be lucky to loose only one second per lap.
Why so called Professional Teams foolish enough to think they could stick on some rubber and be competitive is beyond me. Of course those teams would never ever get the most out of the Michelins if they had them.It´s more than
tyre pressures that makes a tyre work or not.

Because it has been done in the past, including by team Penske when their contracted rubber sucked, Donahue stuck some tires on the car that caused other teams to ridicule him, until he drove away from them and won the race.

Automobile racing is based to two major principles: science and educated guesses.
Bob

[The Badger]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

Because it has been done in the past, including by team Penske when their contracted rubber sucked, Donahue stuck some tires on the car that caused other teams to ridicule him, until he drove away from them and won the race.

Automobile racing is based to two major principles: science and educated guesses.
Bob

And luck

[cmk]

True that the development tyre for the 996 GT3-RSR was Michelin, marcush. Porsche is very closely allied with Michelin through Supercup and Carrera Cups too. Certainly there was some tweaking in the suspension design and setup for Michelin tyres, but of course those too doubtless developed a lot over the years that the RSR ran (and the R and RS before that) so the cars would have evolved to deal with that too.

That being said, factory-supported Porsches have run on Pirellis for 2 years now (Autorlando Sport in LMS 2005/06 and Ebimotors FIA 06) so they must have been doing some simple development work. In addition, factory-supported Porsches ran on Dunlops in 2004 (Freisinger, LMES). The Scuderia Ecosse vs. AF Corse argument also supports Pirelli being slower in general, even when it's the development tyre. Prodrive 550s have certainly been slower on Pirelli than Michelin, even when still supported by CARE Racing.

old man, it's only fair to point out to you that the DBR9 was developed on/for Michelins, in 2005. The Pirelli deal with the works teams only arose in 2006, and of course not at Le Mans because of the fact that they weren't as good a tyre. This may have some effect on the superiority of the Phoenix and late-season Race Alliance pace, but I believe that the Dunlops and Pirellis are also just plain slower.