Does the ACO need a new philosophy for LMP2 and GTE?

[Pandamasque]

^ That looks pretty good.

One question though. I think it was Hindy who repeatedly mentioned that new GT3 rules are just around the corner, and that they should address some of the concerns that ACO have about using the current GT3 in the WEC. Also I've heard somewhere that BMW's forthcoming 4-wheeled monstrosity called M4 GT3 is being built to the those new regs. Is there any more info available on this?

Other than the M4 and the Glickenhaus 004 there haven't been any new GT3 cars out for quite some time, even though the two most established players Ferrari and Porsche are both running outdated models in GT3, which have been replaced in showrooms years ago. Simultaneously Maserati took a rain check.

PS: on Wednesday in an interview with MWM Toyota's TRD chief made some strong hints about a brand new GT3 Lexus coming, as in based on a completely different platform, perhaps LC500 or something yet to debut. It's unclear how soon though.

PPS: the class "ladder" has been broken for over a decade. Time to rename GT3 maybe? Especially now that GT2 is a class below it alongside GT4...

[DistortedSmile]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

Erm... no. A Valkyrie with its ridiculous aero and a huge power advantage would be waaaay faster than the current LMH. Even a road going car is said to be capable of beating LMP2 around a lap on street tires.

lmao you actually bought into Andy Palmer's crap? The same guy behind the garbage Nissan LMP1 program that was totally going to embarrass Audi, Porsche and Toyota? A few years ago they were also claiming the Valkyrie was going to be faster than an F1 car

[Napolis]

Originally Posted by DistortedSmile

lmao you actually bought into Andy Palmer's crap? The same guy behind the garbage Nissan LMP1 program that was totally going to embarrass Audi, Porsche and Toyota? A few years ago they were also claiming the Valkyrie was going to be faster than an F1 car

^ true

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

^ That looks pretty good.

One question though. I think it was Hindy who repeatedly mentioned that new GT3 rules are just around the corner, and that they should address some of the concerns that ACO have about using the current GT3 in the WEC. Also I've heard somewhere that BMW's forthcoming 4-wheeled monstrosity called M4 GT3 is being built to the those new regs. Is there any more info available on this?

Other than the M4 and the Glickenhaus 004 there haven't been any new GT3 cars out for quite some time, even though the two most established players Ferrari and Porsche are both running outdated models in GT3, which have been replaced in showrooms years ago. Simultaneously Maserati took a rain check.

PS: on Wednesday in an interview with MWM Toyota's TRD chief made some strong hints about a brand new GT3 Lexus coming, as in based on a completely different platform, perhaps LC500 or something yet to debut. It's unclear how soon though.

PPS: the class "ladder" has been broken for over a decade. Time to rename GT3 maybe? Especially now that GT2 is a class below it alongside GT4...

I hope its the rumored LC F in GT3 format. The RC F is on its way out imo. As far as new regs GT3's, only the M4 from an already established make so far. That will probably change very soon.

[Speed-King]

Porsche and Ferrari have also announced new cars for GT3 for 2023.

[merak1974]

Surely, Maserati will develop a racing version of the new MC20, no?

[Mike E]

Originally Posted by merak1974

Surely, Maserati will develop a racing version of the new MC20, no?

It has been mentioned a few times but whether it's a GT3 or one make racer is still unclear. One make series seems the obvious starting point to me.

[geeteeone]

The root cause of the current stratification problem between LMH and LMP2 can be traced back to the changes the ACO made at the end of 2016. They increased the power and aero in GTE to make them faster than GT3 cars. That in turn meant that LMP2 power was increased from around 450hp to 600hp so that they would still be able to pass GTEs on the straights and not have to dive-bomb them in the corners.

It wasn't a problem whilst we had LMP1s with 900kg weight and 700-1000 hp, but now that we've got the heaver LMH class there's not much headroom for LMP2 to be slowed down. Remove too much power and you have the problem again that they can't pass the GTEs.

I reckon the only option the ACO have is to get rid of the GTEs altogether and replace with something slower, which would then allow LMP2 power to be returned to pre-2017 levels. The question is, would current GT3 be that much slower than the current GTE machines anyway?

I have no idea how this will play out, but it really doesn't look good for the WEC to have the second string prototype class quicker than the hypercars.

[Sodemo]

Why should LMP2 and GTE have to change to accomodate LMH, a "brand new rules category"? The onus is on the rule makers to fit LMH into the performance ladder, not the other way round. LMH should (in my view) have 50BHP more and should shed as much weight as is realistic (50kg / 100kg) - take your pick. I imagine most LMH cars are ballasted up to the min weight anyway.

[J Jay]

I can only agree with that. The Glickenhaus interview during the N24 went into great detail about the weight issue, which makes sense given the lead-in times for core components like the tub, but the horsepower avenue was notable by its absence. Increasing the power would certainly be simpler (cheaper) and less obstructive than losing a significant amount of weight.

Let's not forget that if the LMP2s are slowed to be in line with the current pace of LMH then we're almost certainly going back to LMP2s dive-bombing GTEs on corner entry - not something we want to see again. It's another fine mess the ACO have got LMH (and LMP2) into.

[peetleouf]

Again, before the LMH/LMDh convergence, the engines had to have more power.


In my opinion, this is not only the fault of the ACO, but also of IMSA which wants a top category that does not cost a fortune, therefore not very advanced.

[greenmachinets040]

Originally Posted by DistortedSmile

lmao you actually bought into Andy Palmer's crap? The same guy behind the garbage Nissan LMP1 program that was totally going to embarrass Audi, Porsche and Toyota? A few years ago they were also claiming the Valkyrie was going to be faster than an F1 car

The whole world is laughing on Andy Palmer...poor guy, I still remember that press conference where he disgracefully talked about audi,porsche and toyota and how those three manufacturer s asses gonna be kicked by nissan LMP1

I have never seen a farce like that during my 25 years watching motorsport.

[GingerPixel]

I still have a soft spot for the Nissan. They tried something different, and when we look back on the history of motorsport its those cars that are remembered fondly. Never had the development it needed, but wasn't a 75% version (vs the 50% that raced) known to be a bit of a weapon?

It also sounded and looked (in my eyes) pretty cool and it shot flames into the drivers face which is undeniably awesome.

[hoffman66]

I too loved all the things Nissan did back then, I didn't care if they failed, marketing and PR people are the scum of the earth when it comes to racing so I ignore them routinely, but they are necessary for racing programs as they convince rich CEO's and directors how good it would be to go racing, but then they have to try and also sell it to the public who invariably dont believe a word of it and are not influenced in any way.

I loved the Nissan thing, other than the Gran Turismo stuff which ended up being a farce, the racing programme was fascinating, ground breaking and given time could have worked, but they just gave up which is the worst part.

[geeteeone]

I'm not convinced it ever would have worked to the level it needed to in order to beat Porsche, Audi and Toyota.

I can understand putting the engine in the front, as Panoz made that work well and it was practically mid-engined anyway. But putting 550hp from the ICE through the front wheels can't ever end well. Hello, torque steer! The whole drivetrain was basically backwards compared to conventional wisdom.

With the DeltaWing you could see what they were trying to achieve, but with the GTR-LM it just seemed to be different for the sake of being different.

[geeteeone]

Originally Posted by peetleouf

In my opinion, this is not only the fault of the ACO, but also of IMSA which wants a top category that does not cost a fortune, therefore not very advanced.

Absolutely. If the convergence wasn't a thing, and the LMH cars were running with the 800+ horsepower that they were originally intended to, we wouldn't be talking about stratification at all.

I'm not sure how I feel about LMH/LMDh convergence. IMSA certainly seem to be getting plenty of interest, but with stock tubs/components it's just another step in the NASCARification of sportscar racing.

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by geeteeone

I'm not sure how I feel about LMH/LMDh convergence. IMSA certainly seem to be getting plenty of interest, but with stock tubs/components it's just another step in the NASCARification of sportscar racing.

IMSA already has that as DPi, minus the "hybrid" stickers, and that's a hybrid with a small "h". If you look all across the racing world, you'll see that NASCARisation is winning everywhere. It's exactly what marketing people want. And if you have any doubt that marketing people are really in charge of most OEMs, just step outside and look at the cars on the street. They're designed by a focus groups. And, lately, it seems there's some inbreeding going on within said focus groups, but I digress.

I remember being really irked by the Nissan PR push at the time during the drawn out launch of GT-R LM. I generally don't like when people clearly overpromise, especially if they then underdeliver. But at the same time I'm sad that such an interesting, not attractive, but truly interesting car failed so miserably and the plug was pulled before it reached anywhere near it's potential. We'll never know whether it could have competed with conventional LMP1s.

And the reason I brought that up is that every adventurous project like this becomes a cautionary tale for OEMs. When was the last time something like that worked out well? Audi R10?
Meanwhile a DPi/LMDh is practically guaranteed success for very little development money. And who cares if that success wasn't as well-earned as the PR people would have you believe.