Lites / LMP3

[Deleted]

"One of the most successful car launches ever" was the motto used by Radio Le Mans staff this spring as Ginetta sold zillion chassis when no-one else had anything to offer.

It looks like we'll gonna have to modify that as "one of the most successful car launches ever before it all went to crapper"

[bella]

in a market of one, who's to say what is and isn't crap though?

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by bella

in a market of one, who's to say what is and isn't crap though?

That works in terms of speed, but basic build quality is universal.

[joeb]

Doesn't LMP3 mandate a number of shared parts between the different manufacturers? or is the engine the only common piece?

[FormulaFox]

An old adage has just come to mind regarding this whole thing:

"Being the first usually means being the worst."

[Hawkwood]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

That works in terms of speed, but basic build quality is universal.

Not necessarily. These cars are built pretty much cheap as can be. This must impinge on build quality.
This only becomes an issue for Ginetta after the Ligier and Adess arrive with better build quality and speed.
If the quality is the same, then Ginetta have no issues.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by joeb

Doesn't LMP3 mandate a number of shared parts between the different manufacturers? or is the engine the only common piece?

I believe only the engine and safety cell -the two most expensive components- are spec.

[mariantic]

Originally Posted by joeb

Doesn't LMP3 mandate a number of shared parts between the different manufacturers? or is the engine the only common piece?

See the listing of common and "free" parts in the following page:-

http://www.mariantic.co.uk/lmp3/What.asp

This is from a fairly old ACO press release and some has been superseded.

The LMP3 website BTW I gave up on as it was getting no interest. May try again...

Mariantic

[joeb]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

I believe only the engine and safety cell -the two most expensive components- are spec.

Originally Posted by mariantic

See the listing of common and "free" parts in the following page:-

http://www.mariantic.co.uk/lmp3/What.asp

This is from a fairly old ACO press release and some has been superseded.

The LMP3 website BTW I gave up on as it was getting no interest. May try again...

Mariantic

Thanks gents

[BTCC 318d]

I had noticed that the Ginetta LMP3 has the same tendancy to fall apart that we've all seen in Juniors and G55/G60.
Surely it's nit _that_ hards to make them a little less flimsy?

[Juntos]

That is branding boys! Ginetta kept it up with their recent past. Sorry, Lawrence. Your new beau may have the right to remain silent. But you just became the talk of the town.

[Mike E]

RLR to run Gineatta and Ligier LMP3s in 2016 ELMS.

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2015/0...lms-plans.html

[pablocomics]

The Adess is alive. Taken from G-Private Racing's facebook https://www.facebook.com/GPrivateRacing

[joeb]

THat is pretty nice, it almost appears that you could fit 2 seats in there!

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by joeb

THat is pretty nice, it almost appears that you could fit 2 seats in there!

I can't find it right now, but there's a picture of the safety cell from the launch presser where two people were sitting in it. It was a tight squeeze, but they fit well enough you could drive down the street.

I've always liked the larger cockpits on the LMP3 - I with the P1s and P2s were require to have cockpits wide enough to actually fit two people. Keep the driver too close to the center to make fitting a second person possible on safety grounds if you want, but at least require there to be enough total space inside!

[Coach Ep]

For what purpose?

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

For what purpose?

Other than selling the fact that these are supposedly "two seat" sportscars?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Coach Ep

For what purpose?

I don't know if the LMP3 rules are rooted in the concept of two seats in a prototype or not (which IMHO is silly these days). But I can envision track day versions (that use the same safety cell) being more attractive if you have room for two seats even if it is a tight fit. You (1) might want room for a driving coach/instructor and (2) want to give friends a ride.

Richard

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I don't know if the LMP3 rules are rooted in the concept of two seats in a prototype or not (which IMHO is silly these days). But I can envision track day versions (that use the same safety cell) being more attractive if you have room for two seats even if it is a tight fit. You (1) might want room for a driving coach/instructor and (2) want to give friends a ride.

Richard

I have a differing viewpoint on that. Specifically, the idea of the prototype having "two" seats being, as you put it, "silly."

Buckle up, this is gonna take a bit.

To illustrate things clearly, let's go to an alternate universe where humanity's knowledge of aerodynamics was at about 1960s level when motorsport first started. Aerodynamics in racing was only just starting to become a big deal in the 60s, but one base concept was well know by then: Exposed wheels are the worst thing one can do for a car's aero. So then we go to this other world where this was known when, for instance, the first Indianapolis 500 was run.

The wheels were exposed back then to save weight, but you can bet your @$$ that if engineers knew the aerodynamic effect that would have back then there'd have been a lot of cars opting for aero over the the weight saving.

As time goes on in this alternate world and grand prix and indy type racing split off from sportscar racing, both would ultimately end up remaining full-bodied due to aero. So do you keep the two clearly differentiated? The only two ways would be the length of the races and number of seats the car has, because they'll be otherwise identical aerodynamically. Your IndyCars would resemble the Stohr WF1 while your sportscars would resemble what we have today, but with(hopefully) wider cockpits denoting the concept of two seats. The actual number of seats in the car would be irrelevant, it's purely a stylistic detail to differentiate one sport from another.

In this world, we'd likely be arguing about open vs closed cockpits as a point of differentiation between single seaters and sportscars.

But now let's jump back to our reality where aero wasn't understood and formula cars had established the idea of being open wheel firmly in place before we started figuring it out. Even in our world, it's a differentiating detail that is becoming all the more important. As efficiency becomes more important in racing -a trend that is going to have to happen eventually no matter what kind of pushback occurs- our formula cars are eventually going to have to give up their exposed wheels completely, or die out.

And when that time comes, this "silly" detail of how many seats the car has(or more accurately, could fit inside) will become the most obvious clue for the casual fan to know what he's watching.

And that's to say nothing of sportscar racing's (usually)stronger connection to roadcars - you could come up with a million other reasons to support two-seat cockpit sizes stemming from THAT detail...

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

I have a differing viewpoint on that. Specifically, the idea of the prototype having "two" seats being, as you put it, "silly."

Buckle up, this is gonna take a bit.

So the word "silly" wasn't meant to offend, but I still stand by it. I know everyone doesn't agree on this topic. I am not a historian so I may get some details wrong, but to expand on my thoughts...

I think the Porsche 904 was the last car Porsche raced at a top level at LeMans that was also completely street legal. When they (sports car racing community) started to go down the path of homologation specials, it created a new class that we now call "prototypes" which where supposed to have strong road relevance even if they were not build in series production. So things like space for two seats, spare wheel and luggage plus a covered body was the required details that was baked into the rules as a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge... these are really road cars" mentality.

That was roughly 50 years ago now. Today there is little expectation (closed body?) that these cars have anything to do with road cars other than various technical details (such as a manufacture may like the WEC hybrid rules as they feel it can help them sell hybrid road cars). They may even try to incorporate traditional corporate styling cues or national colors into the cars. But IMHO, the days of carrying spare tires, luggage and two seats is long, long gone and dead. And while casual views might wonder "Can two people fit inside that thing?" when they see a prototype for the first time, it is likely more of natural curiosity of the size and less about "Wow that is just like my car at home!"

As to differentiation between what we call sports and prototype racing and other series such as F1 or Indycar... Generally speaking there will always be a large split for series produced cars (our GT racing) and everything else. Then we have to look at the collection of bespoke closed body and open body cars. There may always be some level of convergence with these. Such as the current DW12 Indycar having a more than traditional amount of bodywork around the wheels for a reason that closed body cars have always enjoyed (hard to interlock wheels).

Then you have our top level WEC "prototype" (use quotes because today the name "prototype" is all we have, but it really is a poor one as they are no longer prototypes of anything when using the classic definition) and something like F1. So prototypes are moving/have moved to closed cockpit for safety purposes and I would be surprised if F1 doesn't do the same sometime within the next decade. Internally the cars are very similar. Be it suspension, transmissions, power units, brakes, etc. The main physical difference is closed and open body. But there is more than physical differences. There is series structure differences. Generally speaking (and this is a dangerous generalization)... the closed body "sports cars" will participate in longer races (endurance) while the open body are more sprint. Toss in multi class racing and driver changes in the top level of sports car racing as another large differentiator.

Now this is the LMP3 thread which talks to a lower level of prototype car. And in many lower level and amateur series, for many reasons (scheduling for race weekends to fit many classes, no need to refuel, etc.), most races are of the sprint variety regardless of car type. So there will always be plenty examples of sprint races for closed body cars. But I don't think it breaks my broad generalization as I am focused more on top level racing.

After typing all of this out, maybe I could sum this up to that IMHO, I think that series and car differentiation should be along natural lines vs. artificial ones. So multi-class racing vs. single class. Sprint vs. Endurance, and you can even throw in some natural physical differences (even if some of these are ultimately artificial via rule based restrictions) such as closed vs. open body (those will continue to converge somewhat over time).

The artificial stuff is things like space for two seats (but we really only put one in}, or to carry around a spare tire (that is never used) or space for luggage (that is empty and is token in size) If we want to go down that path, put in four seats, sat nav, etc.

Richard

[joeb]

Mariantic has a pic of the first US based Ginetta LMP3, and I gotta say whoever came up with the livery did a great job.

http://www.mariantic.co.uk/lmp/p3.asp

[Accident]

As little as this spec engine and pro/am lineups formula excites me, these are pretty great looking little cars.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by joeb

Mariantic has a pic of the first US based Ginetta LMP3, and I gotta say whoever came up with the livery did a great job.

http://www.mariantic.co.uk/lmp/p3.asp

Dangit, didn't see the word "Ginetta" in the title and thought we finally had a shot of the Riley. :P

[Mike E]

IMHO the two seats thing is 'relevant' because of tradition. Endurance racers/sportscars are descended from road going two seaters (grand tourers, no less) and they continue to pay some respect to that history by retaining an offset driving position.
Just like single seaters continue to run with open wheels, which makes no sense from an aeordynamic or safety point of view.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Mike E

IMHO the two seats thing is 'relevant' because of tradition. Endurance racers/sportscars are descended from road going two seaters (grand tourers, no less) and they continue to pay some respect to that history by retaining an offset driving position.
Just like single seaters continue to run with open wheels, which makes no sense from an aeordynamic or safety point of view.

I agree with this. We're the first people to bang on about tradition regarding Sebring and Road Atlanta, and even 1000km v 6 hour events. Sportscars should remain 2 seater offset vehicles for the same reason single seaters should have a centre seat, open wheels and no roof. Tradition.

Anyway, if we took it to the extreme and said aerodynamics rules all then eventually every car would be the same. F1 cars would have closed wheels and roofs, whilst LMPs would move to a centre seat and we'd all have the same with some stretched bits.