Vitaphone invitation, should the Mazza be at LM?

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by chewymonster

...the Maserati MC12 was clearly made for racing first and the production ones are for homologation requirement only, basically.

Brilliant

40-40 now. Crikey!

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

Brilliant

40-40 now. Crikey!

40-42 now....We (the no voters) are going to win...

[Ebi]

Originally Posted by chewymonster

the Maserati MC12 was clearly made for racing first and the production ones are for homologation requirement only, basically.

if thats the case then why it has a Targa Roof?

[nkh]

Originally Posted by chewymonster

I will just say that the production Maserati MC 12 is 202.5 inches long, or about the same lenght as the Audi A8, Mercedes S class and the BMW 7 series (large sedans) its cousin the Ferrari Enzo is 185.1 inches long. The Saleen is 188 inches long (production version). I think you see where I am going, the Maserati MC12 was clearly made for racing first and the production ones are for homologation requirement only, basically.

If that's a problem then the homologation requirements should be changed. It's a homologation-special Ferrari Enzo, just like the BMW 320si is a homologation-special BMW 3-series.

It's fine that it doesn't race because it doesn't comply to the technical regulations, but it can't and shouldn't have to comply to some personal 'spirit of the class' opinion.


However, considering how it's possible to run quite diffirent cars with very diffirent engines in the same classes at Le Mans, it should be possible to find a suitable penalty for running a car that's 15 mm too wide in either side. Give them a smaller wing or make them run a plate on the top of the rear bodywork that spoils the advantage of having a wider car. The MC12 probably wouldn't win it's class with such restraints (ACO and the other teams are happy), but it would give Vitaphone quite a bit attention just for being at Le Mans (they're happy), and the fans would get something 'new' to look at (we're happy)...

[Hugewally]

Originally Posted by nkh

However, considering how it's possible to run quite diffirent cars with very diffirent engines in the same classes at Le Mans, it should be possible to find a suitable penalty for running a car that's 15 mm too wide in either side. Give them a smaller wing or make them run a plate on the top of the rear bodywork that spoils the advantage of having a wider car.

Now stop that this minute! We'll have now of this talk of common sense here as we're talking about the ACO...

[duke_toaster]

It's amazing when there are so many different engines, induction types and fuels but some people have an issue with a car that's a little bit on the large side. Just give them a 0.4mm smaller hole in their air restrictor or something.

[Nordic]

It has been fun seeing the apologists for Maserati state the case against the big bad ACO for wanting to set some regs the majority of team have no problem conforming to. After all its just a little bit outside them, ******** it is. In an age where mm's and grams are measured in terms of time over a lap to say it would be lst a case of a little bit of weight or a bit less power are crazy. I want to go to see cars race on an equal footing, by teams who care.

I think you guys have some rose tinted specs as far as a car that has many promises made about it. Maserati Corsa said they would make an ACO spec car, I am still waiting. In the time they have fannyed about Corvette have made a new car, aston have moved on as have saleen with revised cars. Maserati have had ample chance to come up with a revison but have instead chosen to sit on the sidelines.

Its up to them to make a legal car. not the ACO or anyone else to move the goal posts to allow them in.

This would render many $$$ spent by GM, Prodrive etc worthless and they would have to think very carefully about weather there next designs should be 'just a little to big' or a bit outside the rules in some otherway.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Nordic

I want to go to see cars race on an equal footing, by teams who care.

I think you over-state the case for some of those with legal cars! I feel it is just a question of where you draw the line.

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

...Just give them a 0.4mm smaller hole in their air restrictor or something.

I find this point interesting. Sportscar racing seems to have gone down the route of equalising the cars rather than having an equal footing. Why not apply that to the Mazza as well as the Corvette, and Aston, etc...

[old man]

I am with Nordic but feel that the same should apply to others, as we have learned on another thread the Corvette is said to use unavailable parts in the engine, I think even the cylinder block and if that is the case then the car is not legal so far as I can see.

Performance balancing never works, lawyers get involved, bad for the sport and spectators. You lay down a set of rules and stick to them, if nobody enters you have a duff set of rules on your hands but it is not beyond the wit of man to consult first and then write rules that most will work to. Engineers will always try to be a bit too clever and you just need to ensure that the engineers who check the cars are as bright as the ones who design them.

[Dani Filth]

42-42 .. i think we can call this even

[SALEEN S7R]

Originally Posted by FIRE

40-42 now....We (the no voters) are going to win...

Maybe, then again maybe not.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by old man

I am with Nordic but feel that the same should apply to others, as we have learned on another thread the Corvette is said to use unavailable parts in the engine, I think even the cylinder block and if that is the case then the car is not legal so far as I can see.

Performance balancing never works, lawyers get involved, bad for the sport and spectators. You lay down a set of rules and stick to them, if nobody enters you have a duff set of rules on your hands but it is not beyond the wit of man to consult first and then write rules that most will work to. Engineers will always try to be a bit too clever and you just need to ensure that the engineers who check the cars are as bright as the ones who design them.

TSK,TSK,TSK. Do you know what is on the homologation form? And I believe that there are C6.R's in the hands of privateers, therefore it is available. Albeit only in package form. And I would surmise on GM base architecture. Also in GT-1 regs check 2.2.2 c/.

As to your second point, I agree in part. I think the 2 adjustments agreed upon by the ACO/ALMS is O.K. But not after each race like this year in the ALMS in GT-1!

L.P.

[Asa]

I voted "yes" because I think Vitaphone were granted the entries based on their results with the Maseratis in the FIA GT.

If they were forced to use other cars, then I would think the most likely cars they would run are the Ferrari 575s, given the Maserati/Ferrari connection. If the choice is between a Vitaphone 575 and a Vitaphone MC12 then I would rather we get a MC12.

[TheNewBob]

Originally Posted by Asa

I voted "yes" because I think Vitaphone were granted the entries based on their results with the Maseratis in the FIA GT.

If they were forced to use other cars, then I would think the most likely cars they would run are the Ferrari 575s, given the Maserati/Ferrari connection. If the choice is between a Vitaphone 575 and a Vitaphone MC12 then I would rather we get a MC12.

Before the MC12, Vitaphone were running one of Konrad's Saleens. Had the Maserati not arrived, maybe they'd have stuck with an S7-R?

[Adam43]

The main point there being that if they had stuck with the S7-R they probably wouldn't have gained the entry to Le Mans.

[SALEEN S7R]

How do you work that one out Adam? The S7R is still competitve enough in the right hands, heck look at what Zakspeed managed this year. Yes they didnt win the Championship but they came close in what was a car that only had 1 professional driver.

Oreca have also shown what can be done with the Saleen, it was comfortably the fastest car in GT1 in the LMS this year, it just still lacks a bit of reliabilty at times thats all, but its getting there.

[Adam43]

I'm not saying it wouldn't be competitive, I am just saying it probably wouldn't have won the championship. They chose the Mazza over the Saleen and it was a change to the Mazza that made Vitaphone champions. Which says something. Maybe you can argue that they were getting better too.

Although I must admit my main reasoning is the finishing positions of the cars in the championship! A fair starting point, I'm sure.

Saleen, I'm not saying it is fact; it is but my opinion and surely not an outrageous one as it based on sound assumptions. The assumption that the Mazza is better so it won the championship!

The Saleen did well in the LMS and if we were discussing an Le Mans entry gain from this series it may be relevant. However winning the FIA GT and LMS GT1 is different. I notice no ALMS (er Sebring) comparisons have come, although they would be as relevant.

The main point I referred to was more to do with them winning the entry using the Mazza (as Asa says), not the Saleen.

[old man]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

TSK,TSK,TSK. Do you know what is on the homologation form? And I believe that there are C6.R's in the hands of privateers, therefore it is available. Albeit only in package form. And I would surmise on GM base architecture. Also in GT-1 regs check 2.2.2 c/.

As to your second point, I agree in part. I think the 2 adjustments agreed upon by the ACO/ALMS is O.K. But not after each race like this year in the ALMS in GT-1!

L.P.

No, never seen an Homologation form but recall discussions between AU N EGL and I think Bob R on availablity of engine parts as used by Pratt and Miller, no personal direct experience. Why are there no private C6.Rs in the ALMS?

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by old man

No, never seen an Homologation form but recall discussions between AU N EGL and I think Bob R on availablity of engine parts as used by Pratt and Miller, no personal direct experience. Why are there no private C6.Rs in the ALMS?

Yes I recall those also. I would speculate that GM is very protective of the unit as a whole! Secrets of how, and its Image! I am not sure why GM makes the decisions it does. The "GM" race cars are available to U.S. teams. What hoops you have to jump through?? I have seen privateer run C5-R (Pacific Coast Motorsports?), GTO-R (team? Boris Said drove it), I have not seen a Caddy though. I believe we will eventually see a C6.R, other than Corvette Racing, as more become available. I think the largest hurdle is $$$$$$$$$$$ and lots of it!

L.P.

[Hugewally]

Partly because P&M doesnt build spare chassis just to sell. They only sell the chassis when they're done with them.

[HORNDAWG]

???

The performance on both sides of the pond sends a strong message to Corvette buyers worldwide.
“That’s a message that we want to have pass the racecar into GM,” Fehan said. “The Corvette is a wonderful tool to do that because it is recognized on every continent.”
With its success globally, many teams have been eyeing a Corvette for its racing program for 2007. Fehan confirmed that more C6.Rs are being made available to customers for the coming season.
“Absolutely,” Fehan stated. “As a matter of fact, we have four cars for sale right now. We already have two that are done and these two [current ALMS] cars will be for sale as well.”
Corvette Racing will be building two new C6.Rs for its 2007 racing season. However, its program has yet to be confirmed.
“Right now, there is not a contract in place to support Corvette Racing in 2007.” Fehan stated.

Well this is the chasis history of the C6.R's to date. And Fehan says they have 4 to sell now. Then where did they come from if not built to sell?
1 of the 4 is Luc Alphands( # C6R-004)

C6.R Chassis History


C6R-001

2005 - Competed in ALMS as car #3.
2005-12 - Sold to GLPK Carsport to run in FIA GT

C6R-002

2005 - Competed in ALMS as car #4.

2005-12 - Sold to Christian Schumacher’s PSI team to run in Le Mans Series (formerly Le Mans Endurance Series) and the FFSA GT, a French national GT series.

From the PSI team website: "Just before Christmas, PSI sealed a deal with GM concerning a C6.R, chassis #002. Hereby, PSI was the first team to get its hands on a C6.R, in Europe and around the world. This car (race # 64) won its class in the 24 Hours of Le Mans with Gavin/Beretta/Magnussen and finished as amazing 5th overall. It also took the ALMS title (race # 4) with Olivier Gavin and Olivier Beretta."

C6R-003

2006 - Competed in ALMS as car #3.

C6R-004

2006 - Competed in ALMS as car #4.
2006-08 - Luc Alphand Aventures team announced that they had agreed to purchase C6R-004 to run in the 2007 Le Mans Series and to try for the 2007 Le Mans 24 Hour.

L.P.

[old man]

When we were talking about allowing the MC12 to run at LM I am saying "no" on the principle that a GT car is a racing version of a road car and the rules stipulate just how it may differ from that road car. I was not convinced that the MC12 is that. I think it is a race car with enough(?) road versions to get it through the homologation. I then suggested that another example may be that the C6R may be sufficiently different from the road Corvette to not be the same car at all, particularly in the engine dept.

You now show that just 4 C6Rs have been built, silhouette apart, how much of the C6R is from the road car?

A GT Prototype was another thing altogether of course, perhaps GT1 should be the latter and GT2 a firmly based class of racing versions of real road cars, Yet more changes do not of course give us the stability that allows sports/GT racing to grow.

[HORNDAWG]

[quote]

Originally Posted by old man

When we were talking about allowing the MC12 to run at LM I am saying "no" on the principle that a GT car is a racing version of a road car and the rules stipulate just how it may differ from that road car. I was not convinced that the MC12 is that. I think it is a race car with enough(?) road versions to get it through the homologation. I then suggested that another example may be that the C6R may be sufficiently different from the road Corvette to not be the same car at all, particularly in the engine dept.

Suffice it to say, if GM were doing something not in the realm of legitimacy the other Manufacturer's would let the world know! What I find more often than not, is that the other manufacturers (or teams) do not let the public know what they do, to the extent that Corvette Racing does. I am not privy to any news other than what is published. That being said, It was and is a homologated car by the scrutineers of the ACO. Do you truly believe that the French would let the Americans stray from the rules?? I do not!!

You now show that just 4 C6Rs have been built, silhouette apart, how much of the C6R is from the road car?

Well these 4, plus 2 built, plus building 2 for the team in 07 = 8. How many GT-1 DB9R's have been built?

Aston Martin Racing will build 12 individually numbered DBR9 Works cars, which will be run by three Works teams in the major international GT series

And I do not think that they have achieved that # yet. Also the focus of Corvette Racing is the ALMS verus 3 works teams in various Int. GT series.

A GT Prototype was another thing altogether of course, perhaps GT1 should be the latter and GT2 a firmly based class of racing versions of real road cars, Yet more changes do not of course give us the stability that allows sports/GT racing to grow.

GT-2 is that already!

At the moment GT-1 is the purview of the factory teams(mostly) and it is a quasi prototype atmosphere that they operate in. But within the guidlines of the class! I believe that is the strength of the GT-1's And the weakness at the same time. It is very expen$$$$$$ive!

L.P.

[Graham Goodwin]

Maybe not exactly as described above but at least 12 different DBR9s have raced so far

[David]

HORNDAWG: Can you tell me where this Fehan conversation originally took place?

"The performance on both sides of the pond sends a strong message to Corvette buyers worldwide.
“That’s a message that we want to have pass the racecar into GM,” Fehan said. “The Corvette is a wonderful tool to do that because it is recognized on every continent.”
With its success globally, many teams have been eyeing a Corvette for its racing program for 2007. Fehan confirmed that more C6.Rs are being made available to customers for the coming season.
“Absolutely,” Fehan stated. “As a matter of fact, we have four cars for sale right now. We already have two that are done and these two [current ALMS] cars will be for sale as well.”
Corvette Racing will be building two new C6.Rs for its 2007 racing season. However, its program has yet to be confirmed.
“Right now, there is not a contract in place to support Corvette Racing in 2007.” Fehan stated."

I would like to add C6R-005 thru C6R-008 to my web site if I can find the original conversation with Fehan.