LMP2 Manufacturers and Engine Suppliers

[lms]

Originally Posted by Bob Baldwin

" One of the worlds most awesome GT Series ...

is BES

[Bob Baldwin]

Originally Posted by lms

is BES

Well a Very Close 2nd !!

depends on What side of the Pond you are on .

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Well, you are persistent.

Compare the two options: GT500 chassis with DP engines or these sad spec prototypes. Which do YOU think is gonna get more attention? These P2 rules are pathetic, useless trash and should be treated as such.

Originally Posted by Bob Baldwin

" One of the worlds most awesome GT Series " That is Fact not Brag !!

They could do better, and will do better once real GT3s start racing in IMSA next year. But I really believe that a Class One-based top class has a far greater chance of success than the neutered, moronic P2s the ACO wants us all to choke on.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by BrentJackson

But I really believe that a Class One-based top class has a far greater chance of success than the neutered, moronic P2s the ACO wants us all to choke on.

What makes you think that the new P2s (at least the US version) are any more neutered than class one? (Which is based on a spec chassis.)

[Rodger Davies]

Exactly, I'm never very understanding of that. A spec chassis with manufacturer styling cues. AKA: what we're complaining about for most of this thread.

[Giba]

It sounds like that there will be more information about P2 2017 regs this weekend according to S365. Wonder it will mention anything different then what we currently think the regs will look like

[DistortedSmile]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

What makes you think that the new P2s (at least the US version) are any more neutered than class one? (Which is based on a spec chassis.)

Compared to GT500 only: Car development, awesome tire war, awesome looking cars, LMP1 speed, at least enough freedom to run mid engine or front engine, hybrid systems allowed, huge factory support.

Originally Posted by Rodger Davies

Exactly, I'm never very understanding of that. A spec chassis with manufacturer styling cues. AKA: what we're complaining about for most of this thread.

Spec chassis with manufacturer styling cues done right.

[Rcz]

Until the DTM guys ruined it somehow hee hee...


I guess I wouldn't mind it, I use to to not like the idea Class 1 as the top class but if they going to screw P2 I guess this would be the better choice.

Personally I like GT1 rules of the late 90s where you create a few road legal prototypes GT cars and had them race. Want to race that rear engine Corvette? Then just build around 5 or 10 street ones.

[TheDude]

There is no such thing as a spec chassis with "manufacturer styling cues" done right.


And why should ACO let a Gt500 car at Le Mans? What's next, a F1 car or a Stockcar?

[DistortedSmile]

Originally Posted by TheDude

There is no such thing as a spec chassis with "manufacturer styling cues" done right.

IMO yes there is, its called GT500

Originally Posted by TheDude

And why should ACO let a Gt500 car at Le Mans? What's next, a F1 car or a Stockcar?

Because a sportscar entering a sportscar race is totally comparable with completely different categories right?

[TheDude]

Originally Posted by DistortedSmile

IMO yes there is, its called GT500



Because a sportscar entering a sportscar race is totally comparable with completely different categories right?

If by sportscar you mean a half tubed silhuette a sportscar, so yes, GT 500 are sportscars

[DistortedSmile]

Originally Posted by TheDude

If by sportscar you mean a half tubed silhuette a sportscar, so yes, GT 500 are sportscars

Half tubed? lol
And I guess there's never been silhouettes in sportscar racing in the past
You may not like them but they are sportscars that's not really up for debate.

[carbsmith]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

What makes you think that the new P2s (at least the US version) are any more neutered than class one? (Which is based on a spec chassis.)

Probably the roughly 0% chance new P2s will be as quick as petrol non-hybrid P1s.

In short, GT500s look better, sound better, go faster, look faster, can use a hybrid system, and have more manufacturer support. It's also extremely obvious from the races that the cars are different enough to perform very differently. It's a pro class specifically and exclusively designed as the top bill of a race weekend.

[TF110]

Who knows if class 1 will have more freedom when its initiated. Maybe they keep it as two aero-kits like gt500's regular and Fuji-spec. But theyre still better than a spec engine lmp2 imo. 6+ different makes all with a unique look is a big part of that. Add in a possible hybrid system and thats even better.

[Maelochs]

I will wait to hear from FIA about the actual new P2 regs---and whatever TUSC decides to run which will almost certainly be the spec P2 chassis with "styling cues" and the same over-controlled engines currently in the series ...

But seriously, why should the top class in any top-tier national sports car series have spec anything except maybe tires?

Arguing for a different set of identical cars with different headlight stickers seems pointless.

Not to say the racing isn't good in those series (e.g. Aussie V8) but I don't see how we can say a spec series is "the best" unless there are zero options ... and that won't happen because WEC, BES, PWC ....

Think far, far back ... remember when the designer and engineer were important figures in racing? Remember when Cars were cool?

I don't want to see TUSC go all GT, but if it does, let the top class be like the old Group 5 or AAGT---cars which were essentuially prototypes in silhouette body work. Camel GT was a series where you could be fascinated by the variety of cars even of the same nominal make and model.

Or, as someone suggested, bring back GT1---Let factories make full-on, made-for-racing race cars. A bunch of modified street cars just isn't "top-tier" to me.

[TF110]

The GT500's dont even look that much alike. Its not some nascar type with a spec body. Maybe the appearance isnt the prettiest, but theyre easily identifiable.

[BrentJackson]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

I will wait to hear from FIA about the actual new P2 regs---and whatever TUSC decides to run which will almost certainly be the spec P2 chassis with "styling cues" and the same over-controlled engines currently in the series ...

And their going down that road with their current cost/exposure problems will rapidly sink them right down into the same problems the late ALMS suffered from. The mere existence of the Pirelli World Challenge (and to a less extent both Trans-Am and the Continental Tire Sports Car Challenge) is making attracting the rich guys who want to get their rocks off racing cars hard and getting harder. IMSA is too expensive now to attract privateer sports car racers, which was Grand-Am's bread and butter. The end result of these problems is that IMSA is suffering from a shrinking grid, and these new car proposals don't fix that problem - if anything, they make it worse. IMSA simply can't use these rules without major changes, because if they do the cost/exposure problem will effectively force the size of the field down. They have to grow the sport's popularity, and that means it has to look like its the boss. GT500 cars do that. P2s, especially these P2s, don't. The mere existence of P1s makes sure of that.

Originally Posted by Maelochs

But seriously, why should the top class in any top-tier national sports car series have spec anything except maybe tires?

I agree, but clearly the ACO, whose complete lack of concern for GT cars or privateer racers is showing through here, disagrees.

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Think far, far back ... remember when the designer and engineer were important figures in racing? Remember when Cars were cool?

The problem is that going that route is really scary expensive, and it doesn't lend itself to cars that have any sort of life. The only series that have such rulebooks anywhere in the world are WEC P1 and Formula One, both of which are ludicrously expensive. Computer-aided design has removed the "let's try this and see if it works" element of racing that existed in this sport until the 1990s, and such design forces people to chase down improvements using the most minute and invisible of details, and the form over function that this also creates is why we don't get looks of the cars of the past. I agree that it would be awesome to see, but where in sports car racing outside of the WEC has it any chance of working? Like it or not, not too many of the wealthy racers and exposure-demanding sponsors are interested in potentially being far off the pace for a long period of time, especially in sports car racing, which is fairly low on the totem pole in terms of exposure to the general public on either side of the Atlantic.

Originally Posted by Maelochs

I don't want to see TUSC go all GT, but if it does, let the top class be like the old Group 5 or AAGT---cars which were essentuially prototypes in silhouette body work. Camel GT was a series where you could be fascinated by the variety of cars even of the same nominal make and model.

Or, as someone suggested, bring back GT1---Let factories make full-on, made-for-racing race cars. A bunch of modified street cars just isn't "top-tier" to me.

GT1 went insane in the space of two years in the 1990s. That's how long the big-bore FIA GT Championship lasted, thanks in large part to exactly what you said - Mercedes came in with their ITR crew and quickly handed everyone else their backsides everywhere but at Le Mans, where engine problems and eventually two spectacular backflips ruined their hopes. If you were to go there, you'd get the same result all over again, and you'd probably end up wounding P1 in the process. The very fast GT1s of the mid-2000s even got too pricey, and its not coincidence that GT2 morphed into GTE and then began getting too expensive.

What I love about Class One is that its a carbon safety cell with what amounts to almost DP-like construction outside of that, with CF-reinforced tube frames beyond that. Carbon-fiber is getting cheaper and easier to work with, but if you need to make all-carbon chassis, you need million-dollar autoclaves and other such gear which requires huge investments. Some companies can do that, but such chassis all but eliminate the idea of somebody building a shop special. But using CF sheets to improve a tube chassis is much easier to do, and I don't think its coincidence that companies that Riley and Coyote can do DPs even though they have never built full-CF chassis. Thanks to NASCAR, SCCA and Trans-Am there are tons of people who can make great tube frame components for a Class One car in North America. As the Class Ones have to work around the big center cell, they don't have narrow-body aerodynamics like the modern Ligier JS P2 or Oreca 05 chassis but instead are built with tons of downforce (a car that size can't exactly easily slice through the air so drag is much less of a concern than it would be on an LMP) and as such they also use bodies that look like those influenced by road cars.

As there are such markers and a requirement for a body that looks like a road car, I can see a Class One base spawning lots of chassis builders - you don't need to figure out safety (that's done for you with the cell) and both fairly large and road car influenced bodywork making aerodynamic efficiency somewhat less necessary, I can see that construction making it possible for lots of guys to try their hand at this. The fact that it can be used with front or mid-engined cars is helpful, as is the ability to use a chassis design similar to a DP makes it easy for anybody with experience in this regard to rapidly shift over. (As a bonus, one of the benefits of a tube-chassis is that a badly-damaged car can have a chunk of it cut off and replaced, something not as easily done on an entirely carbonfiber chassis car.) The fact that these same chassis and many of the bodywork elements are used for DTM and Super GT allows a manufacturer to more easily justify it. My idea of using evolved versions of existing DP engines with these chassis is designed with similar goals - Ford can develop a GRE Ecoboost four-cylinder and run the chassis as a GT500 in DTM, fit a Cosworth V8 and run DTM or use the same engine as their DP but with some more boost added on in IMSA. "Ford rules the racing world with EcoBoost!" - this stuff writes itself. Nissan wants to expand its North American racing? These cars give them an idiot-proof opportunity - take your GT-R GT500 car, drop a variant of its road car motor in it and get out there. Since the bodywork rules for these cars are (quite deliberately) vague, what's stopping crazy stuff? What's stopping Mazda from taking its diesel engine (or better still, taking two of those motors and attaching them to a common crankshaft) and making a Class One based on the Furai? What's stopping GM from making a Chevrolet Volt or a Cadillac ELR Class One? BMW could use the M4 they developed for DTM, or they could go the hybrid route the NSX goes and use the i8 as a base? There are six makers involved in the cars already, and all six have DP-eligible engine options. Add GM and Ford (who I think could go for this) and you get eight. And if they go rather faster than existing cars and have almost DP-level durability, who's losing?

IMO the ACO simply didn't think about the idea of anything other than benefitting their chosen ones writing these rules. I don't doubt that Graham Goodwin and John Dagys are right when they say that discussions went on and changes will be made, but the question I ask of the P2s is why change things at all from existing cars? Are they worried that North America running P2s will see Riley and Coyote get into the game and steal sales from Oreca and Onroak? It ain't the ACO's job to ensure the profitability of Oreca and Onroak. Why the spec engines? And if the rumors on that one are true, tossing another bone to VAG when they already run half the P1 field seems a quid pro quo kind of arrangement. IMSA doesn't need something like now, they need something better than now. Their viability as a series in the future depends on it, and the first round of rules proposals were so bad for this that if it had been me running IMSA that would have been it for the ACO-IMSA connection right there. If the ACO wants to truly advance sports car racing as a sport, they need to make enticing to the privateer racers. The BES did that, and its bulging at the seams. The explosive growth of GT3 racing around the world made the idea that there is tons of guy who want to race these things obvious. The ACO can learn this lesson easily now or learn it the hard way when they scramble to fill the field after the factories bail on the WEC.

[carbsmith]

The tub has nothing to do with the shape of Class One cars (it's actually rather small relatively speaking to be as unobtrusive to different body shapes as possible and aside from the roll cage about as narrow as plausible anyways for side protection) The production shaped part of the body is just extremely tightly defined while what little is outside of it is about as unregulated as IndyCar. There's a lot of aero shapes common to LMPs in there.

Running your own motor package would be missing the boat entirely (and not Class One to speak of). NASCAR wants what it wants but the key to Class One in North America will always be talking GM into running an ATS against well...pretty much every car the coupe version competes against on the road then having cars and engines ready to go.

The IRL and Grand-Am should have taught everyone that capping manufacturers and freezing development ends up practically indistinguishable from single make spec racing from a product standpoint by now, I'd have thought?

[Giba]

Bearing in mind the rumoured 4 chassis manufacturer rule that could happen in LMP2, I was surprised by this comment in the Silverstone program by Jean Todt:

"The WEC is not just about LMP1, however, and it is enormously encouraging to see a new vibrancy in the LMP2 class, with five constructors supplying a host of teams, old and new, in the battle for this exciting title"

[Maelochs]

That's the big news---FIA convinced another manufacturer to pony up the "acceptance" fee.

[carbsmith]

There's actually only three constructors in WEC LMP2 once ESM gets their new cars. I don't know if he counted Onroak twice or what.

[Maelochs]

Onroak and Morgan?

[Rodger Davies]

Alpine, Oreca, Morgan, Ligier, Gibson? HPD being a bonus for the first round?

[TF110]

Alpine dont make their cars. Dome isnt on that list.

[Beryl]

Originally Posted by Rodger Davies

Alpine, Oreca, Morgan, Ligier, Gibson? HPD being a bonus for the first round?

For the full season:
Oreca
Onroak
Dome

HPD will soon be gone, no full-season Gibson in WEC, Alpine is an Oreca with makeup, and Ligier and Morgan are just brand names that roll out of the same factory (Onroak). Carbsmith is right, only 3 full season constructors.