Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Saloon & Sportscar Racing > Sportscar & GT Racing

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 5 Jun 2015, 02:54 (Ref:3545064)   #1301
Damian Baldi
Veteran
 
Damian Baldi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Argentina
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posts: 1,179
Damian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridDamian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridDamian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyson Mazda View Post
Currently P2 cars are away from the DP's because they race Pro/Am driver lineups or terrible engines.
There are many variables, the point is, IMSA choose a class that it's not compatible with their claims. WEC P2 is about no factories, no all pro drivers, no custom bodywork. So, what IMSA wants is everything from P1 with P2 cost.

So, for me, it's easier to make the ACO change current P1 privateers class than to change P2 class.

At P1 privateers today, you have all Pro drivers, custom bodywork and no spec engine, but factories should spend more money.

I'm not saying this is the solution, but for me this is easier than try to change all the P2.
Damian Baldi is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Jun 2015, 03:05 (Ref:3545067)   #1302
Damian Baldi
Veteran
 
Damian Baldi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Argentina
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posts: 1,179
Damian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridDamian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridDamian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrentJackson View Post
People are a little hard on IMSA here with regards to rules stability. The main reason for the desires to keep the cars as development-limited as possible is not NASCAR or a desire to be like them, but rather sports car racing in North America has a rather limited fanbase and racing's economic in North America in general suck terribly - NASCAR is starting to suffer, Indycar is in a deep hole, the ALMS was bought out so that it wouldn't go broke. America's economics right now don't make finding sponsorship for racing easy, and for a fairly high-cost series trying to get sponsors right now is really hard, even for the cheaper pro-am classes.

I would dare say that if the teams could work with budgets like they could once get, they would. If they had the funds to be able to engage in lots of development, I'm sure most of the teams would. But its just not on the cards, so its better to keep the racing as close as possible, hence fairly restrictive rules.

I don't know if it's about america's economy or about the public taste. I been following IMSA and Indycar since 1989 and watching Nascar too. Since mid 90s Nascar grow up so much that I think new generations don't know what was IMSA and Indycar in the past. And that's why there isn't enough money to run IMSA and Indycar as they deserve.

Don't take me bad, it's the same here, where we have the most popular series running crappy cars while we lost Sudamerican F3 and others good series are far to be what they were against the most popular. I think it's a generational change.
Damian Baldi is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Jun 2015, 03:19 (Ref:3545070)   #1303
HORNDAWG
Veteran
 
HORNDAWG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
United States
Oregon
Posts: 8,919
HORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
I am still trying to figure the angst towards TUSC in this matter. TUSC wants a common platform (chassis) with the ACO in P and P-2 so as to make it possible for the two like classes/chassis to compete on both sides of the pond. It is the ACO who is trying to limit the number of chassis mfgs and pushing a spec engine, not IMSA.






L.P.
HORNDAWG is offline  
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent
Quote
Old 5 Jun 2015, 03:30 (Ref:3545071)   #1304
Damian Baldi
Veteran
 
Damian Baldi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Argentina
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posts: 1,179
Damian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridDamian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridDamian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by HORNDAWG View Post
I am still trying to figure the angst towards TUSC in this matter. TUSC wants a common platform (chassis) with the ACO in P and P-2 so as to make it possible for the two like classes/chassis to compete on both sides of the pond. It is the ACO who is trying to limit the number of chassis mfgs and pushing a spec engine, not IMSA.

L.P.
What you read from ACOs attitude? I understand that ACO wants more teams on the P1 privateer class to keep P2 cheap. Currently some teams are too big for P2, they should step up to P1 some day. Old school privateers, like Brun and Joest were.
Damian Baldi is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Jun 2015, 03:49 (Ref:3545072)   #1305
BrentJackson
Racer
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Canada
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 317
BrentJackson should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridBrentJackson should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by HORNDAWG View Post
I am still trying to figure the angst towards TUSC in this matter. TUSC wants a common platform (chassis) with the ACO in P and P-2 so as to make it possible for the two like classes/chassis to compete on both sides of the pond. It is the ACO who is trying to limit the number of chassis mfgs and pushing a spec engine, not IMSA.

L.P.
Because NASCAR. In all seriousness though, I'm in agreement with you on this one Horndawg, but the unfortunate problem is that because IMSA is the biggest loser in these proposals and they are the ones who have had 18 months of PR problems on a regular basis, it's them who get the most barbs thrown at them.

I'm still of the opinion that IMSA needs to accept that their cost-to-exposure problem requires a different approach, that they will get nowhere with these rules and the BoP approach of balancing out DP and P2 chassis isn't earning them much in the way of positive news. I still think that the best option from IMSA now is to kill the American DTM idea for good and use the Class One as the top of the series in IMSA, Class One chassis with current-generation engines. IMSA's biggest problem is the fact that its cost to exposure ratio is horrible (even worse than Indycar, and Indycar is very, very bad at that) and that there isn't a lot of way of hacking costs down now short of tossing one of the NAEC races. Thus, IMSA has to expand the series, and the ugly, fragile, expensive P2 formula is never going to get that acceptance. Time for IMSA to become the world's greatest GT series.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian Baldi View Post
What you read from ACOs attitude? I understand that ACO wants more teams on the P1 privateer class to keep P2 cheap. Currently some teams are too big for P2, they should step up to P1 some day. Old school privateers, like Brun and Joest were.
Why would teams accept spending at least 2-3x the cost for the same exposure and getting run over by the factory LMP1s? Nobody is going to do it who isn't doing so already, and I don't expect Kolles' effort to be a long-time commitment knowing his history. Brun and Joest had a chance with the cars they had to win, which Rebellion and any other privateer racer hasn't got. Privateer P1s won't happen short of the factory teams all leaving, and even then it would be a long shot.
BrentJackson is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Jun 2015, 12:22 (Ref:3545169)   #1306
MagVanisher
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,396
MagVanisher should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridMagVanisher should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrentJackson View Post
I still think that the best option from IMSA now is to kill the American DTM idea for good and use the Class One as the top of the series in IMSA, Class One chassis with current-generation engines. IMSA's biggest problem is the fact that its cost to exposure ratio is horrible (even worse than Indycar, and Indycar is very, very bad at that) and that there isn't a lot of way of hacking costs down now short of tossing one of the NAEC races. Thus, IMSA has to expand the series, and the ugly, fragile, expensive P2 formula is never going to get that acceptance. Time for IMSA to become the world's greatest GT series.
I agree on IMSA ditching the American DTM series and use the Class One rules for TUSC. However, Jim France wouldn't accept turbocharged 4-cylinder engines and once more, ACO will just reject their entry to Le Mans anyway.

Honestly, a mix between LMP2 and Class One cars will be a compromise instead!
MagVanisher is offline  
Quote
Old 6 Jun 2015, 04:09 (Ref:3545404)   #1307
BrentJackson
Racer
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Canada
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 317
BrentJackson should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridBrentJackson should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagVanisher View Post
I agree on IMSA ditching the American DTM series and use the Class One rules for TUSC. However, Jim France wouldn't accept turbocharged 4-cylinder engines and once more, ACO will just reject their entry to Le Mans anyway.

Honestly, a mix between LMP2 and Class One cars will be a compromise instead!
My idea was to use Class One chassis and current-generation DP engines with slightly bigger displacements - up to 6400cc for naturally-aspirated engines, up to 3800cc for turbocharged ones and up to 4400cc for turbocharged diesels. I agree that the turbocharged four-bangers of the GT500 cars, as effective as they are, probably wouldn't work for IMSA.

As far as Le Mans goes, since the ACO clearly has no consideration for professional privateer racers, there is little reason IMO for IMSA to care about them. The ALMS ultimately was failing, and aside from the (admittedly absolutely brilliant) LMP1 category, where are the ACO rules working? Their P2 proposal is a horrific joke and they've lost the ability to advance GT racing to Ratel and the GT3 formula. I'm quite happy to have the GTE cars remain in IMSA, but at this point IMSA walking out on the P2 rules would probably kill them stone dead, which may end up being a huge benefit to both sides. Hindy said on MWM that he knows that people will end up run out of the sport because of those moronic rules, and on this side of the Atlantic he's even more right than he is for those in Europe. If the ACO wants to turn P2 into psuedo-spec cars to allow Oreca and Onroak to make more money, that's their call. But IMSA cannot and should not have anything to do with that insanity. With the P2/DP BoP battles having ultimately done bupkis for IMSA save cause them all kinds of political problems and angered fans and sponsors, I say just dump LMPs altogether and let the ACO figure that mess out on their own.
BrentJackson is offline  
Quote
Old 6 Jun 2015, 08:00 (Ref:3545434)   #1308
lms
Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 750
lms should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrentJackson View Post
My idea was to use Class One chassis and current-generation DP engines with slightly bigger displacements - up to 6400cc for naturally-aspirated engines, up to 3800cc for turbocharged ones and up to 4400cc for turbocharged diesels. I agree that the turbocharged four-bangers of the GT500 cars, as effective as they are, probably wouldn't work for IMSA.

As far as Le Mans goes, since the ACO clearly has no consideration for professional privateer racers, there is little reason IMO for IMSA to care about them. The ALMS ultimately was failing, and aside from the (admittedly absolutely brilliant) LMP1 category, where are the ACO rules working? Their P2 proposal is a horrific joke and they've lost the ability to advance GT racing to Ratel and the GT3 formula. I'm quite happy to have the GTE cars remain in IMSA, but at this point IMSA walking out on the P2 rules would probably kill them stone dead, which may end up being a huge benefit to both sides. Hindy said on MWM that he knows that people will end up run out of the sport because of those moronic rules, and on this side of the Atlantic he's even more right than he is for those in Europe. If the ACO wants to turn P2 into psuedo-spec cars to allow Oreca and Onroak to make more money, that's their call. But IMSA cannot and should not have anything to do with that insanity. With the P2/DP BoP battles having ultimately done bupkis for IMSA save cause them all kinds of political problems and angered fans and sponsors, I say just dump LMPs altogether and let the ACO figure that mess out on their own.
I hate to say it but I have to agree. IMSA is a ****ing mess as well. Talk about continuing with the DPs post 2017, while still retaining the (how many years old?) LMPCs cars... I get it, cost control and everything... but its just ridiculous. Its not entirely the ACOs fault. IMSA could (and should) have said no to these changes.
As for GTE... its a joke. Porsches racing Ferraris just like 10 years ago, and nothing has advanced since then, except in NA where they allow more cars (like the dodge viper or bmw z4) to race with 50 million waivers (just wait for the M6 GTE ), while gt3 is flourishing.
And that common lmp2 platform that has no common elements between Europe and the IMSA cars except the chassis.... no comment...
lms is offline  
Quote
Old 6 Jun 2015, 10:36 (Ref:3545484)   #1309
Rcz
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
United States
Posts: 1,078
Rcz should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Class One? Would using something that they are not in control be any better then what the ACO controls?
Rcz is offline  
Quote
Old 6 Jun 2015, 11:03 (Ref:3545493)   #1310
MagVanisher
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,396
MagVanisher should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridMagVanisher should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrentJackson View Post
My idea was to use Class One chassis and current-generation DP engines with slightly bigger displacements - up to 6400cc for naturally-aspirated engines, up to 3800cc for turbocharged ones and up to 4400cc for turbocharged diesels. I agree that the turbocharged four-bangers of the GT500 cars, as effective as they are, probably wouldn't work for IMSA.
But you shouldn't forget that that turbocharged Inline-4 engines produces 650+ HP. Currently, GT500 cars are insanely fast!

Now back to the main topic, I feel that the current LMP2 regulations should become the next LMP1-L class. But then again, I already mentioned it many times.

Oh well, the class is already screwed up anyway past 2017...
MagVanisher is offline  
Quote
Old 6 Jun 2015, 19:04 (Ref:3545610)   #1311
carbsmith
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,308
carbsmith is going for a new lap record!carbsmith is going for a new lap record!carbsmith is going for a new lap record!carbsmith is going for a new lap record!carbsmith is going for a new lap record!carbsmith is going for a new lap record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrentJackson View Post
People are a little hard on IMSA here with regards to rules stability. The main reason for the desires to keep the cars as development-limited as possible is not NASCAR or a desire to be like them, but rather sports car racing in North America has a rather limited fanbase and racing's economic in North America in general suck terribly - NASCAR is starting to suffer, Indycar is in a deep hole, the ALMS was bought out so that it wouldn't go broke. America's economics right now don't make finding sponsorship for racing easy, and for a fairly high-cost series trying to get sponsors right now is really hard, even for the cheaper pro-am classes.

I would dare say that if the teams could work with budgets like they could once get, they would. If they had the funds to be able to engage in lots of development, I'm sure most of the teams would. But its just not on the cards, so its better to keep the racing as close as possible, hence fairly restrictive rules.
The economics of Gen 3.5 DP are awful. It's a class with (in the entire world) 5 regular cars, 4 from one manufacturer and 3 from one circle of partners that own most of the business behind the class and series.

There's no stability and there's no cost savings. Half the teams in the class in 2013 dumped their program and bought another car they could afford to race because it cost more money to upgrade one DP than buy two LMPCs, all it did was force some people to buy more parts from the series to keep their manufacturer support. Meanwhile Ganassi was throwing money down a bottomless hole to get that turbo to work too, so so much for not spending money on development.

You'd think with all the complaining about the ACO and ORECA being in bed somebody might care the entire DP format serves pretty much entirely Jim France's own interests. They got sped up so he could still win his own races with his own car, it ruined the class for everyone else and pushed budgets up to where they're probably around the bottom of P1 where Muscle Milk and Dyson were sitting lately.
carbsmith is offline  
Quote
Old 8 Jun 2015, 05:06 (Ref:3545997)   #1312
Rcz
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
United States
Posts: 1,078
Rcz should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Well P1 in America was a dead class walking much like GT1, on two very outdated P1 cars and a DW.

P2 wasn't much better either.

I do find the irony in DPs costing more now since they were the PC class of Grand-Am.

Well I do wish IMSA had their own Proto rules much like GTP, I hope the IMSA P2 evolved into this. With a variety types of engines and chassis.

I hope someone say this: I'm going to make a chassis for IMSA in America!

ACO:But you can't race that in Lemans.

Manufactur: I don't care!

Wishfull thinking I know.
Rcz is offline  
Quote
Old 8 Jun 2015, 17:11 (Ref:3546197)   #1313
Damian Baldi
Veteran
 
Damian Baldi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Argentina
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posts: 1,179
Damian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridDamian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridDamian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Riley Submitting LMP2 Constructor Bid

http://sportscar365.com/industry/ril...nstructor-bid/
Damian Baldi is offline  
Quote
Old 8 Jun 2015, 18:16 (Ref:3546220)   #1314
Rcz
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
United States
Posts: 1,078
Rcz should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
It's was pretty much expected.
Rcz is offline  
Quote
Old 8 Jun 2015, 21:33 (Ref:3546280)   #1315
Danske
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 932
Danske should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian Baldi View Post
Riley Submitting LMP2 Constructor Bid
Maybe with the tyrannical hand of NASCAR forcing teams to have no other choice but to race LMP2 in IMSA Riley will actually get some customers this time.
Danske is offline  
Quote
Old 9 Jun 2015, 12:41 (Ref:3546476)   #1316
WMUCarGuy
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
United States
Posts: 1,736
WMUCarGuy should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I have to imagine at this point, the only real question is whether we'll see a car from Ginetta or Gibson.

I have to think Oak, Oreca and Riley/Multimatic are shoe-ins. Strakka and Wolf are out. HPD fluked with their new P2 coupe and BR Engineering is only just debuting their first P2 this year.

That leaves Oak, Oreca, Riley/Multimatic (it's believed they're going in on a P2 design together), Gibson and Ginetta as candidates. Makes you wonder why they couldn't just have 5 instead of 4 as all are capable and currently build a good product.
WMUCarGuy is offline  
Quote
Old 9 Jun 2015, 13:14 (Ref:3546494)   #1317
MagVanisher
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,396
MagVanisher should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridMagVanisher should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
While Riley is eyeing to have a spot in LMP2, I think that the company should team up not just with Multimatic but Coyote too.

Then again, Coyote as a company is just dead weight for Riley as they can only make tube-frame chassis instead of carbon fiber ones.
MagVanisher is offline  
Quote
Old 9 Jun 2015, 13:43 (Ref:3546506)   #1318
WMUCarGuy
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
United States
Posts: 1,736
WMUCarGuy should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagVanisher View Post
While Riley is eyeing to have a spot in LMP2, I think that the company should team up not just with Multimatic but Coyote too.

Then again, Coyote as a company is just dead weight for Riley as they can only make tube-frame chassis instead of carbon fiber ones.
Yes. Coyote (to my knowledge) doesn't have the experience of building carbon-tubbed cars, and I would guess they don't have the capacity to handle the quantities of cars and support needed.

If Riley and Multimatic are teamed up, I see little chance that anyone other than them gets the North American bid.
WMUCarGuy is offline  
Quote
Old 9 Jun 2015, 14:10 (Ref:3546513)   #1319
carbon_titanium
Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,240
carbon_titanium should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridcarbon_titanium should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by WMUCarGuy View Post
Yes. Coyote (to my knowledge) doesn't have the experience of building carbon-tubbed cars, and I would guess they don't have the capacity to handle the quantities of cars and support needed.

If Riley and Multimatic are teamed up, I see little chance that anyone other than them gets the North American bid.
agree and somewhere I've read that dallara too was interested to next lmp2 specs; it won't be so unlikely to see riley and dallara as main manufacturers in US market with oreca and oak masters of european market as they currently are
carbon_titanium is offline  
Quote
Old 9 Jun 2015, 17:16 (Ref:3546576)   #1320
Coach Ep
Veteran
 
Coach Ep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,483
Coach Ep is going for a new lap record!Coach Ep is going for a new lap record!Coach Ep is going for a new lap record!Coach Ep is going for a new lap record!Coach Ep is going for a new lap record!Coach Ep is going for a new lap record!
IF Multimatic (with or without Riley) becomes one of the 'happy few' chances are we're gonna see a Ford powered prototype at some point in the future.
Coach Ep is offline  
Quote
Old 9 Jun 2015, 20:01 (Ref:3546630)   #1321
Rodger Davies
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Wales
Bradford, UK
Posts: 3,042
Rodger Davies has a real shot at the podium!Rodger Davies has a real shot at the podium!Rodger Davies has a real shot at the podium!Rodger Davies has a real shot at the podium!Rodger Davies has a real shot at the podium!
I doubt it's that straightforward. Riley built the Vipers but their DPs never had a Dodge engine. Multimatic currently makes the Mazdas. I'm not sure they're linked in any way.

Such a pity they won't consider opening it up just a little bit, to allow one or two more additional constructors. If the demand is that great that ten are applying, then surely five or six could be chosen and still turn a profit.

Admittedly, there'd be much less valuable kickbacks that way......
Rodger Davies is offline  
__________________
Eat Sportscars
Sleep Sportscars
Drink Gulf
Quote
Old 9 Jun 2015, 23:58 (Ref:3546698)   #1322
Rcz
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
United States
Posts: 1,078
Rcz should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
The P3s future seems to get better and better.

I wonder if P3 will eat away the support of the new p2?
Rcz is offline  
Quote
Old 10 Jun 2015, 02:09 (Ref:3546717)   #1323
skeeskirrt
Racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
United States
Boney Mountain
Posts: 156
skeeskirrt should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rcz View Post
The P3s future seems to get better and better.

I wonder if P3 will eat away the support of the new p2?

That would be ironic, right? P3 attracts the gentleman and privateer, so who's left for P2? ... The manufacturers ... Oh wait you're not allowed!

No, what will save P2 from P3 is the fact that only P2 can go to Le Mans.
skeeskirrt is offline  
Quote
Old 10 Jun 2015, 02:28 (Ref:3546718)   #1324
Damian Baldi
Veteran
 
Damian Baldi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Argentina
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posts: 1,179
Damian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridDamian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridDamian Baldi should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeeskirrt View Post
That would be ironic, right? P3 attracts the gentleman and privateer, so who's left for P2? ... The manufacturers ... Oh wait you're not allowed!

No, what will save P2 from P3 is the fact that only P2 can go to Le Mans.
P3 should become in current P2, and current P2 should replace P1-L.

Let the factories to choice between P1 or P2.
Damian Baldi is offline  
Quote
Old 10 Jun 2015, 05:33 (Ref:3546738)   #1325
Rcz
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
United States
Posts: 1,078
Rcz should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I think there would have been more P2 cars in ALMS had there been no PC class...

It's just my theory, no basis in fact, just my opinion. PC however was pretty much the same thing as P2 just cheaper and a bit slower.
Rcz is offline  
Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Judd LMP2 engine Mike_Wooshy Sportscar & GT Racing 19 3 Feb 2011 22:21
New LMP2 engine - and (more) rule changes ss_collins Sportscar & GT Racing 42 4 Oct 2008 14:49
Manufacturers propose new engine regs Marbot Formula One 20 20 Oct 2007 12:17
LMP2 engine changes? (merged) JAG Sportscar & GT Racing 31 20 Jun 2006 10:20
Engine Suppliers Championship? Mr V Formula One 4 29 May 2002 09:46


All times are GMT. The time now is 19:29.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.