|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
19 Apr 2014, 15:08 (Ref:3395026) | #1 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,335
|
Is there room for an LMP2+ category?
Just a thought I had while watching the ELMS race:
It's great to see that the series pretty much has recaptured the vibe of the 2005-2006 era, but somehow I still feel that there is a little something that's missing. I couldn't quite put my finger on it at first, but then I realized that I miss "big" prototypes. No, not the current hyper-P1s, they are in WEC and that's the place where they belong, but something more conventional like the Pescarolo, Zytek, Creation of yore. Now I am wondering: Would it be viable to add an LMP2+ category to ELMS (and perhaps also to TUSCC come 2017)? What I mean by LMP2+ is cars built to the LMP2-chassis rules and to that or a similar pricecap, but with more powerful engines, somewhere in the 600bhp-range or something thereabouts. You could either use older P1 petrol engines for that or current generation DP-engines. I really think that this would add quite a bit to the ELMS' product and help it to regain a true headlining series status in a way that the anaemic current P2s really can't. |
||
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam. |
19 Apr 2014, 15:15 (Ref:3395030) | #2 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 824
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
19 Apr 2014, 15:18 (Ref:3395031) | #3 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,042
|
If anything, I'd say a class for full pro lineups and one for pro-am. But 11 cars is nice for a class, so I'd rather they leave it alone for now.
|
||
__________________
Eat Sportscars Sleep Sportscars Drink Gulf |
19 Apr 2014, 15:19 (Ref:3395032) | #4 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,335
|
I don't think one could run current P1 cars at a sensible price-cap... you probably need factory techs to run the hybrid systems and then there's the whole problem of the factories wanting to guard their secrets, not to mention the limited number of (theoretically!) available cars...
|
||
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam. |
19 Apr 2014, 15:26 (Ref:3395035) | #5 | |
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
Having non-proam headliner class would be ideal... LMP2, while healthy, isn't exactly the most thrilling to follow
I still think that the main reason for the downfall of privateer LMP1 is the fact that they cannot run anywhere in Europe (and now in States either) unless they sacrifice themselves for that expensive world series with works cars |
|
|
19 Apr 2014, 15:32 (Ref:3395036) | #6 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,232
|
No, more classes, championships with sub-classes inside them and confusion is not a good idea.
|
|
|
19 Apr 2014, 15:40 (Ref:3395041) | #7 | ||
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
Quote:
I've said it before but with GT in particular I wouldn't mind having even five different categories for them if it meant less BoP and waiver politics |
||
|
19 Apr 2014, 15:42 (Ref:3395043) | #8 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,857
|
Its a nice idea but im not sure if the finances would be there.
|
||
|
19 Apr 2014, 15:43 (Ref:3395045) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,187
|
Why not, if there are enough cars around, it could be merged into the championship, perhaps wit BOP.
|
||
__________________
Let's make better mistakes tomorrow! |
19 Apr 2014, 15:45 (Ref:3395046) | #10 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,335
|
Quote:
Another thought: Ten years ago, the headlining prototypes and GTs were earth-shattering 600bhp+ machines... now prototypes and GTs are at a measly 450bhp, which in the case of the GTs is less than what their road going counterparts make. I really hope this discrepancy will get resolved in the GT/GT+ rules, but if they do that, they almost automatically have to give more power to the top class prototypes as well. |
|||
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam. |
19 Apr 2014, 15:54 (Ref:3395056) | #11 | ||
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
Quote:
|
||
|
19 Apr 2014, 16:02 (Ref:3395063) | #12 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,232
|
Quote:
|
||
|
19 Apr 2014, 16:31 (Ref:3395078) | #13 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,335
|
Quote:
BoP vs development based is of course another question, but getting the horsepower back alone would be a big step in the right direction. Come to think of it, maybe they could use (some) GT3-engines for my hypothetical P2+... |
|||
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam. |
19 Apr 2014, 16:44 (Ref:3395089) | #14 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,270
|
|||
__________________
When in doubt? C4. |
19 Apr 2014, 18:01 (Ref:3395154) | #15 | |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,250
|
||
|
19 Apr 2014, 18:06 (Ref:3395156) | #16 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,250
|
Quote:
I really think this is very much needed in the IMSA championship. If IMSA can regain its status as the premier sports car series in America, then I think that the series could support a class of all pro super LMP2+ cars. P2+, GTLM and GTD would be epic! |
||
|
19 Apr 2014, 19:54 (Ref:3395207) | #17 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,946
|
Quote:
I like this idea. P2ish rules , but a bit more power and a bit more freedom would be great. TUSC could do this in 2015, not sure if it can wait in 2017. IMSA and ACO, are you listening? |
|||
|
20 Apr 2014, 00:33 (Ref:3395308) | #18 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,654
|
Can't LMP2 cars do 3'35 and GTs 3'50?
|
||
__________________
Nitropteron - Fly fast or get crushed! by NaBUrean Prodooktionz naburu38.itch.io |
20 Apr 2014, 04:14 (Ref:3395328) | #19 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7,175
|
What's keeping a TUSC P2 team from putting a DP engine in a P2? I mean the limit for non-turbo LMP2 motors is 5.0l and 8 cylinders...which just so happens to be the max liit for DP's as well...
|
||
|
20 Apr 2014, 05:24 (Ref:3395339) | #20 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,396
|
You know what, I think the LMP2 class should have more leeway when it comes to engine regulations.
I think it's boring to hear V8s and V6s, turbocharged or not, all the time. |
|
|
20 Apr 2014, 06:32 (Ref:3395349) | #21 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,335
|
Quote:
IIRC, P2-engines have to be homologated with the ACO... and then they'd be choked down to 450bhp anyway. A 600bhp-P2 would destroy everything that's on the track in TUSC right now... |
|||
__________________
Ceterum censeo GTE-Am esse delendam. |
20 Apr 2014, 07:36 (Ref:3395372) | #22 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 37
|
the future of LMP2 is very likely a cost capped LMP1 chassis with production based engine. if they allow more power and more engine freedom, they should just phase out LMP1-L for this new faster LMP2...
|
|
|
20 Apr 2014, 12:00 (Ref:3395568) | #23 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,396
|
Well, I can agree with you. Besides, the LMP1 class is dominated by manufacturers with privateers like Rebellion Racing will struggle against them.
|
|
|
20 Apr 2014, 12:12 (Ref:3395586) | #24 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,208
|
I think LMP2 techincal regulations are fine. Maybe the upgrade would be just to remove the mandatory Silver driver in the lineup.
|
||
|
20 Apr 2014, 15:03 (Ref:3395721) | #25 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7,175
|
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Project Libra Radical LMP2 (formerly Ian Dawsons Nissan V8 LMP2) | knighty | Sportscar & GT Racing | 192 | 26 Jul 2012 09:09 |
New Luchini LMP2, including new Cv0 LMP2 (merged threads) | veeten | Sportscar & GT Racing | 66 | 3 Sep 2004 05:27 |
THE GTS Category | Geva racing | Sportscar & GT Racing | 6 | 5 Nov 2000 16:51 |