|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
26 Mar 2007, 17:58 (Ref:1876922) | #1 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
This is the first of a number of posts I've moved across from the St'Pete's thread. The discussion can continue here (Bentley03)........
Pardon just a short detour! To lose Audi is not a good thing in any way! Sure, they B***h to much! But they have a very valid point in the class seperation. If any manufacturers are going to come in to "P" cars or do participate it should be in P-1! If they can go to P-2 and not have to face Audi they wont(Porsche)! The rules in P-1 do need to be tweeked to allow a petrol powered P-1 to compete for overall wins with the Audi & maybe(it looks like) the Peugeot!! I do not think that they are "quite happy" to just race partially anywhere! As to Intersport. I would hope that if they qualify somehow through the ALMS points/wins process that they would get an invitation. As they could just change chassis to compete at LeMans! L.P. Last edited by Bentley03; 27 Mar 2007 at 13:22. Reason: First post for new thread........ |
||
|
26 Mar 2007, 18:09 (Ref:1876931) | #2 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 626
|
Calling out all Corvette fans. How would you like that ALMS take the 5% restrictors from the GT2s. How about some more benefits for the GT2s. IMO there is absolutely no competiton in GT1 right now. I am thinking that we should make those GT2s several seconds faster so we can some real competition. At least in P1 there is someone else racing. How would like that? Right now no one knows why the entry list isn't out yet (except a handful of people directly envolved in the process)
|
|
|
26 Mar 2007, 18:10 (Ref:1876932) | #3 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 737
|
Brett: CC PR is so terrible at this time it is almost non existant, even with Sid Priddle as a recent hire.
|
||
__________________
I am really just like a little kitten. Just a baby Puma! |
26 Mar 2007, 19:50 (Ref:1877005) | #4 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 12,041
|
Quote:
just affirms what i have been thinking for a long time now, audi does not want competition, they want to be the only car out front and i can GUARANTEE that when, not if, the creation or zyteck go head-to-head and beat the R10 in a race Audi will be the first to cry foul and search for any little technicality they can find. We can only hope the Peugeot is out in front quali at LM so we can all hear them ***** that the rules are rigged and they might not race if they can't win. It has nothing to do with the "rules" for Audi, just watch when Kanaan I believe it was, was just behind the Audi on the same lap late in the race at Sebring. Once they put the hammer down and went to pull away, the Acura could not have kept up with boosters trapped to it. If Audi stopped being pansies and sandbagging during quali to make the classes look tighter then they were, we could see the actual DRAMATIC differences between them. If Audi runs at Utah, expect them to LAP every car save the Intersport if the actual P1 tires work for them; no way with the length of that track can P2 cars stand a chance. sorry to vent but every time I hear anything from Audi, other then the drivers, it just seems to be whining and complaining their world will end if they can't be laps ahead. If IMSA/ACO/ALMS etc want to make Audi play fair MAKE them make the R10 available as a customer car, not the "customers" of champion or others but actual private teams. Guessing then we will see the full release of any Audi chassis cause who would want to lose to the privateers you sold a car too. I'm sure it is making Honda mad right now looking at Super Aguri last race in australia |
||
|
26 Mar 2007, 19:59 (Ref:1877011) | #5 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,437
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
Nulla Tenaci Invia Est Via |
26 Mar 2007, 20:32 (Ref:1877045) | #6 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,936
|
Quote:
tom chilton and hayari shimoda made that zytek 04S in 2005 go like a missile, same for nic minassian and JCW in the judd engined zytek, they were imo the best team of 2005 and deserved to win at silverstone, nurburgring and istanbul in 2005. |
|||
|
26 Mar 2007, 21:05 (Ref:1877080) | #7 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 435
|
Don't forget the Zytech and Creation showed them up a little in the last two races of the ALMS last season
|
||
|
27 Mar 2007, 00:16 (Ref:1877244) | #8 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,958
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
27 Mar 2007, 11:48 (Ref:1877562) | #9 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,958
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
27 Mar 2007, 12:14 (Ref:1877579) | #10 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 613
|
Hmmm wonder if Audi are reconsidering entering the LMS in view of the apparent dislike of the ALMS rules. IF this is true then you have to wonder at the sportsmanship of Audi....but then again is racing these days really sporting or is it a means to promote the brand ie. advertising ?
|
|
|
27 Mar 2007, 12:42 (Ref:1877609) | #11 | |||
Rookie
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 23
|
Quote:
The problem is that Audi's main goal this year is to beat Pug at LM, and then i think you will see pure private- Audi teams from 2008. Audi has to deliver the best car for the comming cotumers, and for that they have to race i an serie which all the cars are racing within the same rules. Im ALMS there are special rules for Audi ... they ar going for the ACO 207 rules, but the other are going for the ACO 2007 with the IMSA changes I think that we will see Audi perhaps going for Petit in ALMS and perhaps nothing else after LM. They just have to sell the R10's to there costumers. Once again look at the Le Mans series. There are som many cars in all categories. But in ALMS you have Corvette in GT1 Audi in LMP1. LMP2 & GT2 are still good class'es |
|||
|
27 Mar 2007, 13:00 (Ref:1877627) | #12 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,102
|
Audi: In? Out? Shake it all about?
Ok, to save me and the other Sportscar and GT mods from losing our rags about off topic discussion relating to Audi (ALMS/Diesel regs/IMSA rules/ACO rules), I'm opening this thread.
The last thread relevant to the Audi/ALMS situation deteriorated to the point where Adam was left with no option but to close it. Please don't let this one go the same way! So, the purpose of this thread is to give an outlet to those of you who wish to pursue the Audi related discussions which have effectively stifled on topic discussion on a number of other threads. I've moved some posts across from the St.Pete's thread to get it started. |
|
|
27 Mar 2007, 20:46 (Ref:1877979) | #13 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,704
|
Anyway audi are in for the whole season... so its all a bit academic.
|
||
__________________
Chase the horizon |
27 Mar 2007, 22:34 (Ref:1878065) | #14 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
If your a potential P1 manufactuer or privateer looking in, you'll see the fighting, instability, and stay well away for the time being.
And for what, so the best P2 will only be a lap behind the R10, not two, maybe have a shot of qualifying glory? The Ricard test's showed P2's will be as competitive as last season, so why deviate from ACO regs and create instability. |
|
|
27 Mar 2007, 23:32 (Ref:1878088) | #16 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 283
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
28 Mar 2007, 10:21 (Ref:1878324) | #17 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,958
|
Quote:
Are you certain that IMSA hasn't promised static rules to certain manufacturers, and has to keep their word to them? |
|||
|
28 Mar 2007, 16:34 (Ref:1878494) | #18 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
Quote:
L.P. |
|||
|
28 Mar 2007, 17:12 (Ref:1878522) | #19 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,699
|
I'm not sure where I stand on the restrictor deal. Basically, the top P1 and top P2 cars (Audi vs. Penske) were already quite far apart last year. The R10's record clearly displays that. The disparity between P1 and P2 would be even wider at Le Mans, due to the longer lap and flowing nature of the circuit. Not to mention, the 2006 LMS results back up the notion as well. Why further increase the gap?
|
||
__________________
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." Albert Einstein |
28 Mar 2007, 17:18 (Ref:1878527) | #20 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,354
|
I must admit I rather liked it when LM900 and 675 were able to compete for overall wins using very different strategies. It made for some very interesting races with the light and nimble 675's being hunted down by the fast and powerful 900 which had to stop for fuel more often and were slower in the wet.
|
||
|
28 Mar 2007, 17:47 (Ref:1878543) | #21 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
Quote:
L.P. |
|||
|
28 Mar 2007, 17:50 (Ref:1878545) | #22 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
Quote:
L.P. |
|||
|
28 Mar 2007, 18:00 (Ref:1878549) | #23 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Quote:
No P2 manufactuer should be promised stabilty, and a backdoor route to overall wins. And let's get this straight, we aren't talking major chassis/engine changes, it's a tweak of the restrictors/fuel tanks. |
||
|
28 Mar 2007, 18:51 (Ref:1878582) | #24 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,699
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." Albert Einstein |
28 Mar 2007, 18:53 (Ref:1878586) | #25 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,699
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." Albert Einstein |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NZV8's - Set for a shake-up?? (Merged x1) | Just Do It! | Australasian Touring Cars. | 50 | 18 Aug 2007 11:41 |
Pentax K100D/K110D and shake reduction question | mwphoto | Motorsport Art & Photography | 1 | 27 Dec 2006 08:11 |
British GT for shake up | pink69 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 8 | 18 May 2002 09:00 |
Now they shake hands. | kuchi | Formula One | 9 | 19 Mar 2002 20:38 |
Stern shake of head.. | Crash Test | IRL Indycar Series | 16 | 3 May 2000 22:09 |