Technology in Sport 3,5L

[Gil Abobeleira]

Following a discussion around the Prototype-C mod for rfactor, someone ( ) mentioned that the 1992 and 1993 cars had active suspension, which I find it odd (I'm not taking into account the 905 Evo2).

Is there any truth about that?
And other "gizmos", like semi-automatic gearbox, Traction Control (I know the Evo2 had these two), ABS, were they really a feature of the Sport 3,5L (and the IMSA-GTP contemporay cars)?

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by Gil Abobeleira

Following a discussion around the Prototype-C mod for rfactor, someone ( ) mentioned that the 1992 and 1993 cars had active suspension, which I find it odd (I'm not taking into account the 905 Evo2).

Is there any truth about that?
And other "gizmos", like semi-automatic gearbox, Traction Control (I know the Evo2 had these two), ABS, were they really a feature of the Sport 3,5L (and the IMSA-GTP contemporay cars)?

Well it was more talked about than anything else. I know TWR looked into it and one can assume so to did just about everyone else at the pointy end of the grid. Though no one actually ran with it operationally. You might want to check into this, but I think there was some talk about the Corvette GTP using a Lotus derived system? Can't be sure where that comes from, there are some cobwebs on that...the Allard J2X had a very rudimentary ride height control system I'm led to beleive...that's about all I can recall at the moment.

Evo 2 was really the early adaptor as far as that era was concerned. As you mention, active suspension, traction control, etc. But that certainly was the exception.

[Gil Abobeleira]

Thanks Mike.

Tt would be great if gave a hand to those guys at Virtua-LM- again (though, we can assume that you just don't have that much time to waste on "games" ).

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by Gil Abobeleira

Thanks Mike.

Tt would be great if gave a hand to those guys at Virtua-LM- again (though, we can assume that you just don't have that much time to waste on "games" ).

Games or not, I simply don't have much time! What are they up to now?

[Gil Abobeleira]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

Games or not, I simply don't have much time! What are they up to now?

They are going to release the Prototype C-mod (as well as a Group 5 & GTX mod ) on a newer, better, platform.

[Dauer 962]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

You might want to check into this, but I think there was some talk about the Corvette GTP using a Lotus derived system?

The Corvette GTP had indeed an active suspension system, they got it from Lotus and it was a developed based on the active suspension Lotus used in F1.

[chernaudi]

No wonder the old Group C category died! The FIA decided that it would be a brilliant idea to use F1 type technology in GTP sports cars. The result: cars that were essentially F1 cars with roofs and fenders! Ain't traction control and active suspension kinda expensive? Isn't that why the FIA, IMSA, and the ACO banned this and other such things( like old F1 style ground effects tunnels) after 1993?

TCS didn't make a return to sports car racing until '05(GT1&2 in ALMS) and '06 for the prototypes that run under ACO rules. And the ground effects package for the new ACO LMP cars somewhat similar to those pre-'93 cars, isn't it?

But they are still trying to discourage this stuff to a degree, by using near spec rules for the underbody stuff, and that TCS can only effect engine performance, and not work on the brakes.

In other words, the new cars are going to be more expensive than the old LMP 900 and 675 cars. But what else would you expect, when a Porsche RS Spyder or Lola B05/40 cost nearly as much as an Audi R8 did new in '02 or '03?

[MulsanneMike]

Cost was certainly part of the reason, but the FIA took what was a perfectly good series and changed it for really no good reason. Think about the 1989 Group C season and compare to '90 (when the 3.5 liter cars began to be introduced) or '91. It's pretty evident that the 3.5 liter transition killed sport car racing in Europe. The economy at the time would have more than likely had the same effect as it did on IMSA GTP, but the 3.5 cars absolutely gauranteed that the series would die in the face of it.

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

But they are still trying to discourage this stuff to a degree, by using near spec rules for the underbody stuff, and that TCS can only effect engine performance, and not work on the brakes.

TC is a pain in the arz.

Some of the F1 races TV commentators were mentioning that drivers were taking much wider corners then in previous years just to keep TC from activating.

[chernaudi]

You're right there Mike. It's my opinion that Max Mosley and Bernie Eccostone took what was a really good racing series and screwed it up pretty much beyond repair. It's been said that it was a ploy to get Jaguar, Peugeot, and Mercedes Benz into F1. So what does Max and Bernie do( both of whom pretty much control the FIA then, just as now)? Make sportscar racing so expensive that the manufactures would run F1! The result: Jaguar pulled out of racing after '91( parent company Ford was already in F1), MB and Pug went to F1, with mixed results.

And the only way that I see traction control as being an advatage in sportscars is on glass smooth race tracks, or if the track's flooded. At Mosport, the Porsche RS Spyders( which are pretty much the only prototypes that use TSC) ran off the track in the rain as much as anyone else. And it may've cost them the race at Lime Rock. The TCS detects wheelspin, which you'll get plenty of at bumpy tracks. In other words, the Spyders couldn't out acellerate the R8, especally in heavy traffic, although the R8 having nearly twice the torque of the Spyders( 520+ vs 270ft/lbs) didn't help their cause, either. So if TCS is such a problem, why use it- the Audi R8 did just fine without it, and for sure the R10 did.