I don't like the idea of a spec LMP class, that is just lame. Here is what I think they should do. Feel free to edit for gaps and things overlooked.

The new LMP 2 or 3? class should be a completely prototype/experimental class designed for privateers.
1. Chassis must be designed and built in-house by the team
2. Engine must be production based block and heads (maybe even cranks or rods to keep the power under control)
3. Aero is completely open
4. Suspension is completely open
5. Maximum tire width of some amount to keep things under control

I think that would make for quite a spectacle.

 

Open aero and suspensions would be interesting but would be extremely expensive. Just think, active aero and maybe hydraulic suspensions which could let the car lean in to a corner or different damping rates programed for each turn. Cool, but expensive to manufacture and develop.

 

I agree, open aero and suspension would be awesome to see...but for a privateer class, just not possible. That makes it, whoever has the deepest pocket book wins (again; as with most forms of racing)

 

Interesting spectacle? Yes. Realistic? NFW.
The whole idea of a spec prototype class is to allow teams with lower budgets to compete. Why do you think Grand Am has the number of "prototypes" competing? If the ACO adopted this class and allowed them to run at Lemans, we might see teams flock From Grand Am to the ALMS. P2 was meant to be the privateer teams. Todays economy calls for P2 to be a spec class.

 

Why not instead have these rules:

1) any engine displacement/induction
2) min dry weight (with driver) of 1500lbs
3) car must fit into a 6'x'10'x4' box as raced (roll them through something to prove in tech)
4) Any size fuel cell
5) Team is issued 75gallons of gasoline per race hour (two hour race = 150gal), other fuels allowed in proportion to the amount of energy in that fuel. I.e.: 75gals of gas = 105gals of ethanol.
6) no spec tire allowed, but if you sell tires for the series, you have to make the available to anyone that wants them. No playing favorites. If you can't meet demand, you don't get to play.
7) ANy chassis manufacturer can play, but cannot have a "works" team. I.e.: Chassis must be raced by 3rd parties. Exception is if a privateer wants to build their own chassis, and will be limited to 1 entry per race.

 

this needs to happen now.

 

The more strict the rules are the more the big money teams win. Besides, the point of having the teams build their own cars is to keep the race car manufacturers out of it and allow innovation from people that aren't trying to profit from series production of a car (this also reduces the amount someone is willing to spend on development if they aren't going to see the cost amortized over a production run). Additionally, yes, active suspension can be expensive but it doesn't have to be. A careful, staged development program can spread the cost and the risk out over a season or two of racing. Sure, teams with more money can develop things faster but innovation can counteract such things if the rules allow for it. Keep in mind that F1 is essentially emulating portions of active suspension with mechanical devices since active has been banned. Things like 3rd springs, j-dampers, 4 way adjustable shocks, etc are all ways to do the same thing that active suspension can do.

I don't like the fuel limit idea because it stifles a lot of areas. Think of a battle between a very small (aero efficient) and low powered car versus a big, draggy, high powered brute, it would be interesting to watch but a fuel limit wouldn't allow that range of design.

Additionally, they should not have pit stops or limit the stops to 1 or something like that so the crew and tire costs would be reduced.

 

Driver has to be 75% or more owner. No FIA A or Super Lic.( F1 drivers) Drivers in this class.

 

I like that idea a lot.

 

Marshall Pruett has an interesting bit on the new car right now on SpeedTV's web site:

http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/artic...e-test-report/

The cool part is the motor is a dry-sumped (but otherwise bone stock) LS3 (!)

Z//

 

Was at Road Atlanta for ALMS and they had one on display. No mention of cost. The engine is the cheap part of that car from what I read and saw.

 

Engines usually are at that level of racing. Not that they are cheap - just cheaper.

Spec formulas keep costs down - but "spec" allows for a lot of "tuning" and a little bit of Smokey Yunick rules "interpretation". Money will still matter in the new class.

Renting seats would be at risk with an "owner" rule.

 

Everybody is going Spec these days NASCAR, Indy, even F1

Its cheaper and sponsors like the lower costs and they dont care about the quality or even the spirit of racing

I want Can AM back

 

I really like your idea of the 6 x 10 x 4 box. That eliminates the current crop of "wide body" monsters that are worthless for anything but racing on an absolutely smooth track.

I also think that a minumum of 4.5 inches of ground clearance and no ground effect tunnels and no rear wings would be a huge improvement. If you did that you would have cars that are very close to being street worthy. Folks would take older cars and make street cars out of them or take them to track days. Currently, obsolete racing cars are pretty much worthless since they are too expensive to maintain as a track car (one off-track and you did $5,000 of front body damage when the splitter digs in) and are too low to be driven on the street.

You may say that these cars wouldn't be "fast". Well, they would be plenty fast compared to street cars and would take a lot more driver capability than a car that is stuck down with wings and ground effects. Moreover, big horsepower wouldn't be an advantage in a car without aero aids. It would reignite the classic battle of a more nimble, faster cornering car with a heavier car with more power. I think that would be a lot more fun to watch than a "spec series" where everybody is racing the same thing.

 

They already have that, it's called the 24 hrs. of LeMons (race drivers are broke).

 

and the cars are that way too.



Bring Back CAN-AM

 

Yeah, I do too. I *really* miss Riverside. But just remember that the issue being addressed by all these "spec" racers today is the very same issue that killed Can-Am. And that killed GTP. 'Twas ever thus, I'm afraid.

Z//