Please discuss here all your remarks and pose your questions about all racing series, except Formula One. Both technical and other questions about GP2, Touring cars, IRL, LMS, ...
Indeed it is looking good, same for the Drayson car. Those closed tops are really pretty to look at, will be a bit different though next year.
I like next years design, though i like this years car more lol, just such clean lines over the car.
Also on the article you posted, Lola have to cut the costs really much with next years car, the B10 costs just under one mil, they have to half that next year, going to be a though job to do so...
I still don't think that the fin in itself is ugly. It's they way it's integrated in the design. Other cars might look better with it. Also I believe there will still be Lola Coupes in LMP1, including older cars with 2011 body kit.
The 2011 Lola B11/40 LMP2 open cockpit package will include
· New all-carbon bodykit
· Quick-release removable rear bodywork
· Lola high-torque gearbox.
Engines available to Lola LMP2 customers
In alphabetical order
fits the theme of the new LMP2 though, which is suppose to be cheapo privateer car that it always was meant to be, but got taken advantage of by clever people who built some really nice cars for in the past...
The vertical fin idea isn`t new, but it`s a solution looking for a problem. The vertical stabiliser works on some cars (long-nose D-type Jag, for example), but if you consider cars such as the Porsche 956/962, they already have vertical stabilisers - the rear wing is supported at both ends by two large end-plates integrated into the rear body and the concept looks balanced, as well as producing a beautiful car. Since it`s hard to argue with the record of the 956/962, it must be efficient as well. I`ve seen the Ferrari 333sp racing with a fin, and one or two other cars recently too and none of them look "right" - most of them look appalling. With appropriate chassis design and adequate downforce, in conjunction with properly-developed suspension the fin is completely unnecessary. The C11 Mercedes didn`t need one, and nothing at Le Mans is ever likely to eclipse it`s performance. Nether did the XJR-9/12 series, and all of them, Porsche 962 included, were capable of far higher speeds than those reached now, with the chicanes. I am perhaps in the minority - I hate the whole hybrid concept and wish it had never raised it dreadfully ugly head. I love motor racing - with a proper motor. I don`t want to listen to cars that sound like vacuum cleaners. Anyone that doesn`t get a buzz from the noise generated by the likes of the XJR12, Lola-Aston LMP-1, McLaren F1-GTR etc shouldn`t be at the races IMHO. I`ve been a regular at Le Mans since 1987, and am dreading the proposed new fiasco. There was, and still isn`t, anything wrong with the Group C regulations - they fit the bill perfectly without the expense of KERS and other associated Eco-Crap.
There was 1 problem with the Group C back then, it was getting far more popular then the formula 1, then the rules changed wich destroyed Group C. Those cars were simply incredible, the huge amounts of downforce they could generate and their incredible straight line speeds. Those cars were just dangerous to drive. Afterall it is bad the group C died, but the speeds were getting out of hand, the 3.5L cars were lapping quicker then the formula 1 cars around the circuits
wesley123 wrote: Those cars were just dangerous to drive. Afterall it is bad the group C died, but the speeds were getting out of hand, the 3.5L cars were lapping quicker then the formula 1 cars around the circuits
That's a myth. Even F3.5 group C cars did not lap as quick as F1 cars.
See (qualifying times done on qualifying tyres for both series):
wesley123 wrote:There was 1 problem with the Group C back then, it was getting far more popular then the formula 1, then the rules changed wich destroyed Group C. Those cars were simply incredible, the huge amounts of downforce they could generate and their incredible straight line speeds. Those cars were just dangerous to drive. Afterall it is bad the group C died, but the speeds were getting out of hand, the 3.5L cars were lapping quicker then the formula 1 cars around the circuits
i have to disagree there..GroupC racing was in the doldrums with spectators back then ...i was travelling to the Nurburgring to a group C race ...but even though i got a free ticket ,no spectators there.. the same as in elms ,or lms ...shame ....really big shame but already then nothing else but F1 counted .....
I think the biggest problem with Group C was that it was faster than F1. Think of all the publicity that accompanied the 246mph F1 speed attempt recently - the Group C cars did that or very close to it on virtually every lap at Le Mans pre-chicane. I was listening to speed-trap data in 1989 and almost all the front runners were running top speeds over 240mph regularly.
Too dangerous? No - I don`t buy that for one second. One Jonathan Palmer demolished a 962 at le Mans in 1990, at around 200mph, and broke a couple of toes and a finger, I believe. The Group C cars were immensely strong pieces of kit.
The Group C cars were iconic - very, very fast, absolutely stunning to watch and extremely identifiable. And too much of a competitor with F1.
wesley123 wrote: Those cars were just dangerous to drive. Afterall it is bad the group C died, but the speeds were getting out of hand, the 3.5L cars were lapping quicker then the formula 1 cars around the circuits
That's a myth. Even F3.5 group C cars did not lap as quick as F1 cars.
See (qualifying times done on qualifying tyres for both series):
The second car in suzuka 1000 km in 1992 was more than 3 seconds behind the pole position car and it was another peugeot and you only had 4 cars within 7 seconds of the pole position which means only those 4 would have made it to the grid on F1 GP.
As for their specs..well that's why they were not up to the level of F1 cars despite being more efficient aero wise.
Well, from what i have read(or it was an illusion lol) Those Group C cars were running faster race laps on most circuits, from what i was sure is that the Toyota did it in Monza.
And those performances were all done with an heavier car, no active suspension and all those BS, the only thing those car had was LC, TC and an Semi-automatic gearbox, but on such level it was way down.
The L:D ratios of those cars were simply incredible, and stripped down the low amount of drag they had was incredible. I do believe that if yuo run the Toyota 3.5L in its lowest drag on the old le mans track it would easily hit 430km/h its body was just incredibly aerodynamic.
