Absolutely. Jim Hall is BIG in my book. Small team, smart people, big ideas. They could dismantle anyone. That is how racing is supposed to be. Smart is what wins races. Its why I love Porsche. 917/30......5 truly remarkable people and one very talented driver/engineer. Took apart Ford/GM in the Can Am. Proves beyond reasonable doubt you do not need BIG money as much as you need talented people, decent funding and great ideas. Do that and you can send the rest of the kids home early.
Let's not get too carried away here-The Porsche boys threw everything they had at the Can Am and were assisted by perhaps the greatest engineer/driver combo(Donohue) in history and were managed by the greatest team owner ever-Penske. There was plenty of money involved. Porsche had already spent considerable sums on the Can Am with a big NA 917 of 600+HP and titanium everywhere. It was beaten soundly. It was a full factory effort with all of the resources Porsche could muster. Heck, they even built a 16 cylinder engine as well as the turbo motor-small effort of five guys? Hardly. Most accounts have the Porsche Can-Am budget at over 2 million that first year of the 917-10, while McLaren's Can-Am budget never exceeded 500K. Additionally Porsche built their own engines and transmissions and enjoyed their own private test track. Not so at McLaren. Even considering all that, McLaren wasn't "destroyed" in 72. They had wins, pole positions and finished second in the championship. They were competitive in most of the races and probably would have won more except for an unusual number of mechanical failures. They beat McLaren, not GM. Sure there was a lot of back door help from GM, but it was most definitely not a factory effort. Jim Hall had more assistance from GM in many respects. The McLaren was a better car in every respect but outright power. Given another year(and McLaren not giving up), the big Chevrolet engines would have been cranking out 2000 turbocharged HP. Remember, McLaren was already focusing much of their energy on F1. Ford provided engines in a half-hearted effort to the folks running Ford power in the Can-Am, not much else. Besides, Ford had just proved that they could beat anyone in any type of racing with their Total Performance movement a few years earlier. McLaren was not the same after the recent death of their founder. I have no doubt that had Bruce not been killed, the battle between McLaren and Porsche in the Can Am might have been much different. I'm not trying to diminish the awesome 917-30 as its one of my favorite race cars-let's just not call it a shoestring effort as it was most definitely not. Nissan doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as that awesome Porsche.
So, will Nissan carry on with this front engine, front wheel drive (the petrol motor driving the front wheels 100%) or will they come back next year with a more traditional approach as their initial pre-car hype photos indicated? Do we know if they're planning to do the balance of the WEC season or is it back to testing only? BHW
We are thinking about it but it's a HUGE undertaking and would cost at least 30mm e. You'd need a RWD engine that is very small and can make 600HP in endurance tune likely a 4 cylinder You 'd need a FWD hybrid system which would require a lot of engineering. Top aerodynamicts, engineers, and other team members. We could do it but would need additional sponsorship and a customer who want to join us for the ride of a lifetime. You never know.
30mm e is what we'd need for a customer car. Racing,spares, drivers, testing, fuel, etc. not included. That's what a piece of history and a great adventure would cost you more or less.
Interesting the tone this thread has taken. Seems many are castigating Nissan for trying something different, yet we're all interested in Sports Car racing because companies like Nissan are trying something different. IMHO - and a few here agree - F1 / IndyCar / NASCAR / NHRA have all lost the plot because over regulation has bred spec racing. Don't know about you, but I think it sucks. I remember when the NHRA introduced the Harley Davidsons to Pro Stock Motorcycle (which was dying, primarily because everyone - EVERYONE - ran a Suzuki). It was just what the doctor ordered, although today it's almost ALL HD, so it's back to square one. Point is, a different approach (V-Twin vs. 4-cyl) made it exciting. We should applaud and encourage Nissan. No one is anointing them "Porsche" - no one is Porsche. However, to trash them as a 2-bit chump outfit is ignoring the history - they can compete and they've won before, no reason to bet against them. Would I prefer a more competitive offering from Nissan? Absolutely, but I'm much happier seeing their FWD hybrid monster than I would have been if they pulled a Toyota (uncompetitive generic jellybean car). Just my 2 cents.
My beef with Nissan has nothing to do with an innovative design. I ,too, enjoy a variety of approaches to the same problem. That's what made the original Can Am, vintage NASCAR, Indycar,etc so great. I don't like Nissan because of their corporate culture exposed by their dishonesty with the DeltaWing design, failing to honor their commitments and back door shenanigans. Karma. And yes, they have won before(with the X-Corvette/Lola chassis with their engine and some rules adjustments) did indeed win an IMSA title. Perhaps the court case will clear them, although I tend to believe Don Panoz's side of the story at this point.
Knowing Don Panoz' history, I tend to believe him as well. I've tried to detach myself from it in order to enjoy the racing without emotion. I don't want to be a hypocrite either - Ducati pilfered Honda's single sided swingarm, successfully defended against Honda in a patent lawsuit, and today is still referred to as a "pirate" by Honda and the MSMA (really, Honda). I root hard for Ducati, yet arguably, they didn't play by rules either (although the MotoGP rules are really intended to keep them competitive). Long winded way of saying, I hear you and agree, but the racing / innovation is really more important to me.
I think you are right. Some of the exiting and interesting cars we saw in the past would never have come to light if the current conformism had existed in the 60s and 70s. Think about some 4-wheel drive F1 cars, the 6-wheeler Tyrrell, the Chaparrals in CanAm or endurance, the STP Paxton Indy car, the ground-effect cars, Somkey Yunnick Indy sidecar, the Novis, the Lotus turbine, the Brabham fancar, which were way out of the box. Motor racing nowaday tend to have rigid regulations, and most of the recing is in specs series as well. Have you noticed the proliferation of the specs series in the last 3 decades? F3, GP2, Indy light, Indy, soon LMP2, there are always new ones ... That killed innovation and the small workshops trying something different. I am glad I saw racing in the 60s...
Have you read Mark Donahue's book "The Unfair Advantage"? Mark details the 917/30 program. It was still only 5 people at Penske Racing at the time. We can go back and forth in relation to GM & Ford.I know the blue oval side of it as my former boss was part of both the LeMans program and involved to some degree in the Can Am. Bottom line is Porsche came to play. And regardless of resources, Porsche never had the kind of money to spend the other two did. I don't know those numbers, but they didn't outspend GM or Ford. Back then it was win at all cost for all the American manufacturers. My only question to Porsche in relation to Can Am is......What ever happened to the "happy pump"?
Ha, the happy pump! Yes, I've read Mark's book-have an original signed copy and a hand written letter from Mark-he has always been one of my heroes. Anyway-simply not true as regards to cost. Porsche far outspent McLaren, pretty well documented in a number of sources. They did indeed come to win and spent quadruple what anyone else did. Ford had nothing more than a token program in Can-Am, mainly provided a few engines. Their LeMans program of a few years earlier is an entirely different story. While Penske was nowhere near the size then that they are today, they had the entire might of Porsche behind them. Although the genius of Mark solved the fuel metering problems. Where do you think the phrase "TurboPanzer" came from as well as "Unobtanium". The Can Am car was a big part of that myth. Porsche/Penske were working with everything they had to win the Can-Am. A few breaks in McLaren's favor in 72 and it might have gone the other way. '73 was really the dominant year as everyone had pulled out except for the improving Shadow squad. As I've said, its one of my favorite cars and we(my company) even produced a shirt of the beast. Been popular for over a decade! Image Unavailable, Please Login
Same here on Mark's book. That's why I love the car. Innovation takes on many faces. Your statement about all the cars built from the Chaparral's to Smokey is on target. It is why we are seeing the end of racing. Small shops (like my own) are not afraid to take on the bigger teams. We just need to find a better way to make it faster. That is the reason you get up in the morning. I have watched big guys get knocked out of the box because some small team came with their "A" game. Today's over regulation basically has taken any free thought about being different and put it on the trash pile. Like I said with Nissan, they may have mis-stepped, but they will get it together. I think they will take all they have learned and figure out what needs to be fixed and what needs to go. In time.....they are going to be a factor.
A few posts were asking about the Nissan being "4wd". It had electric motors in the rear wheels, which may have not been functional at all and just "ballast" during the Le Man's. There are no drive shafts to the rear wheels, as these would interrupt the tunnels. Nissan's priority, if the rules still allow a similar car next year, is to work on getting the hybrid system to function. They also need to look at the car's maintenance windows. If the Hybrid system had of been working properly, the car would of been much *MUCH* faster. Instead, the driver would often have to shift to neutral, and reset everything at least once a lap(I saw this for an entire stint, pretty much every lap, while streaming one of the cars.) The cornering speed with the car was pretty good, it gave up on exit for the right hander after Indianapolis(not sure of the corner name). If the hybrid system had worked properly, it might not have last as much time, but it probably lost 2 seconds minimum to the other cars as it couldn't put the power down until the car straightened up. Passing GT's would get delayed, where as the Audi/Toyota/Porsche's could just drive under a GT out of the turn and power past. It was an interesting car, and I really hope the rules do not change to much for next year, so it can get another shot at it. Le Mans has managed to make a format where Hybrids are providing VERY interesting racing. Porsche got it hiccups sorted from last year. Will Nissan do the same next year? Audi brings and incredible package in terms of repair time/maintenance time. I'm not sure the Toyota/Porsche match them in this regard?
