It already exists...it's called GTE. (Exception: Ford. 'Didn't have to even make many let alone sell 'em....see my last 2 sentences, post #22 above)
The ACO made some curious moves in the GT1 era. As many (myself included) were advocating that GT1 moved toward more of a mid/late-90s type FIA GT "Supercar" formula to bring more interest to the category with entries such as Ferrari Enzo, Maserati MC12, Bugatti Veyron (for example). But, the ACO dug in their heels and kept the GT1 category as was and little by little it was reduced literally to a Corvette vs. Aston Martin battle. Recalling that, at least for a while, Corvette was the lone GT1 entrant in ALMS leaving the outcomes to an inter-team battle for class victory. Remembering also the near war that erupted when the ALMS wanted the Ferrari of Houston entered Maserati MC12 in the GT1 category. The ACO objected that the car was outside the bounds and spirit of the rules. Poor Scott Atherton, desperate to fill fields (with entries of less than 30 cars at Sebring for a few years running) with interesting and relevant cars, must have flown back and forth to France a dozen times negotiating a deal to make it happen. What came out of it all was an MC12 that was defanged with ballast and engine restrictions that left it with no way to compete for victories. It was such a great pity as the ACO's absolute refusal to allow "Supercars" into the category would have saved it. But, it wasn't seen that way in France for some reason. None the less, Audi's withdrawal will leave a serious void. Things will never be the same again. Unless another manufacturer or two step up, the most important race in the world will become a Porsche steamroller again. BHW
In addition to the obvious influence of the diesel scandal on this decision, Audi have been engaged in a pitched battle with the FIA since Le Mans over whether Audi have been cheating the fuel flow regulations (the FIA's position) or exploiting the poor performance of the originally homologated fuel flow sensors (Audi's position). Prompted by this, Audi are in fact stopping a year earlier than planned and delivering a slap in the face to the FIA. A new manufacturer LMP1 programme is not expected until 2018, so the gruel will be a little thin at the top next season.
Homologation may have been a poor choice of words. More like, make x-amount of cars available to privateer teams (not to speculators) to go compete. It was always a revelation when a privateer like Joest, Kremer or Brun could beat the factory Porsches during the height of the Group C series. At the 24 Hours of Daytona, there would be at least a dozen to 15 962s that had just as good a chance to win overall as the factory backed Al Holbert Racing team. We need more of this today. BHW
At present, LMP1, hybrid or not, are only allowed to race in the WEC, but not in "regional" series like IMSA, ELMS, or ALMS which are only for private team running LMP2 & 3. Thus, in America your 2 best endurance races - Daytona 24 hours and Sebring 12 hours- cannot have LMP1 competing. This is where it's wrong, in my view. These are prestigious races, but barred to the top cars. How did that happen? Can the ACO explain why it send the WEC race at COTA, but not at Sebring? It doesn't make sense to me! The Austin track has no history attached to it compared to the Florida track that has 50 years+ of tradition. The IMSA series is for LMP2 only, right? But they only allow 4 chassis, one US-made, 2 French ones and an Italian, I think. And they must all use the same mandatory engine. Maybe the rules are different in the States than in Europe, I am not sure. The ACO that writes the rules is turning endurance into specs series. So I can see car manufacturers leaving and never coming back. Having ORECA, and OAK, and RILEY chassis with GIBSON engines only allowed is not a recipe for future success, IMO. What if car manufacturers want to enter? They can't!
The IMSA DPi class is for those four chassis with the option of fitting the Gibson motor OR a manufacturer crate engine. The latter requires bodywork with an element of manufacturer 'design cues'. So far Cadillac, Mazda, and Nissan are committed for 2017, with a handful of Gibson-powered entries as well.
I think the problem originates with the ACO introducing new categories, and the need to protect them in a ranking order. Before, there was Le Mans Prototypes and GT; 2 distinct categories. The GT couldn't challenge the Protos. . Then the ACO introduced LMP2, a restricted proto, so it had to make sure that the GT weren't faster; hence the reluctance to accept the Maserati MC12. Now, in IMSA, ELMS and Asian Le Mans series, they have also introduced LMP3, which must slot between LMP2 and GTE. That's why they need to restrict GTE to avoid them being faster than their new-born category. So, the ACO is in a quagmire of its own making. It cannot accept supercars because some could threaten the existence of its LMP2 & 3 categories.
Well, lucky you, I say !!! Here, we have to put up with the Gibson motor -based on a Nissan block, I am told? Like in any series, diversity of cars, chassis and engines is essential, IMO.
There was a lack of participation in the P1 category so they got rid of it. Sure they had some teams come over for Daytona and Sebring, but all the other races only had 1 or 2 cars entered. I am all for LMP1, as long as there are enough cars to make it worthwhile. My fear is that with Audi leaving, and no privateer teams, it won't be worthwhile anymore.
There have actually been two Nissan-branded engines running around in LMP2 over the last few years. One was produced by Zytek now Gibson and was based on the last F3000 motor. The other is produced by Nismo based on their GT3 engine (from the GT-R). I believe next year's Gibson is an extensively reworked if not new design, whilst Nismo continues to develop its GT3 power plant. Gibson obviously know a thing or two about how to extend the competitive life of racing technology: the Gibson (née Zytek) 015 LMP2 chassis which just won the European Le Mans Series title has its origins all the way back in the Reynard 2KQ prototype from 2000! If you find that hard to believe (and I wouldn't blame you) see mulsannescorner.com...
Yaddi, yaddi, yaddi, yaddi, yaddi. It ain't sport anymore. "Those were the days my friends. We thought they'd never end..." lorenzobandini
I do believe you. As for Gibson (ex Zytek), I think they got the engine contract because the bid for their chassis to be homologated for LMP2 was turned down.
Peugeot tech chief calls for low-cost non-hybrid LMP1s Peugeot tech chief calls for low-cost non-hybrid LMP1s But nothing can be done for 2017, so the LMP1 grid is going to be very small. Probably that if the ACO (organising for the FIA) ban hybrids in 2018, Toyota and Porsche will be leaving too. So the WEC will be run with LMP2, and become a specs series. What a mess !!
Yep. And Ligier and ORECA agreed to split the LMP3 business between chassis for the former and engine for the latter...
Opinion: And then there were two - what next for LMP1? Opinion: And then there were two - what next for LMP1? WEC responds to Audi withdrawal: "Others will be arriving" WEC responds to Audi withdrawal: "Others will be arriving"
Endurance racing may have started in France, but it's only recently that the ACO has obtained the mandate to run the World Endurance Championship.
Okay. You've got me. I've been discredited. My non-credentials worthless. But who, outside of France (the FIA Federation Internationale de l'Automobile and whoever prior to it's existence), has been running it? It has been my belief that since the inception of big time international endurance racing, those in Paris have been in charge and I haven't found otherwise at your instigation. All the years of the FIAWEC (http://www.fiawec.com/), World Championship of Makes, the variations of the World Sportscar Champioship, etc., etc., I thought have been under French leadership. I'm so ashamed.... Elaborate please.
