![]() ![]() Entente Cordiale ![]() ![]() ![]() Rules ![]() Daniel Poissenot and Daniel Perdrix, the technical chiefs of the ACO, are in ![]() charge of the new regulations that will govern prototype racing on both sides of the ![]() Atlantic in the Le Mans Endurance Series in Europe, and the American Le Mans ![]() Series in the US. They are working with the FIA on safety issues, but beyond that, ![]() they are taking their own path into the future of prototype racing at Le Mans. ![]() ![]() Slow Burn ![]() The new cars are slow in coming on the scene, probably because the ACO has so ![]() far failed to produce a comprehensive set of regulations for the new cars for 2006 ![]() and beyond. Small manufacturers looking to build LMP2 cars, eligible from next ![]() year, have sought clarification from the ACO. ![]() ![]() What the ACO would reveal to me was: ![]() For 2004 and 2005 ![]() LMP1 = LMP900, LM-GTP, LMP675 (carbon chassis), LMP1, SR1, 900kg ![]() LMP2 = LMP675 (aluminium chassis converted from SR2), LMP2, 750kg ![]() ![]() For 2006 onwards ![]() LMP1 = LMP1 carbon chassis cars ![]() LMP2 = LMP2 carbon chassis cars ![]() ![]() Crash Test ![]() While Poissenot explained that all prototypes built to the new regulations would ![]() need to be carbon, Perdrix disagreed. The crash test may be too stringent for ![]() anything other than carbon, but an aluminium chassis car built to the necessary ![]() strength would probably be miles over the weight limit, which is to be reset at ![]() 750kg next year. ![]() ![]() Is it still the wish of the ACO that the LMP2 category is to be seen as an entry-level ![]() prototype class? Yes. How will the ACO keep the costs of the new formula down? ![]() Through technology and electronics. No real answers there. ![]() ![]() Running with the Big Dogs ![]() What we did establish was what would happen to the current LMP675 cars. The ![]() ACO has decided that, as the MG Lola and the DBA Zytek was capable of winning ![]() against the LMP900 and SR1 cars in the ALMS and FIA SCC respectively, there is ![]() no reason why they should not be in the same category next year. Sounds fair, but ![]() for men like Rob Dyson who bought an MG Lola this year, and the money he has ![]() spent developing the car to run against the Audi, he might just as well have bought ![]() an Audi. ![]() ![]() The LMP2 class will incorporate as many 'little' prototypes as the ACO can muster, ![]() and that includes the SR2 aluminium chassis cars, such as the Pilbeam, which ![]() have already passed the ACO's homologation for the LMP675 class. The Pilbeam ![]() is expected by the ACO to be quicker than the new SR2 cars, so the French ![]() organisation has decreed that it will run with a smaller fuel tank (80 litres), 2003 ![]() restrictors (10 per cent smaller than the new cars, running to 2002 size ![]() restrictors), a smaller rear wing and ballasted from 730kg to 750. ![]() ![]() Stable Mate ![]() The general plan is to have the engine regulations remaining stable. "We do not ![]() want to change the engine regulations," said Perdrix. They are therefore expected ![]() to continue with two litre, turbocharged engines, 3.4 litre normally aspirated ![]() engines, and 4-litre road-car based engines which can be sleeved or bored, ![]() unlike the regulations of the FIA which prevents modification. ![]() ![]() For those teams waiting for a clear set of rules before pressing the green button, ![]() you will have to wait a little longer. The ACO is trying to get the regulations out as ![]() soon as possible. "December" says Poissenot. "No, sooner than that!" says ![]() Perdrix. ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Andrew Cotton |
![]() |