# Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back?



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

I'm tired of the Penske Racing Porsche RS Spyders winning. It was forgivable at the street courses, but a permanent road course overall win is, to me, unexcusable. Now I know whey the ACO came up with the 5% restictor reduction for the LMP2s-they still have a fuel mileage advantage over the LMP1s And even the '06 Spyders were as fast as the R10s, let alone anything else. And Penske is basically a factory team. Not even Acura can claim that their teams are full factory efforts.
And the fact the LMP675/LMP2s have a fuel mileage advantage is well know-the Dyson Racing Lola-AERs had a 1-3 lap advantage over the R8 as early as 2003. 
IMSA didn't go along with the ACO's request of the smaller air restictor, probably because the Acuras and Porsches were the only one's capable of consitantly matching the R10's pace. It's not Creation's fault that the Intersport and Autocon cars are so godawfully slow-either team doesn't have a lot of experience with either car, Kumho can't make a decent LMP1 spec tire, and none of the drivers are the caliber of Nic Minassian or JCW.
I doubt that IMSA will do anything unless the ACO tries to brow beat them into it, but even that might not work(remember the Maserati MC12, and I even backed IMSA on that one).
I may be cynical, and I decided to remain agnostic about this topic, as Audi won Sebring and St. Pete. And they could've won Long Beach, and probably should've won Houston. And Audi Sport boss Dr. Ullrich's complaints started to become rather dull. But LMP1 is supposed to win almost all of the races. You don't see GT1 and GT2 cars racing eachother like this, why should it be that way in LMP1 and LMP2?
So either give Audi back a couple of liters of fuel(and the same goes for all LMP1 cars, too), take away a couple of liters of fuel from the LMP2s(especally seeing as how the Porsches don't use the E10 ethanol/gasoline blend), or take away their restictor break. The only things that would make the ALMS better in my eyes is ban full factory teams from LMP2, and/or ban traction control.


_Modified by chernaudi at 3:03 PM 5-21-2007_


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (chernaudi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_I'm tired of the Penske Racing Porsche RS Spyders winning. It was forgivable at the street courses, but a permanent road course overall win is, to me, unexcusable. 

But it was ok for the Audi to win everything in sight for five years?

_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_Now I know whey the ACO came up with the 5% restictor reduction for the LMP2s-they still have a fuel mileage advantage over the LMP1s And even the '06 Spyders were as fast as the R10s, let alone anything else. And Penske is basically a factory team. Not even Acura can claim that their teams are full factory efforts.

Actually, the Acura teams are just as much factory as the Porsches are and these are the same specs that all the cars ran last year. It just seems that this formula for P2 and P1 are closer to what the ACO tried before, having the P2 and P1 cars be two different means to an end. Porsche made a great car, why penalize them for it, no one ever penalized Audi for its great car.

_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_And the fact the LMP675/LMP2s have a fuel mileage advantage is well know-the Dyson Racing Lola-AERs had a 1-3 lap advantage over the R8 as early as 2003. 
IMSA didn't go along with the ACO's request of the smaller air restictor, probably because the Acuras and Porsches were the only one's capable of consitantly matching the R10's pace. It's not Creation's fault that the Intersport and Autocon cars are so godawfully slow-either team doesn't have a lot of experience with either car, Kumho can't make a decent LMP1 spec tire, and none of the drivers are the caliber of Nic Minassian or JCW.

How do you know you can make those statements? Have you been at Kumho tire testing? Do you know its the tires? Have you compared directly the talents of the drivers you speak of? You're making a lot of broad statements again that you have no proof of.
They didnt implement the restrictor because they wanted racing, that is what they are getting.

_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_I doubt that IMSA will do anything unless the ACO tries to brow beat them into it, but even that might not work(remember the Maserati MC12, and I even backed IMSA on that one).

Dont be too sure, they have made it known that they will be watching what goes on and do what they need to do.

_Quote, originally posted by *chernaudi* »_I may be cynical, and I decided to remain agnostic about this topic, as Audi won Sebring and St. Pete. And they could've won Long Beach, and probably should've won Houston. And Audi Sport boss Dr. Ullrich's complaints started to become rather dull. But LMP1 is supposed to win almost all of the races. You don't see GT1 and GT2 cars racing eachother like this, why should it be that way in LMP1 and LMP2?
So either give Audi back a couple of liters of fuel(and the same goes for all LMP1 cars, too), take away a couple of liters of fuel from the LMP2s(especally seeing as how the Porsches don't use the E10 ethanol/gasoline blend), or take away their restictor break. The only things that would make the ALMS better in my eyes is ban full factory teams from LMP2, and/or ban traction control.


This race was won on fuel economy. The Audi's ran away from the field early on, so they definitely had the speed. They had an awful weekend up till race day spending as much time in the desert sand as on the track. They had the pace, the race dropped into the laps of the Porsche on fuel economy. Even then, the Audi was only 9 seconds back and all the way back to the second Audi were all on the lead lap.
Actually, right now, there cant be anything better for the series than to have all those P2 cars up there fighting with Audi. Its making for good racing, you dont know who will stand at the top of the overall before the race begins and you have legitimately 9 cars that could win overall each event. Its been exactly what the ALMS needs. Give it a little more time and people's interest will be back and then I think you'll see a slight change in the rules to make all right with the world again.


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (.:RDriver)*

First of all, Audi was in the top class, and built their car to the same rules as everyone else. Don Panoz could've built a mid engined car with a turbocharged engine, but chose not to, instead trying a front engined car powered by a pushrod Ford V8. And his cars were successful, as they were the only ones to beat Audi without a rules tilt(LM '05, which didn't work), or being put back burner to another VAG racing program(Bentley), and BMW's LMR doesn't count, as it only beat '99 spce R8Rs.
And my assesment of Penske being a factory team is based on the reading of IMSA allocation of bonus money/prizes for privateer teams. All the Acura teams(AGR, Highcroft, and Lowe's/Fernadez), along with Dyson Racing are ellegible to one degree or another for such bonuses. Penske isn't.
And if what you say is true Jimmy about LMP1 and -2 being what the ACO/IMSA orginally wanted, why didn't they get it right the first time. That was the intent of LMP675: Privateers/smaller factories can run smaller/less poweriful cars, and be pretty much on par with the LMP900s on many courses. But then LMP2 was intended purely for privateers, and aren't intended to have as much of a chance or overall honors. Why did IMSA/ACO not get it right in '99, but are getting those then desired(now unintended) results now? Audi got it right with the R8 and R10, even Panoz got it right with the LMP1 roadster in '99. Granted, these are cars, not rules packages. But the theories are the same. 
And it must be(sadly) admitted that many(too many in my mind) teams reliy on pay drivers(see CART or the IRL for other examples). A lot of these drivers probably should't be out there(again, look at CART or the IRL), but without them, Intersport and Autocon don't race.
I mean, Mike Lewis won quite a few Trans-Am races, And Chris Mc Murray nearly won the LMP2 drivers' title a few years ago. And Jon Field won the LMP675 title in '02, and his son Clint won it's current equivalent in '05. But even with that experience, they still need pay drivers just to afford to race. Which is the saddest thing about this whole deal. I guess that we can thank NASCAR for sucking up all the sponsors in North American auto racing, and having these teams have to run pay drivers in their cars, or simply not race, possibly at all.
And as for the MC12 deal and it's present impelcations, the ACO stopped just short of suing IMSA or trying to pull its sponsorship of the ALMS, and only when the FIA butted in(in what in recent times is one of the smartest things they did) did the issue get settled, presumably because Max Mosley and/or Bernie Eccostone(or at least the guy who Max and Bernie put in charge of sportscar racing at the FIA) threatend the ACO with sanctions similar to what the ACO were threatening IMSA with. So IMSA can run to the FIA again if the ACO start to b**** again. But then again, the outcome may be the reverse of what the MC12 issue was.
And it doesn't help that you can finish last in the lowest paying NASCAR race and make a crap load more money than winning 2 or 3 ALMS races. Money talks in motorsport(see the pay drivers mention). There isn't much insentive to run and win in the ALMS(or any road racing series) unless you're a diehard road racing addict when you can have the crappiest season in NASCAR, and damn near be a millionare. Look and Michael Waltrip. He made only one race(the Daytona 500), finished like 20-25th, is 56th in points, and was fined $100,000 and penalized 100pts. But he's making a crapload of money on the coat tails of Toyota and his older brother Darrell's assocition with the Japanese automaker. And that my friend, is the tragedy with most non-NASCAR series.
If only more people/sponsors/manufactures could get interested in LMP1/GT1, or the ALMS period, and have a long term plan in place, the boat would be righted now. But we can't fix the past, or even the present really, all that can be done is hope for the future.


_Modified by chernaudi at 3:37 PM 5-22-2007_


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (chernaudi)*

I dont know where you went with all that, we're talking about LMP1/2 competitiveness and the next thing I know your spouting off crap about NASCAR and the money involved. Pick a thought and run with it before going off on other tangents.








I dont know why the ACO cant make a good formula for equivalence when they want it and then come up with one when their trying not too (must be a French thing







), but that is what has happened. The LMP 675s were too fragile to keep up, now you have the P2 cars under the original formula keeping up with the P1 cars.
But the bottom line is its now producing good racing for the series. There are legit contenders for the wins, there is good racing, there are good numbers of cars on the lead lap at the end and its something we have been waiting for. Only folks complaining are the die-hard Audi fans cause they dont like seeing them not win all the time. 
I dont care who finishes first as long as there is good racing to get there and that is what we have right now.


----------



## Tanner74 (Jul 28, 2003)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (.:RDriver)*


_Quote, originally posted by *.:RDriver* »_I dont care who finishes first as long as there is good racing to get there and that is what we have right now.

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## 16v (Aug 4, 1999)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (.:RDriver)*


_Quote, originally posted by *.:RDriver* »_
I dont care who finishes first as long as there is good racing to get there and that is what we have right now.

oh Jimmy you have such a way with words


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (16v)*

Well it's true that sports car racing just doesn't appeal to the average Joe anymore. I've found that many current sportscar fans(myself included) are disenchanted NASCAR fans who've grow tired of that sports' politics. And I do blame NASCAR for a lot of what's wrong with American racing right now. But one really can't put all the blame on them. NASCAR is a privately onwed company(just like IMSA and Panoz Motorsports Group), and they've just done a better job of being out there in the sports world. And when you have the marketing draw that they have, we're back to the money talks scenerio. Car makers/team owners/sponsors/drivers want to reap the maximum bang for their buck. And that varies from person to person, organization to organization. What appeals about NASCAR to Ford, Chrysler and GM doesn't appeal to Audi, and the same goes the ALMS' LMP1 class.
That being said, you can't blame the auto makers/team owners/sponsors or drivers. With the bugets for advertising tightenting for a lot of companies, they want the most exposure, publicity, and bang for their dollar. As you've basically said Jimmy(and you're not alone, Robin Miller has said it dozens of times), the guy who finishes dead last in the Daytona 500 is more likey to get publicity and mentioned in the motorsports media(or any media) than the guy who wins the 12 Hours of Sebring.
What I was talking about about the NASCAR BS tangent was an example of how the ALMS is lagging behind. I mean, they don't have the marketing power, they can't draw people in/businesses in, but that's what living with a 800 lb. gorilla that was around a long time before the ALMS was founded does.
And a lot of this has to do with the ACO. They've messed up numerous times, probably due to their desire to keep Le Mans unique. And it's probably costing the ALMS, especally as Dr. Don had to help clean up a helluva mess back in late '98 when the ALMS was founded. And I don't think the IMSA and the ACO have been on the same page(or maybe even in the same time zone) for years. Since '04, neither organiation's rules have been standardized fully, which was sometimes good(helping out smaller ALMS teams) and sometimes bad(messed up LMP1/2 equivalncey formula that either organization can agree on).
And the problem that the rules makers face is that these cars aren't spec by design, so it's almost impossible to fully equalize them 100% of the time. So why not get rid of the two classes and combine them until a settlement can be reached? I mean, there's almost no preformance distiction right now, and a RS Spyder cost as much as a R8, and both have near equal overall preformance.
I guess that I'm PO'd that politics is screwing up what was once a stable, and fair rules package. Maybe I should just expect a can of worms getting opened when the ACO makes any rules change.


_Modified by chernaudi at 10:57 PM 5-22-2007_


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (chernaudi)*

This has nothing to do with the ACO or it being their fault or their rule changes. If anything it lies solely on the shoulders of IMSA as they are the ones that are going against the ACO rules.
IMSA maintains that since the ACO sets its rules for its one race a year on a track that is unique to anything else out there, the same rules cannot be applied to N. American tracks in races that are only 3 hours long. They have a point there.
IMSA wants to use the basic formula so that cars designed for the 24 can still be raced here and they can bring a taste of that race to the American fans. However, they need to also do what is best for their series. Right now that means keeping the P2 rules as they were last year while adding the restrictions to the P1 cars from this year.
For IMSA, right now, that is the best scenario and its proving to be such. Audi can be upset all they want, and truly, I dont blame them one bit, I wouldnt like it either. However, since they have driven everyone off that had a fighting chance to race with them, IMSA doesnt really have any other choice in order to create some racing at the head of the pack. Audi still is winning their class, they can still claim "undefeated" status and they can still claim their perfect season. If anything, I think actually having some competition in the races would make the Audi team all that much sharper when they get to Le Mans. They are actually having to work to try to get to the overall victory, if the rules were different, they could sit back and make mistake after mistake and still be taking the wins.
Watch what happens to Corvette this year. Those guys have no competition and I think they are getting complacent as I'm seeing mistakes and problems on course that they have never made before. I think its Aston's year to finally take advantage of that.
So bottom line is its not the ACO's fault. If anyone, blame IMSA. But right now, I dont think there are a lot out there other than Audi fans that will do that. We have the best racing for the top spot in years and I think people are enjoying it, and that is all IMSA wanted to do from the start.
I fail to see politics in this issue in regards to the IMSA/ACO relationship.


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (.:RDriver)*

The politics may not be causing any real harm to either side yet. But it may become an issue again if something else pops up that they can't agree on. A split may easily hurt both series, like how CART Champ Car and the IRL are still hurting from the '95-96 split, and how sports car racing has yet to completely recover from the ALMS/Grand Am split in '99. IMSA loses much of its preseige in the world outside of North America, and the ACO loses it's North American presence. 
Granted, rules based entirely around a 24 hour race held every June on the outskirts of a famous French Catherdral town isn't gonna work for 3-12 hour races held in the U.S. and Canada 100% of the time. Audi feels hard done by because they have to race LMP2 cars, which theoretically aren't supposed to be in that position. But Porsche would probably feel hard done by too after spending nearly as much time, effort and money as Audi has and not reap all the deserved benefits.
Having said that, one could ask Porsche "why not build a LMP1 machine?". Well, Porsche doesn't see the worth of building a "mass produced" customer LMP1, and feel that LMP2 is where that can be done to the best of their aims. And they're also complaining(rightfully or wrongfully so is your call) about the R10 possibly anilating a Porsche LMP1 car. To me, that's a tough call to make, as their are no factory backed gasoline LMP1 cars in the ALMS or LMS right now. And the Pescarolo C60 Hybrids were 2-3 seconds a lap slower at Le Mans on average during the race(I think that the actual differental was 2.3 seconds on average). Who's not to say that that wouldn't be 2-3 tenths of a second at say, MMSP/Salt Lake City? I guess that will go down as unknown. But it may show how different Le Mans is from almost every ALMS circuit.
And I found this comment in response to my third Audi R10 topic at AudiWorld: http://forums.audiworld.com/ra...phtml If these comments are true, hopefully Audi will still do Le Mans, and Sebring, PLM, Laguan Seca, and/or the LMS.
And the Dyson Lola-AER LMP1 cars not having a shot against the R10s last year is no fault of Rob or Chris, or the team, or Lola, as proven by the Judd and Audi powered cars that are running in the LMS. I blame the AER engine. It just doesn't seem to be making the power it was designed to, and has always been somewhat problematic. Just look at the Courage LC 70s that are running in the LMS. Last year, they used the 4.5 liter Mugen V8, and had a couple of the fastest cars on the grid, but were let down by their unreliable Courage designed Hewland gearboxes. A switch to Xtrac gearboxes has helped reliabilty, but the AER engines have had overheating problems, and again, seems to be lacking in power.
Hopefully, the boat will be righted, and hopefully Audi can accept that what doesn't kill them should make them stronger. I mean, they didn't react this way when a Dyson Lola MG LMP675 car beat them at Sears Point/Infineon Raceway in '03. And the '07 spec cars will be used post Le Mans, and should be superior to the '06 R10s(which are about on par with the LMP2, they're faster over a race distance, but still need a nearly perfect race, but so do the LMP2 cars if they want to win, too). The '06 cars are much faster at most ciruit than at this time last year, and the '07 R10-lighter, with more downforce and less drag, and with improved power/driveabiliy characteristics, should right the boat. 
And hopefully, things will be better for the future for the ALMS so they don't have to go through BS rules adjustments just to have a decent race.

_Modified by chernaudi at 2:11 PM 5-23-2007_

_Modified by chernaudi at 2:15 PM 5-23-2007_


_Modified by chernaudi at 2:15 PM 5-23-2007_


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (chernaudi)*

Well, Autosport is reporting that IMSA may institute 5% restictor reduction quote un quote "very soon". IMSA/PMSG has said that they haven't heard the rumor, but didn't deny it either.
Link: http://www.ten-tenths.com/foru...ge=92


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (chernaudi)*

Good, then everyone can stop their bitching when the P2 cars continue to give the Audi competition.


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (.:RDriver)*

The only place that the restictor should show up is on faster tracks-Road America, Road Atlanta, Mosport for some examples. The LMP2 should be close at Detroit, Lime Rock, and possibly Mid Ohio too, based on the LMS, where the LMP2s can keep up on tighter tracks with most LMP1s(like at Valencia).


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (chernaudi)*

I don't mean to keep kicking this dead horse. But the ACO has been saying for a long time(nearly a year now-after Le Mans '06) that the LMP2 class should be a privateer class separate from LMP1 from a proformance stand point. 
One of the more interesting ways that I've heard to distance the classes is the use of "stock block" or GT2 spec engines. Most original LMP675s used stock block engines, as they were cheap, and reasonably reliable for their time. I think that it may also to a degree help with one of the problems with the LMP2 class, at least in my mind-unreliability. The LMP2 class, especially at Le Mans(but also at Sebring and Petit Le Mans) is basically last man standing. The winner of the class isn't so much a winner seemingly as the first survivor to cross the finish line.
And I have heard that if this goes through(though this is some one else's thought on the matter), the purpose built engined cars(those from Porsche and Acura) may be hit with resitctor or weight penalties. 
I fell that there is room for stock block engines in the ALMS/LMS/LM24, but they'd get slaughtered by the purpose built jobs unless they get pegged back, which may drive Porsche and Acura to LMP1-or out of sports car racing until a rules package favorable to them reappears. I think it would be neat, as it may coax some privateers back in to the ALMS' LMP2 category, but the rules makers have to be careful on this one, if it ever comes true.
And here's something that may help everyone to cut cost-using engine electronics to limit engine power(something the FIA is looking at right now). It's not as hard on the engine, as the air restictors cause strain on the engines. But that would require spec ECUs, or atleast spec software, but I don't really see this happening anytime soon, either, as every engine is different, and the FIA would probably have trouble enforcing it. 
Which, it should be noted, is why there are factory/quasi-factory teams in LMP2-the ACO said that such a rule right now would be too difficult to enforce. And besides, they can't enforce a rule that they haven't written yet, anyways.
This info/opinions was gleened from info at the http://www.ten-tenths.com sports car sub forum. And the thread titles are "ACO on LMP2", "2007 ALMS Season", and "LMP1 Diesel Proformance Adjustment".
And one of those threads also goes into why IMSA is doing what it's doing with the current rules. Simply put, IMSA is getting better TV ratings and media coverage then the LMS is-even in Europe. On the average weekend(ie, no Indianapolis 500, Daytona 500, etc.), the only series that conistantly get better US tv ratings other than the ALMS or the 24 Hours of Le Mans for that matter, is the NASCAR Nextel Cup series(for sure), the Busch Grand National Series(probably), and possibly the Craftsmen Truck series(Audi stated this in their Pre LM'06 press release-which is still up at http://www.audi.com -on why they wanted to run the R10 at Le Mans). And to keep their ratings up, IMSA had to do something, and what we have now is probably the best they could do short term. It's economic Dawinism-if ratings are up, interest is higher among racing fans, sponsors start to pay attention, and so do manufactures, everyone makes money one way or another, the series can market itself better, and the series thrives.
On the other hand, if the ratings go down, the fans loose interest, sponsors and manufactures loose interest, marketing slows down, and the series risks extinction.
I may not like it very much, but IMSA has to do what their doing now to make sure that better times lie ahead.

_Modified by chernaudi at 1:35 PM 5-27-2007_

_Modified by chernaudi at 1:39 PM 5-27-2007_

_Modified by chernaudi at 1:40 PM 5-27-2007_

_Modified by chernaudi at 1:41 PM 5-27-2007_


_Modified by chernaudi at 1:43 PM 5-27-2007_


----------



## USMC_LT (Aug 18, 2006)

I think it is great that Porsche is beating LMP-1 cars. That is their history, smaller class cars beating the big dogs. Just be glad that Porsche did not decide to build a LMP-1 car......Yet.


----------



## FISCAL (Apr 7, 2007)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (Tanner74)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Tanner74* »_
http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

x2 http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (FISCAL)*

I bet that the Porsche Motorsport North America guys are p****d now. IMSA has posted at their site http://www.imsaracing.net that they will adopt the ACO's air restictor reduction. Granted, Dr, Ullrich's criticism of this may've had something to do with it. But their are other things as well. Traditionalist say that the top class should win all the time. 
And remember, IMSA's trying to get Le Mans Series teams to run Petit Le Mans and Laguna Seca. Granted, the races are 3 1/2 to 4 months away, but letting the LMP2 cars be as fast as the Audi R10 probably could discourage LMP1 teams from the LMS LMP1 category from showing up at PLM/LS. 
And the IMSA also says that Penske must run the same E10 fuel that all the other non diesel cars use. Penske management claimed that the RS Spyder's ECU didn't allow the use of any fuel containing bio-ethanol. Well, Dyson's cars have used it for a couple of races now. Maybe that's what Penske's advantage has been so far.
And if PMNA is angry now, imagine if Audi didn't commit to the ALMS, the Intersport and Autocon Creations would be given huge performance breaks or the LMP2 cars would be severly resticted.
And imagine if the ALMS adopts the 2008 LMP2 regs. the LMP2s would have to carry 110 lbs of ballast compared to now.
This is obvioulsy a ploy by the ACO to get Porsche and Acura out of LMP2 and by IMSA to get LMS teams(like Peugeot, Swiss Spirit, Rollcentre, and maybe(a big maybe) Pescarolo) to run the last 2 races of the year.


----------



## toomuchtoplaywith (Dec 21, 2006)

I personaly dont know what all the specific restrictions are for every class, but it seems logical. If you put alot of restrictions on a big car, and let a lighter car go "all out", of course the bigger car will be held back. What about applying the same restrictions to either class? My guess would be that.... Get Porsche in LMP1, and have them build a car held down by the same resrictions to compete with the r10, I think porsche would have more trouble keeping up


----------



## Entwerfer des Audis (Jun 16, 2006)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (chernaudi)*

I think the point is that LMP1 is supposed to be the king of the LMP class, and as such, in order to beat Audi, other LMP1 cars have to improve without Audi-specific penalties or advantages that everyone except Audi gets. And as for the LMP2s, they need to stay within the rules without huge weight and fuel-related advantages simply given to them because some people are tired of Audi winning, which means they can still beat the LMP1 cars, but must work hard at it within such rules to do so.


----------



## toomuchtoplaywith (Dec 21, 2006)

*Re: Should the LMP2 cars get pegged back? (Entwerfer des Audis)*

put and audi r10 tdi, in an lmp675 body, giving them extra fuel and letting them drop 175kg, i bet it would be a different race. IF LMP675 IS RUNNING THAT QUICK, THEY NEED TO BE BROUGHT BACK WITHIN THEIR LIMITS!


----------

