2015 General WEC/ELMS/AsLMS Discussion ThreadSports Cars

[MatskiMonk]

you even stated it yourself here

And that's a demand is it?

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

And that's a demand is it?

Yep they are requesting a change in the rules to allow cost capping also just seen who was the fastest in the Aston Martin test!! 16 year old jamie chadwick!! The same Jamie Chadwick @Furinkazen kicked out of his toca series as he didnt believe it was her

Jamie Chadwick 2:01.384
Darren Turner 2:01.636
Matt Bell 2:02.148
Daniel Lloyd 2:03.085
Devon Modell 2:03.221
Ross Gunn 2:05.610

 

[catamount39]

At this point I agree, but at the same time, the rules and costs need a going over every few years to establish a direction and solid foundation to continue to build a few for the growth of the sport, cost cutting is something that will need to be looked at, make the sport cheaper for both manufactures and private teams, I know that isn't something that needs amending right now, but still making things cheaper only benefits everyone,

Cost cuts are fine as long as it's the FIA/ACO doing it, and not because a childish company wants to have some new toys that they'll throw away in about 2 years, probably putting in as little effort as possible and being slower than the LMGTE's even.

 

[GTPorsche]

They're demanding that the sport be cheaper, yes.

 

[MatskiMonk]

They're demanding that the sport be cheaper, yes.

Where?

 

[catamount39]

Where?

Cue quote from article:

“The first condition is that the PSA company is completely straightened, on its economic fundamentals.

“The second condition is having, at the level of the World Endurance Championship, a control on the regulations that results in a cost control that makes this sport and this practice reasonable.

“And then the third condition is having time to prepare ourselves to face the other competitors and the other brands which are there for more years than us and so we must be able to enter at a level of preparation and maturity technical and technological that is at the best level because if we return there, obviously it’s to win.”

I think that Nissan, Audi, Porsche and Toyota seem fine with the current state of affairs.

 

[MatskiMonk]

I think that Nissan, Audi, Porsche and Toyota seem fine with the current state of affairs.

They want to know that cost are under control. I understand this can be perceived as meaning "cheaper" (even though that isn't what it says), but it seems clear to me they want regulations to be controlled in a fashion that minimises the chance of an outright spending war. That doesn't mean cheaper.

Seriously, I think you lot are reading a lot into that article that isn't there.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

They want to know that cost are under control. I understand this can be perceived as meaning "cheaper" (even though that isn't what it says), but it seems clear to me they want regulations to be controlled in a fashion that minimises the chance of an outright spending war. That doesn't mean cheaper.

Seriously, I think you lot are reading a lot into that article that isn't there.

So how do you propose keeping costs under control without changing the rules?

 

[Roger the Horse]

They have stated that they will not return to the WEC if they cannot afford to compete in it. Entirely reasonable.

They're not holding anyone to blackmail. The WEC currently has Porsche, Audi, and Toyota competing at a top level, with Nissan possibly joining them if they can get their programme in order for next year. The WEC doesn't need Peugeot, and if Peugeot doesn't need the WEC, then it won't have them.

Peugeot's conditions for return are entirely reasonable and are basically the conditions any manufacturer would have before embarking on a motorsports programme.

 

[catamount39]

They want to know that cost are under control. I understand this can be perceived as meaning "cheaper" (even though that isn't what it says), but it seems clear to me they want regulations to be controlled in a fashion that minimises the chance of an outright spending war.

I think the thing is...if it was stable motorsports driven company like a Mazda or something, then maybe it could be taken in a context of "for the good of the sport", however, this is Peugeot. However, cost cuts that Peugeot would want would destroy LMP1's greatness. It's still far less expensive than F1, I think that LMP1 has a low chance of going into a spending war.

We CANNOT change LMP1's formula for "cost's" sake. When the day comes that a red flag is raised fine, but LMP1 is the last of the true innovative classes. We cannot rid of that for the sake of some 2-bit company that should leave motorsports until they want to actually win, and not just do it for a publicity stunt.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Either you are purposely being obtuse, or you don't realize as @Holdenhsvgtsr just showed, exactly what you quoted saying.

They have stated that they will not return to the WEC if they cannot afford to compete in it. Entirely reasonable.

They're not holding anyone to blackmail. The WEC currently has Porsche, Audi, and Toyota competing at a top level, with Nissan possibly joining them if they can get their programme in order for next year. The WEC doesn't need Peugeot, and if Peugeot doesn't need the WEC, then it won't have them.

Peugeot's conditions for return are entirely reasonable and are basically the conditions any manufacturer would have before embarking on a motorsports programme.

Then don't say anything at all, other than "we just don't see it as a beneficial effort at this time". The fact they made this long winded response as another thrilling season ends by saying how much they love endurance racing but will only return if a, b, c are met...is demanding in nature. Especially when 2 of those things are to do with the series and only one of them is to do with the Manufacture.

Not sure what cost cutting needs to be done, but if it were to be done just like the FIA has issues with F1 you'll see every team having a different idea on what proper "cost cutting" is. And in reality why put the WEC through this? They're doing fine, new technology is being seen and done better than other places so why should they entertain the idea because of a response from Peugeot ( I doubt they are).

 

[catamount39]

A manufacture shouldn't make demands of a championship anyway. *coughBMWcough* Peugeot is being snobby for even releasing that statement.

 

[Roger the Horse]

Peugeot's requirements are reasonable. They're not throwing the toys out of the pram in any way.

They're not going to risk tens or hundreds of millions of euros on a motorsport programme which may or may not prove successful if they aren't confident they can afford it.

They're not going to enter into a series they might be priced out of by a spending war. They want any investment they do make in the series to not go to waste. Look at the late 90s BTCC to see how self destructive spending wars can prove.

And finally they're not going to enter if there aren't clearly set out regulations years in advance to ensure they have time to build up and develop a competitive programme.

I don't see how any of these are unreasonable.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

Peugeot's requirements are reasonable. They're not throwing the toys out of the pram in any way.

They're not going to risk tens or hundreds of millions of euros on a motorsport programme which may or may not prove successful if they aren't confident they can afford it.

They're not going to enter into a series they might be priced out of by a spending war. They want any investment they do make in the series to not go to waste. Look at the late 90s BTCC to see how self destructive spending wars can prove.

And finally they're not going to enter if there aren't clearly set out regulations years in advance to ensure they have time to build up and develop a competitive programme.

I don't see how any of these are unreasonable.

Guess who started the spending war in the late 2000's ill give you a clue. it wasn't Audi

 

[Tired Tyres]

Peugeot's requirements are reasonable. They're not throwing the toys out of the pram in any way.

They're not going to risk tens or hundreds of millions of euros on a motorsport programme which may or may not prove successful if they aren't confident they can afford it.

They're not going to enter into a series they might be priced out of by a spending war. They want any investment they do make in the series to not go to waste. Look at the late 90s BTCC to see how self destructive spending wars can prove.

And finally they're not going to enter if there aren't clearly set out regulations years in advance to ensure they have time to build up and develop a competitive programme.

I don't see how any of these are unreasonable.

Except they are also being delusional. They could get all the stable cost cutting rules they could ever ask for. It would not stop them reaching for the cheque book if they are not winning.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Toyota aren't priced out and yet somehow there is some spending war?

 

[catamount39]

Guess who started the spending war in the late 2000's ill give you a clue. it wasn't Audi

Does it start with a P?

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

Toyota aren't priced out and yet somehow there is some spending war?

And Nissan have said they can't compete with the money that Toyota and Audi put in so they looked at an alternative way of building their race car rather than complaining, Same with AMR who's LMP1 budgets were only £15 million when they ran the Lola and AMR-One.

 

[Roger the Horse]

There isn't a spending war. Peugeot are saying they don't want there to be one. Would they hypocritically go against this if they were actually to enter the series? Maybe. Maybe not. That's a pure hypothetical for the time being.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

That's the point you're missing, why bring it up at all if there isn't one unless you expect to have one upon joining...and if so that's the issue.

Nothing shows there being a need to cut costs, especially with how liberal the regulations are to where you as a team/manufacture can find innovative ways of doing something while saving money.

 

[MatskiMonk]

I think the thing is...if it was stable motorsports driven company like a Mazda or something, then maybe it could be taken in a context of "for the good of the sport", however, this is Peugeot. However, cost cuts that Peugeot would want would destroy LMP1's greatness. It's still far less expensive than F1, I think that LMP1 has a low chance of going into a spending war.

Just so I'm not missing anything.. what costs cuts do they want?

Also... Mazda?

Peugeot is being snobby for even releasing that statement.

They were asked!

"it was inevitable that the company would be asked directly about the potential for Peugeot to return to their earlier sportscar programme..."
"French TV’s ‘Turbo’ programme did just that this morning with Group head Carlos Tavares answering..."

You seem to have a big problem with Peugeot.

 

[IforceV8]

Real news from about teams that didnt quit in the 11th hr . http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/bahrain-post-race-notebook/

Aston testing Dunlops, ESM reboot, and 3 Ferrari 488's in Pro.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

Just so I'm not missing anything.. what costs cuts do they want?

Also... Mazda?



They were asked!

"it was inevitable that the company would be asked directly about the potential for Peugeot to return to their earlier sportscar programme..."
"French TV’s ‘Turbo’ programme did just that this morning with Group head Carlos Tavares answering..."

You seem to have a big problem with Peugeot.

So how do you propose controlling costs without changing the rules.

 

[ukfan758]

You seem to have a big problem with Peugeot.

I'd say it's quite reasonable to have a problem with a manufacturer who wants the WEC to bend over backwards to satasify their demands. If Peugeot wants to join (I'd love to see a French manufacturer at Le Mans anyway), they should man up and pay the money. If they're not willing to pay, then they should not complain and shouldn't request cost cuts for self benefit.

 

[MatskiMonk]

So how do you propose controlling costs without changing the rules.

I wouldn't have a clue.

Doesn't change whether or not regulations existing that have a view to cost control should or shouldn't be part of Peugeot's decision making process.

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

I wouldn't have a clue.

Doesn't change whether or not regulations existing that have a view to cost control should or shouldn't be part of Peugeot's decision making process.

Thanks for voiding your full arguement.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Thanks for voiding your full arguement.

My full argument...

Over reaction much?

1) They need to make sure the company is financially sound.
2) They need to see cost control measures in place.
3) They need time to get ready (i.e. stability of regulations during the development phase)

Seems perfectly reasonable and sensible to me. Blindy pissing away hundreds of millions of Euros for the sake of saying you're in the WEC is moronic. If that's at odds with a governing body then so be it, it doesn't happen, and nobody has lost
anything.

And that's voided how?

I'll reiterate that my knowledge of LMP regs has nothing to do with the validity of Peugeots decision making process when it comes to investment of hundreds of millions of euros.

The fact GTP seems to have the hump with Peugeot and are interpreting these 3 factors that Peugeot would consider prior to commitment to a notional WEC program (of which cost cuts wasn't one), as a list of demands (and cost cuts) that the WEC must bend over to comply with before they will enter, is what I'm struggling to understand.

I'd say it's quite reasonable to have a problem with a manufacturer who wants the WEC to bend over backwards to satasify their demands. If Peugeot wants to join (I'd love to see a French manufacturer at Le Mans anyway), they should man up and pay the money. If they're not willing to pay, then they should not complain and shouldn't request cost cuts for self benefit.

Where are you getting this from?... admittedly I'm just going by the article linked earlier, but I don't understand how you come to that conclusion from what was said?

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

My full argument...



And that's voided how?

I'll reiterate that my knowledge of LMP regs has nothing to do with the validity of Peugeots decision making process when it comes to investment of hundreds of millions of euros.

You say that they aren't asking for the rules to be changed so how would you propose what Peugeot are asking for without changing the rules that we have?

Rules are here BTW

http://www.fia.com/file/34642/download?token=QUDSEC8u

http://www.fia.com/file/25424/download?token=xpVCfIXP

 

[mustafur]

This page is GTP in a nutshell.

 

[Eva]

Okay...so Peugeot won't be joining the WEC for a few years. Who the 🤬 really cares? All that would mean is that the other 4 manufacturers would have to fight for 1st or 3rd in Le Mans since all Peugeot can seem to do is finish second. Not a huge deal to me. We aren't missing anything.