The Pescarlo playstation cars are winning le mans yay

  • Thread starter Thread starter Toyotaf1
  • 114 comments
  • 4,988 views
356C
Yeah its too bad about the F1 interuption. . .SO WE COULD SEE ALL 6 CARS RACING AT INDIANAPOLIS!!!! What a disappointment. Though I'm really not that into F1 racing anyway. Its too bad they don't also broadcast the Nurburgring 24h hour race. Unfortunetly, most americans who enjoy motorsport watch that stupid NASCAR. I wish Brian France and his whole family was never born. Damn them for their media control.
While I agree interupting the most important race in motorsports over and over is annoying, I don't agree with wishing a guy and his family was never born just because of it so that is pretty low. sure that is way too damn much they do that, but thats over the top to say that.
 
The Le Mans race was the big race, and I didn't care for NASCAR Trucks at Michigan, or nascUSAR [Hooter's Pro Cup at Mansfield] coverage on Speed Channel. Since I'm not online all the time, I don't have access to Radio Le Mans anytime I wanted to hear it. Like I say on (another message board), this is one of the world's biggest races. It may be cool for Formula One to race in America, maybe good for casual race fans to see NASCAR and other stock cars during Le Mans coverage, but this weekend was all about Le Mans.

After I heard about the unfortunate fate of the F1 GP of America, it made it even more about the Le Mans race. Now speaking of the Pescarolos, it was sad to see the 2nd Place overall Pescarolo have overheating problems even in a HOT day in France. Hell, that Pescarolo could have made a race for P1 in Prototype 1 and overall, but like many things in motorsport, it wasn't meant to be. Hell of an effort regardless. I'm still happy with Pescarolo's efforts.

As an off-topic question, which Pescarolo do you like best?
(A) 2003 Pescarolo (as seen in GT4)
(B) 2004 Pescarolo (as seen in GT4)
(C) 2005 Pescarolo
 
JohnBM01
The Le Mans race was the big race, and I didn't care for NASCAR Trucks at Michigan, or nascUSAR [Hooter's Pro Cup at Mansfield] coverage on Speed Channel. Since I'm not online all the time, I don't have access to Radio Le Mans anytime I wanted to hear it. Like I say on (another message board), this is one of the world's biggest races. It may be cool for Formula One to race in America, maybe good for casual race fans to see NASCAR and other stock cars during Le Mans coverage, but this weekend was all about Le Mans.

After I heard about the unfortunate fate of the F1 GP of America, it made it even more about the Le Mans race. Now speaking of the Pescarolos, it was sad to see the 2nd Place overall Pescarolo have overheating problems even in a HOT day in France. Hell, that Pescarolo could have made a race for P1 in Prototype 1 and overall, but like many things in motorsport, it wasn't meant to be. Hell of an effort regardless. I'm still happy with Pescarolo's efforts.

As an off-topic question, which Pescarolo do you like best?
(A) 2003 Pescarolo (as seen in GT4)
(B) 2004 Pescarolo (as seen in GT4)
(C) 2005 Pescarolo
I didn't like the hybrid too much but I 'm kinda think the 03 and 04 cars are the best ones.
though I cheered audi the entire time, I too feel sorry for them because seeing them battling it out was the best part of the entire race(not to mention the DBR9 And C6R Battle)
by the way, what exactly happened to the United States grand prix?
 
The problem with the US Grand Prix was that during qualifying cars on Michelin tires were having problems. Specifically, a toyota hit the last turn #13 (the banked one). By the time the race started Michelin recomended that all cars runing their tires not to race. So the race was only run by cars on Bridgestone Tires which amounted to 6 cars ( :lol: HAHA just like Gran Turismo). This of course meant that Ferrari got a gimme.
 
well, they did show the last 10 hours straight.
We here in Australia are looking forward to a half hour highlights package on pay tv sometime in the next few months but we'll have to keep our heads buried in the tv guide each week so we don't miss it.
This of course meant that Ferrari got a gimme.
I haven't been there yet but I bet the F1 threads are full of Ferrari bashing for the farce at Indianapolis.
 
Schrodes
We here in Australia are looking forward to a half hour highlights package on pay tv sometime in the next few months but we'll have to keep our heads buried in the tv guide each week so we don't miss it.

I haven't been there yet but I bet the F1 threads are full of Ferrari bashing for the farce at Indianapolis.
well when you see it, trust me it the best le mans you'll ever see.
so good luck mates.
 
BTW, did anyone else get a little choked up when hearing the "Star Spangled Banner" played on the podium?

Really happy for Champion Audi. I'm glad they pulled it off, and what a way to bid farewell to one of the greatest race cars of all time, the Audi R8.

I feel sorry for Pescarolo. Either way, this was going to be the only year either Champion or Pescarolo could win, with the factory Audis coming back, with Peugeot and hopefully others to follow.

So stoked the Corvettes won it again. I love the 'Vettes, but I can see why people wouldn't like them, since they are American cars, and we're not the most popular country at the moment. (Not like I care.) But face it, they haven't had steady competition since they came into dominance. They started against the Oreca Vipers, who pulled out at the end of 2000, just when the Corvettes were starting to beat them. (Not saying that had anything to do with it.)

Their most fierce opposition has come from Prodrive, with the Ferrari 550 and the Aston Martin DBR9. (Both are great-looking and great-sounding cars, and if they weren't racing my beloved 'Vettes, I'd cheer for them.)

Something I'm angry about is the stupid weight penalties for cars that go under 3:55. That completely goes against the spirit of racing and the spirit of the 24 Hours of Le Mans. You are supposed to build a car, and if you're not fast enough, too bad. To penalize cars because they wen't too fast is beyond ridiculous. Thought this year's GT1 race was good between the 'Vettes and the Astons? Just imagine how much better it could have been had the Ferraris not been handicapped by extra weight. Aston vs. 'Vette vs. Ferrari would have been even better.
 
Mulsanne
Just imagine how much better it could have been had the Ferraris not been handicapped by extra weight. Aston vs. 'Vette vs. Ferrari would have been even better.

Wow I'm late on that. I didnt know that the Ferraris were "handicapped" in
the race. I knew the R8s were though . No wonder the Ferrari GT1s were lifeless in this race. I didnt see any feirce competition with it.
 
Mulsanne
BTW, did anyone else get a little choked up when hearing the "Star Spangled Banner" played on the podium?

Really happy for Champion Audi. I'm glad they pulled it off, and what a way to bid farewell to one of the greatest race cars of all time, the Audi R8.

I feel sorry for Pescarolo. Either way, this was going to be the only year either Champion or Pescarolo could win, with the factory Audis coming back, with Peugeot and hopefully others to follow.

So stoked the Corvettes won it again. I love the 'Vettes, but I can see why people wouldn't like them, since they are American cars, and we're not the most popular country at the moment. (Not like I care.) But face it, they haven't had steady competition since they came into dominance. They started against the Oreca Vipers, who pulled out at the end of 2000, just when the Corvettes were starting to beat them. (Not saying that had anything to do with it.)

Their most fierce opposition has come from Prodrive, with the Ferrari 550 and the Aston Martin DBR9. (Both are great-looking and great-sounding cars, and if they weren't racing my beloved 'Vettes, I'd cheer for them.)

Something I'm angry about is the stupid weight penalties for cars that go under 3:55. That completely goes against the spirit of racing and the spirit of the 24 Hours of Le Mans. You are supposed to build a car, and if you're not fast enough, too bad. To penalize cars because they wen't too fast is beyond ridiculous. Thought this year's GT1 race was good between the 'Vettes and the Astons? Just imagine how much better it could have been had the Ferraris not been handicapped by extra weight. Aston vs. 'Vette vs. Ferrari would have been even better.
1.I sure did. not once in looking at le mans have I heard the national anthem played at le mans so it was different from previous years
2. you too are also frustrated about the stupid weight penalties held against some cars. what made me laugh at this race was it almost seemed like the aco was trying to make the audis lose (it would be scary if that was true )and yet even with weight added to the car, they still win.
3. by the way, would 3:55 mean weight for the other cars too or times?
4. I agree that that is taking away the spirit of racing but also the diversity, Simplicity, and creativity of the sport.
 
VyPeR
Wow I'm late on that. I didnt know that the Ferraris were "handicapped" in
the race. I knew the R8s were though . No wonder the Ferrari GT1s were lifeless in this race. I didnt see any feirce competition with it.
they did that to the older porsches also(I believe)while I'm at it, they have been saying that they'll add the weight penalties on any car that does not meet any of the class specs or if car is from the original specs of 00-03 (at least thats what I heard).
By the way, enjoy the nextel cup and Rolex Sports Car series in you state.
 
Yeah, they penalized the Ferraris with extra weight because they went under 3:55 for numerous laps last year. So next year, expect similar penalties for the Astons and Corvettes. Not like Aston will care, since it's likely the factory Prodrive team won't be back, just customer cars.

But just think if the Ferraris hadn't been slowed with extra weight because some ACO bureaucrat thinks cars shouldn't be faster than some arbitrary lap time, the race would have been even better.

It did seem like the ACO were trying to grant Pescarolo the win. I'm happy the Audis won (that's a change for me, usually I root against them), but sad to see Pescarolo lose the only chance he will ever have for an overall win.
 
I was hoping that one of you could explain what happend with the Pescarolo cars...
Could you please explain that?

Talking to a friend he mentioned something about this and just like someone else above, he said they were trying to give him the race.

I was wondering what exactly happend?
Thanks. :D
 
Mulsanne
Something I'm angry about is the stupid weight penalties for cars that go under 3:55. That completely goes against the spirit of racing and the spirit of the 24 Hours of Le Mans. You are supposed to build a car, and if you're not fast enough, too bad. To penalize cars because they wen't too fast is beyond ridiculous. Thought this year's GT1 race was good between the 'Vettes and the Astons? Just imagine how much better it could have been had the Ferraris not been handicapped by extra weight. Aston vs. 'Vette vs. Ferrari would have been even better.
Am I to assume that you don't know that the vettes are already handicapped? The C5R was handicapped because of it's success, and the C6R was handicapped out of the box. They haven't run a race WITHOUT the handicap. Same handicap Ferrari has. Its easy to be faster on a lap when you're new and don't have a handicap yet (ASTON). But that should change for next year (or the next race).

But I agree--it becomes a reliability contest, not a race!
 
Kent
I was hoping that one of you could explain what happend with the Pescarolo cars...
Could you please explain that?

Talking to a friend he mentioned something about this and just like someone else above, he said they were trying to give him the race.

I was wondering what exactly happend?
Thanks. :D
1. what happened was tht the pescarolos set the fastest times of the race with the audis chasing but hours into the race, problems:
Problem#1:collision with number 78 Panoz(the number 17)cause suspension damage
Problem#2:laps later, it has gear issues(from what i heard, the car was stuck in 5th gear)
problem#3:engine woes(the number 16),which end up giving the number two Audi the lead and goes three laps down.
Problem#4:again engine woes, which make it lose four more laps on the leaders
Problem#5:by the dying moments, overheating problems in the number 16 cause it to stay two laps down.
so thats what happened according to me and I assume your friend thought that the ACO actually were trying to give the win to Henri Pescarolo's team.

BTW, could you move my "vids:le mans" forum to the Gran Turismo 4 section?
 
Mulsanne
Yeah, they penalized the Ferraris with extra weight because they went under 3:55 for numerous laps last year. So next year, expect similar penalties for the Astons and Corvettes. Not like Aston will care, since it's likely the factory Prodrive team won't be back, just customer cars.

But just think if the Ferraris hadn't been slowed with extra weight because some ACO bureaucrat thinks cars shouldn't be faster than some arbitrary lap time, the race would have been even better.

It did seem like the ACO were trying to grant Pescarolo the win. I'm happy the Audis won (that's a change for me, usually I root against them), but sad to see Pescarolo lose the only chance he will ever have for an overall win.
1. I think that the new head at the ACO had something to do with it, almost as if he was trying to rig the race. now they have messed around with the rules time and time again but this seems way over the top.
2. what makes you think Henri pescarolo,after coming so close, won't be back?
theres still a possibility and besides, its proven VS. unproven next year (the R10 basically)so expect a possible come back.
3. come to one of my new forums I have posted:
Vids:le mans
submit a video of you doing one lap around Circuit De La Sarthe in GT4 in the cars listed on my first post.
The racing quiz forum
submit an answer to my questions weekly
 
RACECAR: :2. what makes you think Henri pescarolo,after coming so close, won't be back? theres still a possibility and besides, its proven VS. unproven next year (the R10 basically)so expect a possible come back."

I never said Pescarolo wouldn't be back, just that this was his (and Champion's) only chance for an overall win. In the past, the Audi factory team (Audi and Bentley) dominated. Next year, Audi will be back with a new prototype, and Peugeot the year after. The rules were right for Pescarolo, so this was his best and only chance to win. He's been coming there for over 40 years, so he will be back.


skicrush: Am I to assume that you don't know that the vettes are already handicapped? The C5R was handicapped because of it's success, and the C6R was handicapped out of the box. They haven't run a race WITHOUT the handicap. Same handicap Ferrari has. Its easy to be faster on a lap when you're new and don't have a handicap yet (ASTON). But that should change for next year (or the next race).

According to Speed Channel, Radio Le Mans and other sources, the weight penalties only counted towards to C5R, not the C6.R, since the ACO considers it to be a new car (which it is). Expect weight penalties for the Corvettes next year.


Okay, another b!tch I have about the race. Was it just me or did the prototypes just look slow? They're so restricted that especially on the run from Mulsanne to Indianapolis, they just looked really slow. Hey ACO, take off the stupid air restrictors and let them go at it.
 
Mulsanne
RACECAR: :2. what makes you think Henri pescarolo,after coming so close, won't be back? theres still a possibility and besides, its proven VS. unproven next year (the R10 basically)so expect a possible come back."

I never said Pescarolo wouldn't be back, just that this was his (and Champion's) only chance for an overall win. In the past, the Audi factory team (Audi and Bentley) dominated. Next year, Audi will be back with a new prototype, and Peugeot the year after. The rules were right for Pescarolo, so this was his best and only chance to win. He's been coming there for over 40 years, so he will be back.


skicrush: Am I to assume that you don't know that the vettes are already handicapped? The C5R was handicapped because of it's success, and the C6R was handicapped out of the box. They haven't run a race WITHOUT the handicap. Same handicap Ferrari has. Its easy to be faster on a lap when you're new and don't have a handicap yet (ASTON). But that should change for next year (or the next race).

According to Speed Channel, Radio Le Mans and other sources, the weight penalties only counted towards to C5R, not the C6.R, since the ACO considers it to be a new car (which it is). Expect weight penalties for the Corvettes next year.


Okay, another b!tch I have about the race. Was it just me or did the prototypes just look slow? They're so restricted that especially on the run from Mulsanne to Indianapolis, they just looked really slow. Hey ACO, take off the stupid air restrictors and let them go at it.
sorry bout that. guess I missread but you not the only one who thinks the pros were slow. even the pescarolos, though hybrids, seem slow too and did you notice when they tried to pass the C6R it was a bit slow doing that whereas 2003, it zoomed by so thats strange.
 
Mulsanne
skicrush: Am I to assume that you don't know that the vettes are already handicapped? The C5R was handicapped because of it's success, and the C6R was handicapped out of the box. They haven't run a race WITHOUT the handicap. Same handicap Ferrari has. Its easy to be faster on a lap when you're new and don't have a handicap yet (ASTON). But that should change for next year (or the next race).

According to Speed Channel, Radio Le Mans and other sources, the weight penalties only counted towards to C5R, not the C6.R, since the ACO considers it to be a new car (which it is). Expect weight penalties for the Corvettes next year.
It looks like you're right, as I have been unable to confirm that they did. And I assumed like everyone else that the vettes were taking it easy to avoid a penalty for next year (even though they'll get one for winning anyway. Do they double them up?). It looks like that was not in fact the case. http://americanlemans.com/News/Article.aspx?NewsID=1159
Oliver Gavin from ALMS website
The success of the Aston Martins in their first races actually motivated us very much in our preparations. But, when we came to the official test here on June 5 and found ourselves some way from the Astons' pace, the general assumption was that we were sandbagging, sticking strictly to the 3:55 rule.

That wasn't actually the case so, the week in between the test day and the race, our engineers went back to Detroit and worked like madmen to try and find us a bit more speed here and there and get us more comfortable in the car. They worked wonders because when we came back for the race, the car was far more comfortable to drive, and we could do a lap time that was respectable and reasonable. We knew we had a very good race car.

It was a great race though, wasn't it? I really didn't think it would be that close for that long – after 22 hours there was a pair from each of our teams on the same lap. I followed both of the Aston Martin cars at various times during the race and, although we could close up under braking, and we were better in the Porsche Curves, we just couldn't touch them on the straights.

In my final stint, the team told me that we needed a certain lap time to make sure the Aston Martins would never catch us for the lead. That meant driving absolutely balls out, flat out, the whole time. In the configuration our car was in, that was as fast as it could go, but we achieved the lap time we needed, and they broke.

The only car problems we had were the two punctures. Le Mans uses the most amazingly sharp gravel in their gravel traps and that, combined with the number of rookies at the race who seemed to spend more time in them or spreading their contents over the track, definitely had an impact. A huge proportion of teams had punctures in the race. We were just lucky we had no damage as a result.

I've seen other people crawl back to the pits at 50 or 60 mph, but when you have to do it yourself, it's not funny with cars going by you at 200. Olivier also performed a miracle to save the car when his rear blew out - he went SO sideways in the Porsche Curves, but somehow he kept it off the wall.

Throughout the race none of the drivers or, in fact, anyone on the team, made any mistakes and we didn't damage the car in any way. Everybody knew exactly what they were going to do from the word go, and what the strategy was – even when we changed things on the hoof such as single stinting tires instead of double stinting them. Communication was key. Yes, we wanted to race the Astons desperately, but we didn't want to sacrifice our reliability by chasing, chasing, chasing. I think they were trying to lure us into that. We ended up pressuring them, much like last year, though this year was far, far hotter and far, far tougher.
 
Sometimes it pays to be a Le Mans geek. :)

Yeah, the prototypes looked way too slow. If it were up to me, I'd take off the air restrictors and just institute a sliding scale of weight based on the engine size. More displacement or turbocharging equals more weight the car has to carry. Let's see some 900 - 1000 BHP cars. Of course, all of these new prototypes would be closed-top cars, like Group C used to be.

Same displacement/weight would apply to the GT classes as well. Let's get rid of the idiotic air restrictors and ballast weight for going too fast. (Penalties for going too fast? Must be a French thing...) ;)
 
Mulsanne
Sometimes it pays to be a Le Mans geek. :)

Yeah, the prototypes looked way too slow. If it were up to me, I'd take off the air restrictors and just institute a sliding scale of weight based on the engine size. More displacement or turbocharging equals more weight the car has to carry. Let's see some 900 - 1000 BHP cars. Of course, all of these new prototypes would be closed-top cars, like Group C used to be.

Same displacement/weight would apply to the GT classes as well. Let's get rid of the idiotic air restrictors and ballast weight for going too fast. (Penalties for going too fast? Must be a French thing...) ;)
I dont' know about that--I'm a little shy of penalizing displacement. It bugs me that the vette costs extra in EU because they tax displacement, not mileage. The vette has 6 litres (or 7 with the Z06), but it gets better mileage than any porsche, but they only have 3.6 litre engines. Why penalize or reward teams for HOW they make power? Why not just class them by power? I guess that type of reasoning is behind the current system. I don't know that much about how they class them, but I don't see why they don't just class them by power and weight. If some are faster with the same power and weight, let them have their reward--don't penalize them for it. I am behind you all way as far as the weight penalty goes. It makes no sense! If a car runs fast, good for them!
 
In the past, they used to classify cars by their displacement. So a 6.0 liter Corvette would go up against a 6.0 liter McLaren F1 or a 5.something liter Ferrari Enzo. Hardly a fair fight.

Personally, I believe the GT cars should be classed by volume and price. So GT1 would be the low-volume, high-price supercars. GT2 would be the more "normal" sports cars like the 911, Corvette, 360/430 Modena, DB9, etc. But that's just my own fantasy land of GT racing.

The thing about the displacement to weight scale for engines is that it doesn't penalize those who make smaller engines, since their cars will weigh less, and it doesn't give the advantage to smaller, turbocharged engines at the expense of larger, normally-aspirated engines. If both engines put out a similar amount of power, the cars will weight the same. I think it levels the playing field for everyone. (Not in a NASCAR sort of way, but allows manufacturers to build what they want and give everyone a shot of winning.)
 
Mulsanne
In the past, they used to classify cars by their displacement. So a 6.0 liter Corvette would go up against a 6.0 liter McLaren F1 or a 5.something liter Ferrari Enzo. Hardly a fair fight.

Personally, I believe the GT cars should be classed by volume and price. So GT1 would be the low-volume, high-price supercars. GT2 would be the more "normal" sports cars like the 911, Corvette, 360/430 Modena, DB9, etc. But that's just my own fantasy land of GT racing.

The thing about the displacement to weight scale for engines is that it doesn't penalize those who make smaller engines, since their cars will weigh less, and it doesn't give the advantage to smaller, turbocharged engines at the expense of larger, normally-aspirated engines. If both engines put out a similar amount of power, the cars will weight the same. I think it levels the playing field for everyone. (Not in a NASCAR sort of way, but allows manufacturers to build what they want and give everyone a shot of winning.)
I agree for the most part, but I see the vette (and viper, for that matter) as being aberrations, or at the very least exceptions to the rule. Since they make their power on size, and have engines that are arguable OVERsimplified (your McLAren and enzo are hardly SINGLE OHC and 2 valve per cylinder engines like the big american engines), they make alot less power than other similarly sized engines. Being simpler, they do weigh a lot less (comparing the DBR9 and C6R is very instructive here--big difference in size, but also a big difference in complexity. And a difference in reliability, too), but if size is the ONLY consideration, they'd never be in the same class. And by the way, that is ROUGHLY how it works right now anyway. Weight and displacement are limited for each class, with two different limitations--one for NA, and one for turbo. However, they also seem to be limited to a ballpark in hp as well. The ALMS website stated for example that the P1 category was between 750-800 hp. I looked, but couldn't really find any further clarification on the subject.

But the real reason I was looking was that I wanted to see how the classification on the different classes are determined. Why does the vette run in GT1, and Porsche in GT2? As far as the road cars go, the vette is lighter, but has never made more power until this year with the Z06. I know GT2 is a lot closer to stock--why couldn't chevy compete in both categories? C6R in GT1, and a race prepped Z06 in GT2?
 
'Vette in GT1 and Porsche in GT2 is something I've never understood either. That and the "supercar" Mosler is slated for GT2. This is confusing enough for me, and I follow the series religiously. Just imagine how confusing it must be for the casual fan the ALMS is trying to draw in.

That's why I think it would be best to classify GT cars based on their production numbers and price. Like I said before, GT1 should be the "supercars", GT2 should be the 911, 'Vette, Viper, Ferrari Modena, etc. with perhaps a GT3 for smaller, cheaper everyday sports cars. Little to no confusion about which car is in which class.
 
I think manufacturers can just decide which class they want their car to compete in, and then build the car to spec. For GT1, that means a real commitment to a real race car. For GT2, that means a race version of the road car, stripped of all the crap that a race car doesn't need to get the weight down. Stage 3 weight reduction, more or less. The Maserati and the Mosler probably don't differ a whole lot from the race versions. The vettes, more so. The Maranellos and Astons? More than that. If you classed them by the performance of the road going version, in order to have a race with more than 2 or 3 cars, the vette and porsche would still be in GT1 and GT2, because of the different versions of the cars. Maybe that would be too much rivalry if they competed in the same class?
 
Bring back Toyota, Nissan and Mercedes
 
Back