ACO + FIA

[landman]

From Planet Le Mans: -

The Automobile Club de l’Ouest and the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile used the annual press conference at Le Mans today to announce their plans for the FIA World Endurance Championship.

Five years ago the FIA and ACO started to work together to harmonise regulations. After Jean Todt, an avid endurance racing supporter, was elected as the new FIA President he realised that a great endurance championship was missing. Soon after he sat down with Jean-Claude Plassart and the result of those talks was more appeciation between the FIA and the ACO and the birth of the World Championship.

After three races in 2010 and seven races in 2011 as part of the 2011 Intercontinental Le Mans Cup, the partnership between between the ACO and the FIA sees the birth of the new World Championship. The initial contract between the ACO and the FIA will last for three years, with a new contract linking the parties for another ten years afterwards.

Even though no calendar was announced yet the current calendar will be the base structure of the new series. The 24 Hours of Le Mans will be the backbone of the new series, although the event itself will remain the exclusive property of the ACO. Joining Le Mans on the calendar are two events in Europe, two events in Asia as well as two events in the Americas. Pierre Fillon, ACO vice-president added to this that the costs for the 2012 FIA World Endurance Championship will be like the 2011 Intercontinental Le Mans Cup.

Frédéric Henry-Biaubaud, the ILMC general manager said: “We are focussing on seven events in 2012. Two of them will be on the American continent, not necessarily two in the United States. In 2013 we’ll be looking at other continents. We are looking at South America, India and Russia, in no particular order. The calendar could be a bit larger, but not too large. One or two extra races would be good.”

All races will be at least six hours and the final calendar will be confirmed at the FIA World Motor Sport Council later this year.

In accordance with the regulations in place for the 24 Hours of Le Mans and the Intercontinental Le Mans Cup the new championship will be open for the LM P1, LM P2, LM GTE Pro and LM GTE Am categories, while the point scoring system will be equal to the other FIA World Championships.

Titles in the World Championship will be awarded in six categories:
Manufacturers’ Endurance World Champion
Drivers’ Endurance World Champion
GTE Pro World Cup
FIA LM P2 Trophy
FIA GTE Am Trophy
FIA Trophy for the best private team (open to all categories)

With regards to television coverage it was made clear that the ACO will be the promotor and will be in charge of the TV rights. Henry-Biaubaud is looking at a TV deal “that will bring not only racing to the fans but also a good look behind the scenes.”

Despite the Intercontinental Le Mans Cup becoming the World Endurance Championship this doesn’t mean the demise of the regional series like the Le Mans Series and the American Le Mans Series. Henry-Biaubaud made it clear that the World Endurance Championship required the strong bases that are these series.

When asked Patrick Peter, the Le Mans Series promotor, said: “There certainly a future for the Le Mans Series. After everything is finalised things will be more clear, but clearly we will exist. There are several options for the Le Mans Series in the future; one without LMP1 cars and one with LMP1 cars, possibly not factory efforts. The Le Mans Series would become a feeder series to the World Championship. We currently have around 35 cars, the Intercontinental Le Mans Cup has 26 and I think they aim at 30-35 cars.”

Scott Atherton, CEO of the American Le Mans Series and currently in charge of operations in North-, Central- and South-America, did not have many answers yet after having spent most of his time on the Mosport sale that was confirmed last week. He said: “We have not had the opportunity to sit down with the ACO yet.”

When asked what his opinion on the American rounds, the World Endurance Championship and the impact on the American Le Mans Series was, he answered: “Our focus is on North America but it is too early to give a definitive answer. At the moment we have more questions than answers ourselves. The world championship will bring unprecented changes, which has potential for both sides (ALMS and WEC), but it is also a cause for concern.”

Scott Atherton is not as positive as Patrick Peter with regards of the regional series becoming feeder series to the world championship. “Successful regional series and a world championship? No.” In the next couple of days Atherton and his team will be in talks with the ACO and hope to get answers on their questions. “We’re rolling up our sleeves and we need to sweat out the details before going home.”

http://www.planetlemans.com/2011/06/09/le-mans-press-conference-2012-and-further/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+planetlemans+%28Planetlemans+Newsfeed%29&utm_content=motorsport+racing&utm_term=motorsport+racing

[Jules G]

It will all end in tears....... There will be a dilution of non factory teams on the start line especially in the fly away races if they head off to India or Russia. Scott Atherton (ALMS) none too pleased about the anouncement, looks like the French are ganging up on our friends across the pond
No doubt the TV coverage will end up on bloomberg or similar as per the GT1 and GT3 world championship rounds at the moment.

[Nordic]

To be fair the old Group C was run as an FIA series. I know it all ended in tears but I feel that was as much due to the economic meltdown as the FIA.

The 3.5 litre rules did attract cars from Pug, Merc, Jag, Toyota, Mazda, Lola, Spice plus the BRM, Konrad, Allard, Alfa also had a game, but flawed attack. hardly a series that did not appeal.

In fact more factory teams than the orignial rules and the cars where amazing. seeing a 3.5 Pug or toyota blow by was an experiance.

At that time the US scene also flourished with a different, but close too, set of GTP rules.

Fingers crossed it wont be the disaster many predict, and i doubt it would have happened without some commitment from the current teams.

[Peaky]

all we need now is for Mr Ecclestone to get involved...

[landman]

Was listening to the Midweek Motorsport podcast on the way home last night [sometimes long train journeys have their uses...] and apparently David [not Dave] Richards was in the booth with RLM on Saturday night commenting on what will happen with equivalancy once the FIA & ACO start working together.

Seems that DR was looking forward to the balance being re-established between the petrols & the diesels.

Maybe he's not so silly after all?

Given the cozy position between the ACO, Audi & Peugeot it might be the FIA's involvement that finally restores a level playing field.

In light of the comments on amateur drivers versus professional drivers elsewhere on the forum I for one hope that the FIA will achieve what the ACO might be scared to try & do i.e. cut down the power/speed of the diesels.

[chop456]

Right now, I'd say an equivalency formula should be the least of Richards' concerns.

[Brad Zarse]

Was listening to the Midweek Motorsport podcast on the way home last night [sometimes long train journeys have their uses...] and apparently David [not Dave] Richards was in the booth with RLM on Saturday night commenting on what will happen with equivalancy once the FIA & ACO start working together.

Seems that DR was looking forward to the balance being re-established between the petrols & the diesels.

Maybe he's not so silly after all?

Given the cozy position between the ACO, Audi & Peugeot it might be the FIA's involvement that finally restores a level playing field.

In light of the comments on amateur drivers versus professional drivers elsewhere on the forum I for one hope that the FIA will achieve what the ACO might be scared to try & do i.e. cut down the power/speed of the diesels.

My theory on this, is not to reduce the speed of any of the cars - after all, this is meant to be a race.  As long as speeds stay south of 250mph, then we're not in the realms of the ridiculous. 

What should be restricted, is the fuel allocations.  After all, this is what people who buy diesels in the real world, buy them for - MPG.  So establish the amount of fuel, that a petrol runner would need, to run 100% flat out, all the way through, then take away 10% to encourage new technology to save petrol. 

Then take away the expected fuel economy saving produced by a diesel (say 35% in the real world) - then reduce that by a further 20%.

It drives development of more fuel efficient technologies, gives the Petrol cars the opportunity to claw back some of the current gap, but ultimately benefits users of the cars these manufacturers produce, in the real world. 

[Lazy B'stard]

As said in the other thread, its nothing to do with Petrol V Diesel. Its a matter of budgets. Audi still won every year when they had petrol engines. Mr Richards and Mr Pescarolo can not expect the ACO or the FIA to tie the manufacturers hands behind their backs because they spend more on chasing the win.

NOTE TO D.R.
Mr Richards. Anyone can cobble together a half arsed chassis, slap an old Austin engine in it, sell seats to journeymen drivers and turn up at Le Mans. But if you want to win you have to spend some serious £££££. Don't expect the FIA to come to your aid. If you are unable to play with the big boys stay away and don't take up 2 entries with that ameteurish abortion you call the AMR-Onelap.

[Werner]

What should be restricted, is the fuel allocations.  After all, this is what people who buy diesels in the real world, buy them for - MPG. 

Brad,

on the danger of being flamed here I'm outing myself: I don't fully agree to this. I am driving an oil burner too - but the excellent miles per gallon ratio is for me just a nice side effect. What i like about those engines is the massive amount of torque and the driveability they have. A state of the art common rail turbo diesel is so much more fun to drive than an equally sized petrol engine  - I didn't beleave it until I experienced it myself.

Cheers

Werner

[monkey]

What should be restricted, is the fuel allocations.  After all, this is what people who buy diesels in the real world, buy them for - MPG. 

Brad,

on the danger of being flamed here I'm outing myself: I don't fully agree to this. I am driving an oil burner too - but the excellent miles per gallon ratio is for me just a nice side effect. What i like about those engines is the massive amount of torque and the driveability they have. A state of the art common rail turbo diesel is so much more fun to drive than an equally sized petrol engine  - I didn't beleave it until I experienced it myself.

Cheers

Werner

You won't get ‘flamed’ (?) by me Werner - my 156 died over Christmas (RIP I loved that car 158k miles never missed a beat and then popped one on the M40 on New Years Eve - owed me nothing) and I now have a 159 'oil burner' and I love it – the feel reminds me of the very first Renault Turbo's that came in the early 1980's whippy and great fun to drive. Safer overtaking too.

[Brad Zarse]

I also drive an oil burner (a german one at that) and whilst I agree with you to some degree (my 2.7 diesel merc has plenty of torque), if I had the choice between petrol and diesel, and money was no object, I'd absolutely have a petrol car.  

The reason is purely that Diesels are like strippers - They just get to the interesting bit, and they demand more.

My Diesel feels fantastic from idle, to about 3500 Rpm, then you've got to change gear.  I long for a diesel which replicates the torque levels seen at the lower end of the rev range all the way through to 6000rpm - but the constraints of the fuel dictate that it is unlikely I guess.

I can imagine that if they put a Continuously Variable Transmission into a diesel, it would be incredible, but still not overly driveable.  

And the thing I miss about the Honda S2000 I sold to purchase the Mercedes?  The scream of an engine hitting 9000rpm in a (on the whole) predictable manner!

If they could adjust the rules so that Diesel engines have to push out similar revs and torque figures at the top end, to the Petrol equivalents, whilst making good fuel economy, THEN we'd be talking!

[Werner]

I also drive an oil burner (a german one at that) and whilst I agree with you to some degree (my 2.7 diesel merc has plenty of torque), if I had the choice between petrol and diesel, and money was no object, I'd absolutely have a petrol car.  

The reason is purely that Diesels are like strippers - They just get to the interesting bit, and they demand more.

My Diesel feels fantastic from idle, to about 3500 Rpm, then you've got to change gear.  

Funny - you as an Englishman drive a German oilburner - I as a German drive a British oilburner , X-type 2.2 that is. But our cars seem to be too different to compare - mine is 6 gear automatic transmission so I leave that shifting gears to the gearbox...

But I fully agree about the noise - when it comes to proper sound the oil burners are boring!

If they could adjust the rules so that Diesel engines have to push out similar revs and torque figures at the top end, to the Petrol equivalents,

That would be against the principle and the concept of mordern diesel engines - and that is why from my point of view it doesn't make sense to let diesel and petrol cars run in the same class at Le Mans - I doubt this will ever work.

[Brad Zarse]

My car is also automatic, but that doesn't stop it having to change gear at 4000rpm (max!)

Has anyone ever driven a continuously variable transmission vehicle??  is it as good as it sounds??

[Lord Steve]

Brad
I've just chopped in a Merc with a 2.7 diesel auto (same as you) for a BMW 3.0 Petrol and 17 year old youths on mopeds burn me off at the lights now. Great for silent running but sadly lacking that boot full of torque that the oil burners have.
Steve

[nopanic - neil]

My car is also automatic, but that doesn't stop it having to change gear at 4000rpm (max!)

Has anyone ever driven a continuously variable transmission vehicle??  is it as good as it sounds??

Brad

don't do it, even as it was made by the dutch