mooty

yep

Nizer

Waxer

Akunob

I wouldn't call us whiners per say, its just that the GT3R and RSR were just so UNCOMPETITIVE overall (especially given the marginal difference in qualifying times) that it begs the question...what the heck happened? Not accusing anyone of cheating however, as auto enthusiast and specifically Porsche die-hards, we want some kind of answers. BOP might explain it. We'll be following the racing season (Sebring is a must watch now) to see whether Daytona had characteristics that favored the FGT etc. but Porsche needs to address any deficits in the RSR for the brand's sake!

chuckbdc

Anyone with a passing knowledge of IMSA endurance racing knows that the IMSA tries to dial up real competition among the brands it attracts with its balance of performance adjustments for each brand before each race. Occasionally IMSA overcomes politics, team strategy and actual technical differences to get the racing close and exciting for drivers and fans. When it fails as obviously as it did yesterday, its hilarious to see one brand just drive away from the competition whenever it wants to.

Hats off to Ford and Chip for pulling it off. Magic indeed.

Guest89

I was at the race, and I watched all but a few hours when I caught a nap in the middle of the night; as many people on this forum know, I go to most IMSA races and watch the rest in full (including WEC).

GTLM:

Porsche qualified third and fourth (out of a field of 9 cars - 2 Ford, 2 Corvette, 2 Porsche, 2 BMW, 1 Ferrari), but obviously didn't have the single lap pace to remain competitive. I can't say if the 911s were set up for cooler weather (as they were for Sebring 2017 when they came back after dark and nearly won) or rain or what. Whereas the 2017 Rolex 24 featured numerous cautions, this race ran with minimal cautions and resulted in the Fords running away from the rest of the GTLM field; this is easily the most dominant performance for the Ford GT since the car's debut two years ago at Daytona. The car is very aerodynamically efficient, a major benefit on the superspeedway.

The Ford drivers drove in formation for much of the race and looked to be driving to a pace (ie, they had pace in hand), whereas Porsche's drivers were having to push. Around midnight, Nick Tandy made what appeared to be an unforced error at the bus stop and the #911 car lost a good bit of time to repairs as a result.

As for the "blah blah blah" Porsche needs turbos to win commentary in this thread (I won't name specific names, but I think a lot of the commentary is from uninformed people that watch five minutes of a race and consider themselves "experts" based on how their chosen marque performs), Corvette won the title last year with NA power, Aston Martin won Le Mans with NA power, Cadillac won the race overall the past 2 years with NA power, etc. It's all down to BOP and how skillfully Porsche can lobby for themselves. There is a renewed emphasis on GT racing in the wake of the LMP1 departure (4 GTE Pro cars at Le Mans this year), and I expect they will "get it right" and enjoy some success this year.

As for the comments about Porsche not being a brand that excels in endurance racing... there was a display in the Porsche VIP suite that showcased diecast models of each Porsche overall winner at Daytona. The brand has more overall and class wins at Daytona (and Le Mans) than anyone else.

GTD:

Only a few 911s in the field of 21 GTD cars, and only one particularly strong team - Wright Motorsport

They had Patrick Long (Factory Shoe), Mathieu Jaminet (Porsche Junior Driver), Christina Nielsen (Sneaky Silver and repeat GTD champion), and Robert Renauer in the car.

Renauer spun at the kink on the warmup lap and damaged the car; they never recovered from the extensive repairs.

Guest89

The engine positioning of the 911 RSR does not require a waiver. Period.

The Corvette race engine is a 5.5L NA engine that has nothing in common with any C7 street engine (except 8 cylinders and overhead valves)

Mr. Adair

Mr. Adair

robmypro

Yep. We make our own luck.

Mvez

+1. The next GT3R due in 2019 will be NA, homologated on the .2RS. With a much bigger push globally, especially in Blancpain, I think we will see more of the car's true capability, as displayed the past 2 years in PWC. Plenty of turbo cars in GT3, yet NA Porsche is still very competitive.

RSR will be fine. I expect some wins this year. Last year they shot themselves in the foot in pit lane on numerous occasions, along with some mechanical bad luck that cost them potential wins. They didn't lose because of NA engines, or lack of "torque" because no turbo engine.

When Porsche flipped the engine, it shifted the weight percentage by only 1%. This is what Porsche admits. This isn't a "true" mid-engine car, which is why Porsche still doesn't call it mid-engine because the weight balance is still not as "ideal" as the true mid-engine race cars like the Ferrari or Ford. It's like people expected some magical performance increase by switching to the supposedly perfect mid-engine layout. Now that wins aren't piling up, it must be the motor's fault.....LOL. Then when the turbo lovers finally get a turbo RSR, and it loses, what will they blame it on then? BOP finally? LOL.

The days of glorious, bespoke NA engines are dwindling to zero quickly, and nobody should be in a hurry for that to happen.

brake dust

Missed the point. It's about torque either thru displacement or FI. As you know from watching all of the races, there is qualifying speed (momentum - clear track) and racing speed.

BTW - no lobbying on BOP now driven thru data gathering

Guest89

If you want to argue with me you need to come correct - IMSA does not use the "Auto BOP" that WEC adopted last year.

enduro911

The variance in approach (NA vs turbo) is not the important part. The variance is in the driveability, power band, and fuel economy that the cars can produce. A Corvette engine of 5.5L can be of particular use. First, it's stupidly simple to make and work on. Second, it's cheap for them to rebuild (not that budget is of great concern). Third, when you cap the top end power, you can rebuild the rest of it so that it makes grunt right from idle. Go ask Katech (former builders of the Corvette engine) how much "unrestricted" horsepower one of those things can made. They'll either not answer the question or say "not a whole lot more than it did with the restrictor because the engine's built around the restrictor". If Porsche's got a 4.5L flat 6 hiding someplace that they can use, that'd be helpful. Otherwise, using an engine that's got roughly the same displacement as their current engine is going to require forced induction.

To take this a bit further, someone posted in one of the other forums that the top speed of the 911 was roughly that of the other cars. That said, terminal velocity isn't the end game, it's just part of the equation. It matters how quickly you reach terminal velocity and when the Fords are slipperier and the Vettes and Ferraris jump out of the corners, that means even a factory shoe like Tandy has to be driving at 10/10's all the time to keep pace. The other thing to consider is that with the other cars in the class having such a torque advantage over the RSRs, the BOP has to think outside the box to appropriately balance the Porsche. Essentially, all other things considered, they would need to be open-minded enough to say "We're willing to give Porsche a higher top speed at the end of the straightaway because they're slower to get to terminal velocity." That takes a leap of faith on their part and the understanding of the other teams (good luck with that) before there's a good deal of complaining. If Porsche had a similar powerband to the other cars, it would be easier for the BOP to "get it right" and not essentially exclude or favor Porsche.

Porsche said they wanted to go the NA route because the BOP was going to get it right. Turbos add weight and complexity. If you can race a NA motor, it's better because there's less that can go wrong and you get the same performance through BOP. Torque is the extra bullet in your gun and I don't think that the BOP "got it right" yesterday.

fxz

Big "mistery" why they didn t go 4.5L rather than only hoping tyres efficiency and on BoP