BOP in LM
05-16-2019, 02:13 PM
#1
Drifting
Thread Starter
BOP in LM
I don't know if you read this https://www.motorsport.com/lemans/ne...-imsa/4389496/
But to me the Ford GT probably was an odd car to fit into this category to begin with. Thoughts? The platforms that anyone else brings forth aren't supercars to begin with. I drove a street version of that car last year for a weekend, and oh my....
But to me the Ford GT probably was an odd car to fit into this category to begin with. Thoughts? The platforms that anyone else brings forth aren't supercars to begin with. I drove a street version of that car last year for a weekend, and oh my....
05-20-2019, 06:51 PM
#2
I'll take a crack at this.
1) Ford was more than rewarded for its initial entrance into the LM class. They built a car that was in many ways outside the spirit of the rules and they got a level of treatment in their first year, especially at Le Mans, that should make people grimace. If this is indeed "payback", tough ****.
2) They should have won the championship last year (Corvette did) but they had issues at Petit. That's on them that they under-performed.
3) The sport seems to favor the car that hasn't been successful in a while and whose manufacturer is throwing big dollars at it. When Porsche exited the prototype class, it wouldn't surprise me if the motorsport budget had a reallocation back into the GT program. Hence, they would receive more favorable treatment which could explain their current hot streak (in addition to actually continuing to find ways to have the fastest possible car).
4) I obviously haven't seen the team's telemetry, but just because the car doesn't stand out in a particular area (in a good way), it doesn't mean that the car is bad. It simply lacks sufficient advantages in one particular area.
Between the F1 domination by MB and the pickle that sport is in, and the somewhat predictable, cyclical favoritism that seems to permeate sports car racing, it's tough for me to jump on either bandwagon in a really meaningful way.
1) Ford was more than rewarded for its initial entrance into the LM class. They built a car that was in many ways outside the spirit of the rules and they got a level of treatment in their first year, especially at Le Mans, that should make people grimace. If this is indeed "payback", tough ****.
2) They should have won the championship last year (Corvette did) but they had issues at Petit. That's on them that they under-performed.
3) The sport seems to favor the car that hasn't been successful in a while and whose manufacturer is throwing big dollars at it. When Porsche exited the prototype class, it wouldn't surprise me if the motorsport budget had a reallocation back into the GT program. Hence, they would receive more favorable treatment which could explain their current hot streak (in addition to actually continuing to find ways to have the fastest possible car).
4) I obviously haven't seen the team's telemetry, but just because the car doesn't stand out in a particular area (in a good way), it doesn't mean that the car is bad. It simply lacks sufficient advantages in one particular area.
Between the F1 domination by MB and the pickle that sport is in, and the somewhat predictable, cyclical favoritism that seems to permeate sports car racing, it's tough for me to jump on either bandwagon in a really meaningful way.
06-11-2019, 03:23 PM
#3
I think we can all agree, whether it's F1 or sports cars, there's quite a bit of favoritism thrown about when it suits the Organizer's wishes.
Ford bringing the GT in 2016 (which all teams signed off on, mind you) to LM24 and winning with 3 of the 4 in the top 4 spots (I believe, or close) was an epic PR move for both Ford, who were then selling the GT (or taking orders) and LM24/ACO to get viewer numbers up. It certainly worked, and was a true 'fairytale' race for Ford and the GT.
Then take Porsche last year, in their 70th Anniversary year, utterly dominating LM24 1-2 with the Manthey-run cars, whereas the CORE/IMSA units DNF'd I believe. They were well off the pace at testing so far for 2019. We'll see how they do this year but they have a ways to go.
Then you have BMW who are already quitting WEC with the M8, as it's not competitive, much like the M6 wasn't either (in GTE-spec, anyway- but is a true badass in GT3 format?). But they obviously don't have the resources to keep running at the back with them being much smaller than others in the category. WEC isn't going to reward them for such tenuous support for the series against the staples of Ferrari/Porsche/AMR.
IMSA rewards Chevy for their continued involvement no doubt, as did PwC when Cadillac won 5x on the trot (lol) with an ATS-racer... That's why Pratt & Miller get no extra love from the ACO or WEC when they bring those cars across the pond. You're going to be loyal and reward the marques that keep your series going, and not give the 'once a year' team any preferential treatment.
All that to say, I'm truly surprised Ford didn't do more with the GT racing programme, especially in WEC where I think the cars were more suited to the higher-speed F1-style circuits WEC races on. But they did initially say it was only a limited-run deal, and that's now over, so okay, I'm not upset about it. Glad to see the Keating guys running one in GTE-Am though!
Ford bringing the GT in 2016 (which all teams signed off on, mind you) to LM24 and winning with 3 of the 4 in the top 4 spots (I believe, or close) was an epic PR move for both Ford, who were then selling the GT (or taking orders) and LM24/ACO to get viewer numbers up. It certainly worked, and was a true 'fairytale' race for Ford and the GT.
Then take Porsche last year, in their 70th Anniversary year, utterly dominating LM24 1-2 with the Manthey-run cars, whereas the CORE/IMSA units DNF'd I believe. They were well off the pace at testing so far for 2019. We'll see how they do this year but they have a ways to go.
Then you have BMW who are already quitting WEC with the M8, as it's not competitive, much like the M6 wasn't either (in GTE-spec, anyway- but is a true badass in GT3 format?). But they obviously don't have the resources to keep running at the back with them being much smaller than others in the category. WEC isn't going to reward them for such tenuous support for the series against the staples of Ferrari/Porsche/AMR.
IMSA rewards Chevy for their continued involvement no doubt, as did PwC when Cadillac won 5x on the trot (lol) with an ATS-racer... That's why Pratt & Miller get no extra love from the ACO or WEC when they bring those cars across the pond. You're going to be loyal and reward the marques that keep your series going, and not give the 'once a year' team any preferential treatment.
All that to say, I'm truly surprised Ford didn't do more with the GT racing programme, especially in WEC where I think the cars were more suited to the higher-speed F1-style circuits WEC races on. But they did initially say it was only a limited-run deal, and that's now over, so okay, I'm not upset about it. Glad to see the Keating guys running one in GTE-Am though!
06-11-2019, 09:04 PM
#4
I think we can all agree, whether it's F1 or sports cars, there's quite a bit of favoritism thrown about when it suits the Organizer's wishes.
Ford bringing the GT in 2016 (which all teams signed off on, mind you) to LM24 and winning with 3 of the 4 in the top 4 spots (I believe, or close) was an epic PR move for both Ford, who were then selling the GT (or taking orders) and LM24/ACO to get viewer numbers up. It certainly worked, and was a true 'fairytale' race for Ford and the GT.
Then take Porsche last year, in their 70th Anniversary year, utterly dominating LM24 1-2 with the Manthey-run cars, whereas the CORE/IMSA units DNF'd I believe. They were well off the pace at testing so far for 2019. We'll see how they do this year but they have a ways to go.
Then you have BMW who are already quitting WEC with the M8, as it's not competitive, much like the M6 wasn't either (in GTE-spec, anyway- but is a true badass in GT3 format?). But they obviously don't have the resources to keep running at the back with them being much smaller than others in the category. WEC isn't going to reward them for such tenuous support for the series against the staples of Ferrari/Porsche/AMR.
IMSA rewards Chevy for their continued involvement no doubt, as did PwC when Cadillac won 5x on the trot (lol) with an ATS-racer... That's why Pratt & Miller get no extra love from the ACO or WEC when they bring those cars across the pond. You're going to be loyal and reward the marques that keep your series going, and not give the 'once a year' team any preferential treatment.
All that to say, I'm truly surprised Ford didn't do more with the GT racing programme, especially in WEC where I think the cars were more suited to the higher-speed F1-style circuits WEC races on. But they did initially say it was only a limited-run deal, and that's now over, so okay, I'm not upset about it. Glad to see the Keating guys running one in GTE-Am though!
Ford bringing the GT in 2016 (which all teams signed off on, mind you) to LM24 and winning with 3 of the 4 in the top 4 spots (I believe, or close) was an epic PR move for both Ford, who were then selling the GT (or taking orders) and LM24/ACO to get viewer numbers up. It certainly worked, and was a true 'fairytale' race for Ford and the GT.
Then take Porsche last year, in their 70th Anniversary year, utterly dominating LM24 1-2 with the Manthey-run cars, whereas the CORE/IMSA units DNF'd I believe. They were well off the pace at testing so far for 2019. We'll see how they do this year but they have a ways to go.
Then you have BMW who are already quitting WEC with the M8, as it's not competitive, much like the M6 wasn't either (in GTE-spec, anyway- but is a true badass in GT3 format?). But they obviously don't have the resources to keep running at the back with them being much smaller than others in the category. WEC isn't going to reward them for such tenuous support for the series against the staples of Ferrari/Porsche/AMR.
IMSA rewards Chevy for their continued involvement no doubt, as did PwC when Cadillac won 5x on the trot (lol) with an ATS-racer... That's why Pratt & Miller get no extra love from the ACO or WEC when they bring those cars across the pond. You're going to be loyal and reward the marques that keep your series going, and not give the 'once a year' team any preferential treatment.
All that to say, I'm truly surprised Ford didn't do more with the GT racing programme, especially in WEC where I think the cars were more suited to the higher-speed F1-style circuits WEC races on. But they did initially say it was only a limited-run deal, and that's now over, so okay, I'm not upset about it. Glad to see the Keating guys running one in GTE-Am though!
06-12-2019, 11:37 AM
#5
They were fast 2 years ago vs. Aston Martin (led a lot of the way, I believe and only were overtaken due to a puncture literally on the last few laps or last lap) and were at the top of the charts before scrutineering, or right up there. Free Practice sessions start today (actually ongoing right now), so I won't be surprised to see Pratt & Miller qualifying high up this year.
06-17-2019, 05:19 PM
#6
Perfect Angel
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
No. 68 Ford DQ'd post race for violating a fuel capacity rule. In post race tech they were found to have 97.83 liters capacity where the rule stated they could only have 97. Not sure what that means for the AM car of Ben Keating or the other Fords.
The team says they didn't have time to run proper calibration or something.
Not a Ford fan but the cars were shipped how long ago? Across an ocean? How long did they have to react to the BOP?
Rules are rules but the sanctioning body needs to make some adjustments to the process to ensure the teams have enough time to comply. I doubt this was willful on Ford's part since it's something so very easily checked.
https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...IfG_TeHGRBZRSI
The team says they didn't have time to run proper calibration or something.
Not a Ford fan but the cars were shipped how long ago? Across an ocean? How long did they have to react to the BOP?
Rules are rules but the sanctioning body needs to make some adjustments to the process to ensure the teams have enough time to comply. I doubt this was willful on Ford's part since it's something so very easily checked.
https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...IfG_TeHGRBZRSI
Trending Topics
06-17-2019, 05:46 PM
#8
No. 68 Ford DQ'd post race for violating a fuel capacity rule. In post race tech they were found to have 97.83 liters capacity where the rule stated they could only have 97. Not sure what that means for the AM car of Ben Keating or the other Fords.
The team says they didn't have time to run proper calibration or something.
Not a Ford fan but the cars were shipped how long ago? Across an ocean? How long did they have to react to the BOP?
Rules are rules but the sanctioning body needs to make some adjustments to the process to ensure the teams have enough time to comply. I doubt this was willful on Ford's part since it's something so very easily checked.
https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...IfG_TeHGRBZRSI
The team says they didn't have time to run proper calibration or something.
Not a Ford fan but the cars were shipped how long ago? Across an ocean? How long did they have to react to the BOP?
Rules are rules but the sanctioning body needs to make some adjustments to the process to ensure the teams have enough time to comply. I doubt this was willful on Ford's part since it's something so very easily checked.
https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...IfG_TeHGRBZRSI
Keating dropped to 2nd
https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...ns-gte-am-win/
Imagine winning Le Mans and then getting a penalty like this.....
https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...ns-gte-am-win/
Imagine winning Le Mans and then getting a penalty like this.....
At least they didn't win AND get DQ'd like G-Drive did last year... 2nd still isn't bad for a new (to them) chassis in it's first race.
06-17-2019, 05:47 PM
#9
Perfect Angel
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Sounds like a DQ?
"It initially resulted in a post-race time penalty of 55.2 seconds, although a second infraction, for exceeding the minimum fuel capacity, has resulted in the car’s disqualification"
"It initially resulted in a post-race time penalty of 55.2 seconds, although a second infraction, for exceeding the minimum fuel capacity, has resulted in the car’s disqualification"
06-17-2019, 06:00 PM
#10
Perfect Angel
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I still contend that the qualifying needs to be moved back so the BOP adjustments can be made with more time to ensure it's done correctly. Why not hand down the BOP with enough time to get at least more than a warm up Saturday morning to check things out? If Ford wanted to cheat, really cheat, this was not the way.
06-17-2019, 06:31 PM
#11
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
Basic Site Sponsor
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Durham, NC and Virginia International Raceway
Posts: 18,681
Received 2,837 Likes
on
1,671 Posts
The Keating car was found to exceed capacity by 100 milliliters, .1 liter or .03 gallons. If they had taken one less pit stop and gained an advantage (like the Monteplast Audi that was DQ'd at the Rolex 24 a few years ago for short stops), I could see it. But there was no advantage...
My opinion is that the ACO had it in for them. Otherwise, why the mandatory bodywork pit change after eighteen hours with the same condition (no additional tape) nose? Why was Ben given a stop and go for "spinning drive wheels" leaving the pit lane when just about half of the pit boxes showed evidence of the same, without penalty? Then, when they can't figure out how to get enough time penalty with the .6 seconds short stop (plus penalty), they add the 100 milliliters over capacity and DQ'm for the double.
Man, the ACO makes the FIA look good...
My opinion is that the ACO had it in for them. Otherwise, why the mandatory bodywork pit change after eighteen hours with the same condition (no additional tape) nose? Why was Ben given a stop and go for "spinning drive wheels" leaving the pit lane when just about half of the pit boxes showed evidence of the same, without penalty? Then, when they can't figure out how to get enough time penalty with the .6 seconds short stop (plus penalty), they add the 100 milliliters over capacity and DQ'm for the double.
Man, the ACO makes the FIA look good...
__________________
-Peter Krause
www.peterkrause.net
www.gofasternow.com
"Combining the Art and Science of Driving Fast!"
Specializing in Professional, Private Driver Performance Evaluation and Optimization
Consultation Available Remotely and at VIRginia International Raceway
-Peter Krause
www.peterkrause.net
www.gofasternow.com
"Combining the Art and Science of Driving Fast!"
Specializing in Professional, Private Driver Performance Evaluation and Optimization
Consultation Available Remotely and at VIRginia International Raceway
06-17-2019, 09:01 PM
#12
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
Basic Site Sponsor
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Durham, NC and Virginia International Raceway
Posts: 18,681
Received 2,837 Likes
on
1,671 Posts
I will say Keating is a class act, for sure. He said it tested good at the beginning of the race, and accepts the findings of the ACO. Wow.
06-17-2019, 09:55 PM
#13
Perfect Angel
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I'm disappointed by this. .1 seems like an acceptable variance. There may be a tolerance in the rules but I'm not compliance engineer. The Short fueling thing I can understand and conceding the win would have been acceptable.
06-18-2019, 11:04 AM
#14
Just seeing the -Am Ford DQ'd... hard take. I know Dempsey lost a race this season for similar and I believe G-Drive had their win in 2018 in P2 taken away for the same, or similar? I understand the sentiments about if they wanted an advantage, this isn't where you do it, but all the other GTE cars didn't have the issue? Just makes you wonder anyway. I'm surprised he's not fighting it, which makes you wonder even more what really is/was going on with it all, and what we don't know. Nowadays this race is really a game of seconds with so many cars finishing on the lead lap, everyone is looking for any advantage they can get. Wild stuff.
06-18-2019, 12:52 PM
#15
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
Basic Site Sponsor
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Durham, NC and Virginia International Raceway
Posts: 18,681
Received 2,837 Likes
on
1,671 Posts
Just seeing the -Am Ford DQ'd... hard take. I know Dempsey lost a race this season for similar and I believe G-Drive had their win in 2018 in P2 taken away for the same, or similar? I understand the sentiments about if they wanted an advantage, this isn't where you do it, but all the other GTE cars didn't have the issue? Just makes you wonder anyway. I'm surprised he's not fighting it, which makes you wonder even more what really is/was going on with it all, and what we don't know. Nowadays this race is really a game of seconds with so many cars finishing on the lead lap, everyone is looking for any advantage they can get. Wild stuff.
Reason why he’s not contesting it is that he wants to come back...