New Blancpain GT2 category

Stephane Ratel launches the GT2 category for 2019.
The GT2 class will be reserved for Supercars that do not need massive development to be competitive and the power levels of the GT2 will be 640-700 Hp. Around 100 or 120 Hp more than a GT3.
The class, which includes' real supercars', 'It's not GT1', 'There are not hypercars, but the most powerful of this range of cars are there.
The aerodynamic development of the cars will be limited and it will not be possible to change the position of the engine and the gearbox.
I am thinking about Ferrari 812 superfast, Lamborghini Aventador, Aston Martin DB11 or Vanquish S will be the cars for this category, this is the return of the V12s. I like the idea.

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2018/07/27/stephane-ratel-on-his-new-gt2-class-concept.html
https://sportscar365.com/sro/sro-relaunches-gt2-category-set-for-2019-debut/

 

Excellent. Love to see Aventador vs 812 SF. The noises made will be amazing.

I just hope they won't take their 488 GT3's and Huracans and wind up the power and call it a day....

 

Not sure how they will put the rules together, but I'm pretty sure a mildly modified 488 (or Mc 720S, or Lambo HP) would be more efficient on track than a mildly modified 812SF or Aventador.

 

The understanding I got from the articles is GT2 will have more power than GT3, less aero, be AM only and will be based on more expensive cars. Did I get that right?

 

I always liked the visionary approach of Stephane but this time I'm asking about what did he smoke...?

As charming the Idea of screaming NA V12 Racecars is...I'm wondering who is going to pay for that development, nothing worse than a heavy racecar so massive, massive Carbon will be used. Not to mention brakes, gearbox, cooling, suspension, (4 wheels steering?), electronics, Diff... etc etc. The Manufacturers have their programs with GTE and GT3, Hypercars are coming in WEC so for sure there will not be any engagement from Ferrari or Michelotto with the 812. Lambo doesn't even do a GTE. So manufacturers going to build those cars only if the business case makes sense and if they can sell Cars to the Customers. So some private Companies could build them but we have seen how difficult this was with the 550. Only Prodrive were able to develop a proper racecar (dont ask the running costs of that thing) You can't just take a streetcar and "challengish" that car a bit and race within GT3 Cars in Endurance Racing. I dont really see the point for this class. It will not be cheaper to run than GT3, for sure not. thats a bit of dreaming... and to annoy the ACO with their Hyperclass (and call it GT2 to increase the confusion..) Spa had 64 Cars, thats the same amount of Cars per Kilometer if you run 120 Cars at Le Mans. Pure AM's do less and less GT3 because of GT4 and because of the very high costs of GT3. The Grid is full. Adding a handfull 700HP cars doesnt solve the problem, but increase the risks of crashes (the AM will be MUCH faster on the straight and braking much earlier for corners, good luck at Eau rouge with a bunch of Pro GT3's behind you....

For sure AM's are gone in Blancpain Sprint, 30min driving time for each is nothing as in Endurance Cup you have 3, 6 and 24hours means at least minimum 1 hour driving time for each AM in the 3 Hours race. The attractiveness of the Sprint will not change just because you race in a 812. if you want to increase the
attractiveness of the Sprint Series, extend the race to two hours.

We will not see modern race cars with V12 Engines anymore, sad but thats the true.

 

The GT2 name is so bizarre. Shouldn't it be called GT5?

 

Just to correct a mistaken point about new class at LeMans:

The new rules do not allow for hypercars to run at LeMans. The rules allow for a mfg to take styling cues from their hypercars and use them on their LMP car-but they will not be allowed to run a hypercar.

Rules require a "LMP1" style chassis, with bigger cockpit, wider, meet new crash standards. Engine to be about 540 Kw (700+ hp) max with a front wheel drive only 200kw electric traction motor. Aero controls based on a max downforce and min drag numbers. Body shape "free" as long as you met the aero limits.

But no way will La Ferrari's, AMR Valkrye's etc run at LeMans.

 

Brian, total tangent but curious about the crash standards: are they just a set of rules/standards, or do they actually crash test cars? this came up over the weekend with the Krebs/Meyrick crash at Spa 24.

 

Chas,

The current LMP chassis rules are very comprehensive-and tough to meet. The new ones will be really difficult!

There are set regs set by FIA. And you as mfg must show you meet them via actual crash testing of chassis.

ARTICLE 2 : APPROVAL TESTS FOR SAFETY STRUCTURES
2.1 Survival cell
The survival cell must be subjected to
four separate static load tests.
2.1.1)
Static side load te
sts on the survival cell :
A constant transversal and horizontal lo
ad of 3000 daN shall be applied through a
ball-jointed junction at the centre of
area of a pad :
•
On a vertical plane passing halfway between the front axle c
entreline and the top of the
front rollover structure.
•
In the cockpit area on a vertical plane passing throug
h the centre of the seat
belt lap strap fixing.
•
In the fuel tank area on a vertical pl
ane passing through the centre of area of
the fuel tank in side elevation.
It must be applied in less than 3 minutes and maintained for a minimum of 30 seconds.
The survival cell must be fixed onto the te
st device in such a way that its transve
rsal displacement is left free and its
rigidity not modified.
This transversal displacement must be blocked through
a pad identical to the one used to apply the load and
positioned symmetrically relative to it (see diagram 1).
These pads must :
- be 100 mm long and 300 mm high, with a maximum radius on all edges of 3 mm
- conform to the shape of the
survival cell at that section
- be placed against the outermost sides of
the survival cell with the lower edge
of the pad at the
lowest part of the
survival cell at that section.
It is permissible to place rubber 3 mm thick between the pads and the survival cell.
Under these load conditions, there shall be no structural fail
ure of the inner or outer surf
aces of the survival cell.
ACO TECHNICAL REGULATIONS 2004
PROTOTYPE "LM"P1 and "LM"P2
28/11/03 A
UTOMOBILE
C
LUB DE L
'O
UEST
– ACO
Page 18
The deformation shall be measured at the
top of the pads across the inner surf
aces of the survival cell. and any
permanent deformation must be less than 1 mm a
fter the load has been released for 1 minute.
2.1.2)
Static vertical load te
sts on the fuel tank floor :
A constant vertical load of 1700 daN shall be applied thro
ugh a pad of 200 mm diameter in the centre of area of the
fuel tank floor.
Under these load conditions, there shall be no structural fail
ure of the inner or outer surf
aces of the survival cell.
2.2
Frontal absorbing structure
The frontal absorbing structure must
be subjected successively to a static side load test and a crash test.
2.2.1)
Tests of the frontal
absorbing structure with the complete survival cell :
a) Static side load test on t
he frontal absorbing structure :
To test the attachments of
the frontal absorbing structure to the surv
ival cell, a static side load test shall be
performed.
For this test, the frontal absorbing structure
must be fixed to the complete survival cell.
A constant transversal and horizontal
load of 4000 daN, passing through a vertical and transversal plane situated
500 mm forward of the front axle centre
line, must be applied to one side of t
he frontal absorbing structure using a
pad identical to the one used in the static side load
tests on the survival cell (see article 2.1.1).
The centre of area of the
pad must pass through the vertical and transversal plane mentioned above and the mid
point of the height of the st
ructure at that section.
During that test, the complete survival cell must be solid
ly secured to a flat plate but not in such a way as to
increase the strength of the attachm
ents being tested, and must be blocked
laterally through a pad of identical
dimensions to the one used to apply the load, positioned
before the junction with the
frontal absorbing structure
(see diagrams 2 and 3).
After 30 seconds of application, there must be no failure of
the structure or of any atta
chment between the structure
and the survival cell.
b) Crash testing of the fr
ontal absorbing structure :
The frontal absorbing structure and the complete survival ce
ll must be subjected to an impact test against a solid,
vertical barrier placed at right angles
to the longitudinal axis of the car.
The frontal absorbing structure and the complete survival ce
ll must previously have been subjected to the static
side load test described in article 2.2.1a).
The complete survival cell must be solidly fixed to the tr
olley through its engine mounting points but not in such a
way as to increase its impact resistance.
The fuel tank must be full of water.
A dummy weighing at least 75 kg must be installed in the
survival cell with the safety belts defined in Article 15.2
fastened.
With the safety belts unfastened, the dummy must
be able to move forwards freely in the cockpit.
The following must also be installed :
- The extinguishers, as described in article 258A-15.1;
- The battery, according to article 258A-8.1.
The test conditions are as follows :
The total weight of the trolley and test structures shall
be equal to the minimum weight defined in article 258A-4.1 +
150 kg and the velocity of impact 14 m/s.
During the test, the maximum average decelera
tion of the trolley must not exceed 25 g.
In addition, there must be no damage to the survival cell or to
the mountings of the safety
belts or fire extinguishers
or battery.
Furthermore, the peak deceleration in t
he chest of the dummy must not exceed 60 g for a cumulative time of more
than 3ms, this being the resultant
of the data from the three axes.
2.3 Rollover structures
Each rollover structure must be subjected succe
ssively to the following
static load tests :
2.3.1)
Front structure :
- A vertical load of 75 kN must be applied on top of
the structure, downward and
in front of the driver.
2.3.2) Rear structure :
a) Combined load :
The following loads must be applied simultaneously
on top of the structur
e, behind the driver :
- 60 kN longitudinally rearward
- 50 kN transversally inward
- 90 kN vertically downward.
b) Longitudinal load :
One of the following tests must be carried out at
the discretion of the technical delegate :
- A longitudinal load of 60 kN, applied
forward, on top of the structure.
- A longitudinal load of 60 kN, applied
rearward, on top of
the structure.
ACO TECHNICAL REGULATIONS 2004
PROTOTYPE "LM"P1 and "LM"P2
28/11/03 A
UTOMOBILE
C
LUB DE L
'O
UEST
– ACO
Page 19
The load may be applied indiscriminately on one side or the other
relative to the longitudina
l axis of the car, at the
discretion of the FIA technical delegate.
The resultant of these loads shall be applied through a
rigid flat pad with a diameter of 200 mm, positioned
perpendicularly to the axis of this resultant.
If the front rollover structure is not direct
ly accessible or is part of the survival
cell, the load may be applied straight on
to
the survival cell, through a plate fitting the cell’s local shape,
the surface of which must be le
ss than or equal to that of a
disc 200 mm in diameter.
It will be permissible to place rubber 3 mm thick between the pad and the survival cell.
The rollover structures must be
attached to the
survival cell.
The survival cell must be supported on its underside on a flat
plate, fixed to it though its engine mounting points and
wedged laterally by pads 100 mm wide by 300 mm long.
The deformation must be less than 50 mm,
measured along the axis of load applic
ation, and any structural failure must
be limited to 100 mm below the top of the ro
llover structure, measured vertically.
2.4 Steering column
Crash testing of the steering column :
The steering wheel, steering column and steering rack assemb
ly must be mounted on a repr
esentative test structure,
as must any other parts which could mate
rially affect the outcome of the test.
The test structure must be firmly fixed to the ground a
nd a solid object, having a mass of 8kg and travelling at a
velocity of 7m/s, will be projected onto it.
The object used for this test must be hem
ispherical with a diameter of 165 mm.
For the test, the centre of t
he hemisphere must strike the stru
cture at the centre
of the steering wheel along the same
axis as the main part of the steering column.
During the test the striking object
may not pivot in any axis and the test
structure may be supported in any way
provided that this does not increase the im
pact resistance of t
he parts being tested.
The resistance of the test structure must
be such that, during the impact, the peak
deceleration of t
he object does not
exceed 80 g for more than a cumulative 3 ms, this being measured only in the direction of impact.
After the test, all substantial deformation must be within
the steering column and the steering wheel quick release
mechanism must still function normally.

 

The Spa accident was in GT3 cars. So modified production cars. Chassis and roll cage rules are tough but not near LMP1 standards. Basically you can build a roll cage onto your chassis without any real tests if you religiously follow the FIA rules- which are still pretty good. But not LMP stuff, plus any accident at Raidillon (Eau Rouge) is going to hurt!

 

Brian which mfg do you see could join the "new class" at Le Mans? I'm quite excited about this new concept. I know we dont see modified LaFe or AMR (fortunately) but still would be great to see those mfg producing the new Prototype cars.

 

sorry if I wasn't clear, the question immediately after the crash was, since GT3 cars are built by the factory and FIA homologated, if they were actually crash tested, or just built to certain standards. the deformation on Meyrick's roll cage was pretty substantial. then again, he escaped (relatively) uninjured from a massive crash.

I thought you'd be a good guy to know, having designed an FIA homologated GT car

 

The following have been in discussions with the ACO (OEM's)
Aston Martin
Ford
Toyota
McLaren
Ferrari

Toyota would like to run something like their new GR Super Sport Concept.
Macca wants to run a "Senna" like car.
Aston something like the Valkyrie
Ford--Who knows-an odd one. Maybe a "super" Ford GT??
Ferrari--Who knows. My guess is not a La Ferrari look alike but something new and different.

I also know that Glickenhaus has some interest in doing a car.

And there are others that "I know of" !!! (Hint hint hint!)

The main issue with running "hypercars" from mfg was and is "How do you balance them?" Do you want more LM-GTE BOP type shenanigans? As cars were built to no set of common rules it becomes a nightmare to figure out to make them all more or less similar on race track. Don't worry about it you say? Then you will not have more than 1 or 2 OEM's involved. Only those with competitive cars.

What ACO is doing is saying the cars will be built with a defined maximum downforce at some speed and a minimum drag at some speed. And not allowed to go over that. So if you can have a semi truck meet the rules then that can be the shape of your car. The way the rules are set up there are very, very few constraints on vehicle shape. And no more controlling performance by defining the geometric shape of the car. No more rear wing of "this size" with "this gurney" and a diffuser that looks like "this". If you want a 10 element rear wing have at it! If you want no diffuser/splitter-have at it. We (ACO) don't care.

Well-that may be a bit exaggerated but gets to the point. Shape is "free". Performance is not.

So class is open to OEM's, race car constructors like Dallara or Ligier or you or I. There is no "hypercar" rules as such. But OEM's can make their cars look like a hypercar, if they wish. Just will not be a race going version of the road car. Not in the rules.

 

No real crash tests for a GT car-unlike LMP cars.

 

ok thanks!

 

Porsche evaluating new SRO GT2 platform for possible car based on 911 GT2 RS…

https://sportscar365.com/sro/walliser-new-gt2-platform-very-interesting/

 

Lamborghini GTE Program Called Off according to Sanna, Head GT racing at Lambo

 

Yes, I read this on Sportscar365, but I do not know what this has to do with the new GT2 category.
At least it does not say anything in the article that Lamborghini has canceled its GTE to make a new GT2 in this place.

 

Ford and Ferrari say no thanks

https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/ford-ferrari-exit-2020-hypercar-talks/