Nissan withdraws from WEC

Nissan withdraws LMP1 entry from 2016 WEC


Nissan withdraws LMP1 entry from 2016 WEC

 

That stinks

 

handwriting was on the wall when Darren Cox resigned a few months ago, but to do this 3 days before Christmas (most of the team is based in Indianapolis), is absolutely shameful.

Le Mans/WEC - WEC: Nissan Quits LMP1

 

Keep seeing the word "innovative" sprinkled throughout the article.

Wouldn't the car be "innovative" if the obscure design and implementation been successful?

Can't think of too many cars that have come along in my life time with as much fan fare
to complete in only one race. Perhaps a more traditional approach would have gone better
for them.

The Nissan BoD must now certainly be rethinking their entire approach to motorsport.

BHW

 

$15mm Superbowl ad....for this.

amazing.

 

The pity is that the concept was rushed to the track, when it could have benefited from one or two years of testing to show its validity and iron out the gremlins.
The Nissan were plagued with components realiability problems as soon as they hit the track, in the full glare of the media.
The project suffered from adverse publicity, and that's what must have pushed the decision makers to sideline it.

Great pity in my book.

 

I do not see anything about good or successful results in the definition.

I have many innovative failures saved in a "didn't work this time" type folder on my computer at work.

Once in a while, something can come along that makes those ideas pan out, sometimes, they sit there forever.

If I only did what had been done before, I wouldn't have a job creating things that hadn't been done before.
"an innovative thinker"

 

This doesn't surprise me really. Seems like they never had this thing working properly and were spending so much money just to get to the performance of more traditional designs. Kudos for trying something new I guess, but I never understood what was so compelling about the design....guess I never will now.

 

Nissan put a ton of money into the DeltaWing project as well, one wonders where they'd be if they had consolidated their DW, P1 GTR and P2 motor program budgets and gone straight head to head against Porsche/Audi/Toyota with a mid engined car.

maybe they'd have something to hang their hats on. or maybe they'd be in the same place with fewer obvious excuses.

gotta love trying to innovate but as Sideshow Bob says, there's no Nobel prize for attempted chemistry.

 

When thinking innovative, it's usually something along the lines of the Lotus 79 or BMW
LMR-V12. Something that threw down the gauntlet which others then follow. And, you
see this immediately inherent in these types of cars. It just wasn't in this Nissan.

The Nissan, for all of its quirks, made no sense from a practical view. Front wheel drive
pulling the car, huge wheel wells that the drivers had trouble seeing over, the skinny rear
wheels for reduced drag, all interesting in theory. But, from the onset, the project was plagued
by parts and structural failures and as likewise mentioned, all played out in front of the media
which seemed to be invited right into the Nissan tent during test sessions at Sebring last year.

Had it worked as planned, it would have been great. But, there was a fundamental flaw
in the design and rather than go back to Square-1, evidently they'd rather scratch the
program. What a pity.

It is easy to look at the history of Le Mans and see manufactures get sucked into going
for top speeds on the Mulsanne. But, as was pointed out at the time back in June, the
top speeds this year weren't all that great (nor not nearly as fast as expected), the top
teams Porsche, Audi and Toyota are making their time the turns where they just seem
to be on rails and under braking.

So, what does Nissan do with the cars now, crush them? Or, do they sell at Barrett-Jackson
at Scottsdale?

BHW

 

Those stupid cars were ridiculous and they should crucify that idiot designer [Ben Bowlby] for trying to put a square peg into a round hole.

 

But I thought that WEC was a much better research platform for manufacturers to test and experiment?

A major manufacturer builds a single dud and they are out already?

...and they say that F1 has problems!

 

Tell us how you really feel!
When was the last time there was a colossal failure in top tier motorsports like this?

 

WEC is undeniably a better place to bring new concept. F1 only allows conformity.

The problem at Nissan, it seems, was that they didn't do enough research and testing before getting on the track. They went public at least 1 year too early.

Experimenting is better done behind closed doors than in the full glare of publicity.

But 10 out of 10 for trying, IMO.

 

Blah, blah, blah.

Yet another example of WEC's biggest appeal being nothing more than a marketing ploy.

 

A few photos from first US public debut last February at the Chicago Auto show. I give them credit for some originality if nothing else. F1 is also a marketing ploy, and a poor use of money in my opinion. Atleast most of the public can relate more to closed wheel cars, especially GT class cars. Show an F1 car on an ad and it looks like the donkey cart that it is.WEC cars are also pretty ugly now and might scare people. The Darth Vador WEC cars have to be some of the ugliest race cars ever made. Go back to 1990's FIA GT1 style racing, and make rules that allow the cars look good again.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I wouldn't call Bowlby an idiot, he's designed some very successful race cars (Lola B99/00 and B2K/00 Champ Cars and several iterations of the LMP675 cars, etc) not to mention he was the head of Ganassi's engineering department for years, during which they won 5 Indycar championships, 4 Rolex championships, multiple Indy 500s, Rolex 24s, etc. he was also the guy behind the Laurel Hill train tunnel turned wind tunnel

But yes he has been behind some bizarre and ultimately unsuccessful programs too, namely this and the DeltaWing. There's a chicken and egg argument over whether that was an engineer allowed to run amok until he was in over his head or whether that was people wanting to "prove" an idea that simply wasn't feasible.

DeltaWing and the Lola and Reynard F1 cars come to mind. maybe the first Eagle/Toyota Champ Car too, although I think that was a decent car with a bad engine and not enough development time/budget.

NASCAR Car of Tomorrow, 1st gen Rolex DP and 1st gen IRL Indycars were all pretty awful too but that was more of a case of people writing the rulebook not really understanding race car design.

 

Nissan has outlined their reason(s) for pulling out of the WEC.

Their reasoning seems a bit strange in that they knew that they had major issues with
the original GT-R LM and had planned to come back in 2016 with an all-new car.

However, that said, the 2016 version was designed but the construction was not complete
(sounds as though it hadn't gotten started) and would not be ready in time for pre-season
testing the season opening event at Silverstone.

Seems as though some curious managerial moves in light of the fact that they knew they
needed an all-new car for 2016 but they hadn't gotten down to building the car (yet).

In any case, its all moot now.

Nissan reveals why it has withdrawn from the 2016 WEC - WEC news - AUTOSPORT.com

BHW

 

How about the McLaren F1 car that was never raced due to unreliability? I believe that was in the mid-2000's.

 

As for WEC/Le Mans rules, it seems as though the ACO is committed to keeping prototypes
at the pointy end of the field.

The clear separation between the P1 and P2 teams is also big with the ACO as well as having
definitive GTE Pro and GTE Am divisions.

Any mention of bringing in 90's style FIA GT rules is usually summarily dismissed by the ACO.
There seems to be a real distaste on their part for "Supercars" which always seemed curious
but remembering back when Risi wanted to bring in the Maserati MC-12 to ALMS and how
the whole thing nearly threw the ACO/ALMS deal off the rails, there doesn't seem to be any
movement at Le Mans to this end even though this sort of move would have likely saved
GT-1.

The closest we may get to seeing FIA GT type cars currently is the SRO run Blancpain series
which also ran the FIA GT series.

Not sure why the reason is for the "Supercar" phobia at Le Mans but that door certainly does seem shut tight.

BHW

 

Agreed.

Caustic comments aside, Bowlby is a very good and experienced designer with a portfolio full of successful designs. It's the execution that sucked...

 

I remember the FORD GT in 1964 that was heading for total failure too.
FORD attack on Le Mans was part of the "Total Performance" mantra, with no money spared and the best engineers from both sides of the Atlantic to beat and destroy the pesky Italians and their Ferraris.

At the Le Mans test in April, the FORD cars were unstable and flying off the road. Schlesser was almost killed on the Hunaudiers trying to tame the beast. FAV tester Roy Salvadori scared himself to death in private testing in England; he resigned and returned his pay cheque in disgust. The head gaskets kept blowing, the gearboxes lasted a few hours and the GT was a dog to drive.

At Le Mans, even after some aerodynamic revisions, the cars were a handfull to drive. Phill Hill (with Bruce McLaren) lead briefly before the gearbox packed up. The Ginther-Gregory car blew yet another head gasket, whilst the Schesser-Attwood car caught fire.

It was a total disaster for FORD, and not looking good for the future. Some reorganisation followed, Eric Broadley was sacked. John Wyer put on gardening leave and Shelby got involved. The US side of Ford resented the UK staff, etc...1965 wasn't better with another complete debacle. 7 cars at the start; none finished !!!
I remember this time. FORD $ mult millions effort seemed doomed ...

We know what followed: 4 Le Mans wins, etc...

 

+1

 

Very good analysis of the situation, I thought.

Maybe the ACO seems to favour high-tec hybrid LMP1at the exclusion of Supercars because they don't want a repeat of the Porsche 911GT1, or Dauer-Porsche and McLaren F1 victories, where state-of-the-art prototypes were defeated by GT Supercars of the time.

To me both should compete, but the ACO prefers the LMP1 to win, hence favourable regulations for them, and restrictions imposed on GT cars. As for Supercars, they are just not admitted. Bugatti Veyron, LA Ferrari, Koenigswegg, Porsche 918 should have been allowed in the WEC; the ACO completely excluded them.

As for the LMP2, the ACO has turned that category into an "Amateurs only" specs series.

It's a pity that LMP1 cars don't have more races in Europe though.

 

Good analysis and comparison.

Let's not forget that Ken Miles was killed in a GT40 while testing at Riverside. Ford and
Shelby ran up a rather long list of killed or seriously injured drivers during the GT40 era.

And, its true, it usually takes two or three years for a new car to become competitive in
sports car racing. There are always exceptions of course but the Nissan was so outside
the box even if Nissan put Ford-type money at it, the thing likely never would have
done well.

Ford by comparison was throwing money at the GT40 projects to the point where there
was little to no accountability and Ford's ROI resulted in profound financial losses.

I was reminded earlier today about the strange appearance of the original Nissan GTP ZX
Turbo. That car was by no means a beauty and at first a debacle but Nissan stuck with
the project and it became the dominant car of the late 80s/early 90s GTP era to the
point where even Porsche 962s were taking their styling cues from the Nissan.

Different times these days though.

BHW