I don't think it is wise to change rules each time manufacturer leaves. They are bound to leave at some point. And I don't think any manufacturer ever entered a racing series BECAUSE of the regulations. Big car makers need exposure. ACO must work on PR and media/fan coverage and not change regulations too often -- that would only confuse fans and anger existing manufacturers. This applies to all series.FW17 wrote:Now that only 2 manufacturers are there for a LMP1 2017 should AOC relook at the rules?
If you leave a tiny hole where big teams can pour money for any amount of performance advantage they will.FW17 wrote:With drive train development may offer some relevance to the road do they really need to have serious chassis development programme?
For once I enjoy cars that LOOK different. I don't enjoy Indy/FE as much as F1/WEC for that reason. I think I am not alone here.FW17 wrote:Wouldn't P1 be more attractive to some manufacturers if this chassis cost is taken out of the equation as in IndyCar and FE?
No! LMP2 must be a healthy environment for privateers. Manufacturer-oriented LMP2 is a route to nowhere.FW17 wrote:If provisions were made in the current LMP2 chassis for the incorporation of front wheel drive e motor wont it be easier for new manufacturers to jump in?
Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot] and 1 guest