• 26000+ Members! Dear Guest, click this link to join the community on the official RaceDepartment Discord server

WEC/IMSA: Technical Regulations Confirmed for LMDh Category

As we build up to the 24 Hours of Le mans, the technical regulations for next year's LMDh class have been finalised and released.
  • The Le Mans Daytona h (LMDh) prototypes class is set to replace the Datyona Prototype International (DPi) class.
  • They will race alongside LMH category in the FIA World Endurance Championship from 2021.
  • The confirmed regulations are a product of the joint effort from the FIA, IMSA and the ACO.
Back in January, during the build up to this year's 24 Hours of Daytona, ACO and IMSA announced that a new LMDh class would replace the DPi class from 2021. Eight months on, with the details finalised, the technical regulations have been confirmed ahead of this weekend's 24 Hours of Le Mans.


Presidents of IMSA, the ACO and the FIA's Endurance Commission shared the job of releasing the news at a press conference on Friday:

"Since the announcement of the IMSA and ACO convergence back at Daytona in January, and the opportunity for a competitor to enter the same car at both the IMSA WeatherTech SportsCar Championship and the FIA World Endurance Championship, we have received and responded to many specific questions from prestigious automakers.
"We’ve also had those same automakers very involved in the development of the LMDh regulations, and I think all of us are very encouraged and confident, that as we announce the final regulations today, it will bring more names to the table.
"Certainly, the top level of endurance sports car racing has now a very clear, tangible and very bright future. This is, quite frankly, very good news in this difficult global context."

IMSA and ACO technical directors Matt Kurdock and Thierry Bouvet shared some of the main points of interest for the new LMDh class, which will feature hybrid engine technology, with cars costing one million Euro without the power unit.

LMDH-Render-2.jpg

Authorisation has been given to just four chassis constructors to manufacture LMDh cars, including Dallara, Ligier, ORECA and Multimatic. The minimum weight for the prototypes will be 1,030kg, with a common wheelbase length for all cars. Each manufactuer will be allowed "to bring their own identity and styling cues" with free reign of the upper body styling, while using a "controlled underfloor."

The hybrid powertrain will be a product of Williams Advanced Engineering, Bosch and Xtrac. The combined power output from the internal combustion engine and a "spec hybrid powertrain system" will be just over 670bhp:

"The Bosch motor is integrated with the Xtrac gearbox, while the Williams Advanced Engineering battery will be integrated with the Bosch motor controller. This is all in a compact assembly, which installs from underneath the survival cell in an isolated compartment from the driver.

Kurdock described the collaboration between IMSA and the ACO as being "effective":

"ACO and IMSA have led a collaborative effort along with the four chassis constructors and the three hybrid powertrain suppliers to come up with a common LMDh solution.
"I think this demonstrates effective work and collaboration between ACO and IMSA...we should have announced this in June had we not had the health crisis.
"I think the efficiency of the process is a further reflection of the importance of this collaboration between IMSA and the ACO, and the future of endurance sports car racing...To have the same car be able to run at Daytona and Le Mans is an expectation of all of our manufacturer partners, and can you only imagine how this is going to make our fans feel?"

Let us know what you think of the new regulations, and who you hope to see lining up next year in the LMDh category.

cover.jpg
 
Last edited:
22. Software Engineer with experience in Formula One and Motorsport simulation.

AccAkut

2000RPM
Premium
Mar 21, 2015
2,658
2,516
So any manufacturer could bolt his ICE to that drivetrain and run a car? Would be cool to see diversity.
 

PR0JECTNR56

75RPM
May 31, 2016
78
269
Glad to hear that they got the basics layed down and that Porsche concept art picture looks really nice, dishing out the mixture of a modern LMP1 and late 90s GT1 prototype cars.
 
Last edited:

PegaMixel

100RPM
Jun 4, 2017
122
231
28
Thats not gonna happen. It will forever be DPi and LMP.

Daytona Prototype imperial, Le Metric Prototype
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Adyl

Dirk Steffen

Porsche Factory Jackass™
Premium
Jul 30, 2016
1,851
1,095
The cars are too heavy and too low powered to be interesting prototype cars.

It looks indeed like the times when prototypes were the crazy spaceships are over for a while.
We had a few glorious eras when crazy spaceships ruled racing in the late '60s, early '70s, throughout the '80s and from the late '90s all the way until Porsche and Audi left the LMP1H class to the shameful show the ACO is responsible for we have today :-(

Le Mans prototypes should never be spec racers.

They always were the absolute pinnacle of racing just like F1 cars insigne seater open wheel racing.

This is the second biggest gripe that DESTROYS the sport.

The first biggest factor though is the ACO's alphabet soup regulation salad with EOT, BoP, HIV and colon cancer.

Look how they thoroughly managed to destroy last years and this years GT class racing with their nasty BoP infringements.

We may just as well throw the dice before the race who gets the most favorable BoP and know the most likely race winners before hand. We may just as well save us all the expenses of racing at all and just do this thing as a boardgame instead … so much more politically correct as well ;-)

Gone are the times when engineering innovation, guile and skill determined the races. Its a game of politics and regulations.

Dial back the regulations.
Make GT cars mandatory to bear manufacturer dealership showroom road legal cars again.
Open the regs for the prototypes so engineers and drivers can shine.

… also … loose the ridiculous face diapers.
 

tr1v1um

100RPM
May 19, 2013
213
388
54
The cars are too heavy and too low powered to be interesting prototype cars.

It looks indeed like the times when prototypes were the crazy spaceships are over for a while.
We had a few glorious eras when crazy spaceships ruled racing in the late '60s, early '70s, throughout the '80s and from the late '90s all the way until Porsche and Audi left the LMP1H class to the shameful show the ACO is responsible for we have today :-(

Le Mans prototypes should never be spec racers.

They always were the absolute pinnacle of racing just like F1 cars insigne seater open wheel racing.

This is the second biggest gripe that DESTROYS the sport.

The first biggest factor though is the ACO's alphabet soup regulation salad with EOT, BoP, HIV and colon cancer.

Look how they thoroughly managed to destroy last years and this years GT class racing with their nasty BoP infringements.

We may just as well throw the dice before the race who gets the most favorable BoP and know the most likely race winners before hand. We may just as well save us all the expenses of racing at all and just do this thing as a boardgame instead … so much more politically correct as well ;-)

Gone are the times when engineering innovation, guile and skill determined the races. Its a game of politics and regulations.

Dial back the regulations.
Make GT cars mandatory to bear manufacturer dealership showroom road legal cars again.
Open the regs for the prototypes so engineers and drivers can shine.

… also … loose the ridiculous face diapers.
I think people need to get over the impression that series XYZ is the pinnacle of anything and that reglementations should be as open as possible to aid innovation. The results is exactly what you complain about - Toyota getting a boner how fast they are on their own and the most interesting category being LMP2 that is basicly exactly what is proposed here - a "spec" class with an equal playingfield where everyone can have a go and not just some big factory teams. The times are over, when big manufacturers could pump as much money as they like to into a programm for a few years, just to leave it a bit later with all privateer and smaller teams getting dusted by sheer cost explosion. And it's important to understand that motorsport shouldn't be in the hands of a bunch of guys with the most money - we've seen it with the decline of LMP1, F1 and DTM as current examples. While the good examples of recent times show that some important limitations are needed and make it actually alot more diverse. Hence the better competition in MotoGP, Indycar, LMP2, IMSA and BTCC, where costs are actually far lower with spec parts where it matters and not everything being in control of one big brand. Today we again had a new winner in MotoGP and the top 13 riders are devided by as many points as the top 2 in F1, it's that laughable.

Endurance racing is about efficiency and there is as much innovation and work required to get the most out of a given budget or spec rules as it is with open regulations. The difference being that it get's interesting for more manufacturers as well as private people if the costs are somewhat controllable and when the concept is sustainable for all involved. If you beat 5 big manufacturers it means alot more than beating 2 private teams with a fraction of the budget that you are running on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adyl

Tombprince

100RPM
Jan 19, 2019
135
49
25
Man this thread shows people can never be pleased

during lockdown:"We want le mans back"
After lockdown:"EW the cars are too modern"


Well get used to it green tech is the future and oil is dying the petrol enthusiasts are gonna claim it's not innovative
stop living in the past I am sure that given enough time hybrid technology will be just as powerful as gas engines maybe even complete with fake vroom vrooms.


Update: i am very impressed the admins allowed this semi political rant to stay up thanks guys
 
Last edited:

Dirk Steffen

Porsche Factory Jackass™
Premium
Jul 30, 2016
1,851
1,095
I think people need to get over the impression that series XYZ is the pinnacle of anything and that reglementations should be as open as possible to aid innovation. The results is exactly what you complain about - Toyota getting a boner how fast they are on their own and the most interesting category being LMP2 that is basicly exactly what is proposed here - a "spec" class with an equal playingfield where everyone can have a go and not just some big factory teams. The times are over, when big manufacturers could pump as much money as they like to into a programm for a few years, just to leave it a bit later with all privateer and smaller teams getting dusted by sheer cost explosion. And it's important to understand that motorsport shouldn't be in the hands of a bunch of guys with the most money - we've seen it with the decline of LMP1, F1 and DTM as current examples. While the good examples of recent times show that some important limitations are needed and make it actually alot more diverse. Hence the better competition in MotoGP, Indycar, LMP2, IMSA and BTCC, where costs are actually far lower with spec parts where it matters and not everything being in control of one big brand. Today we again had a new winner in MotoGP and the top 13 riders are devided by as many points as the top 2 in F1, it's that laughable.

Endurance racing is about efficiency and there is as much innovation and work required to get the most out of a given budget or spec rules as it is with open regulations. The difference being that it get's interesting for more manufacturers as well as private people if the costs are somewhat controllable and when the concept is sustainable for all involved. If you beat 5 big manufacturers it means alot more than beating 2 private teams with a fraction of the budget that you are running on.
As I generally absolutely agree with the sentiment of your post I can absolutely not see how the proposal of the absolute extreme end of the spectrum of solutions is the logical means of solving the issues in endurance racing.

Have budget explosions ruined racing and generally put an end to several great eras of endurance racing in the past?

Yes, absolutely!

Are budget restrictions and the use of some standardized cost controlled components lead to exciting racing?

Quite likely.

Is it the right solution to go the the absolute extreme and mandate a true and complete spec class where only three chassis manufacturers are allowed to build chassis and the drive train is tightly controlled by its majority of components being also of spec manufactured by only one party?

ABSOLUTELY VEHEMENTLY NOT!


It was a terrible mistake by the ACO to disallow from the get go privateers to enter into the LMP1 H class as privateers are the bread and butter of the racing field while the manufacturers generally have the needed budget to kick off major innovation and the stamina to run with them over several year programs without bankrupting the outfit.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with manufacturers developing highly expensive, innovative vehicles and then leave the racing series after a short term of success.
This has ALWAYS been the formula of great racing. Just look at the past how major manufacturers have entered highly successful racers, earned championships and won races (or failed at it) for a short term of 1-3 seasons while mildly developing the vehicles and then either left the series as a manufacturer outright or moved on to the next project.

The highly successful cars they developed and raced more often then not went on into privateer hands and continued racing for a few seasons, often times even as longliving as a full decade after their works entry and racing was wonderful!

The LMP1 H regulations should have been more cost controlling and from the get go should have allowed and encouraged privateers to enter with viable development partners.

It would have been wonderful to see a Rebellion LMP1 H with a Mercedes co-developed drivetrain.
It would have been amazing to have seen a midengined Corvette LMP1 H prgroam in partnership for an innovative hybrid drive train with Tesla outside of the strict boundaries the ACO has thought out in technical limitations for the past LMP1 H formula.

In a free market industry stringent regulations and limitations are never the formula to a diverse and innovative field of successful entities.

And yes, the same ACO letting Toyota suckle to the ACO tit for a few years longer allowing the clown show of the one entry LMP1 H was a biiig mistake and made a farce out of endurance racing just to keep the manufacturer from leaving.

An outright spec series as proposed (and looking likely to happen) is NOT what Le Mans endurance racing fans want to see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frank

tr1v1um

100RPM
May 19, 2013
213
388
54
As I generally absolutely agree with the sentiment of your post I can absolutely not see how the proposal of the absolute extreme end of the spectrum of solutions is the logical means of solving the issues in endurance racing.

Have budget explosions ruined racing and generally put an end to several great eras of endurance racing in the past?

Yes, absolutely!

Are budget restrictions and the use of some standardized cost controlled components lead to exciting racing?

Quite likely.

Is it the right solution to go the the absolute extreme and mandate a true and complete spec class where only three chassis manufacturers are allowed to build chassis and the drive train is tightly controlled by its majority of components being also of spec manufactured by only one party?

ABSOLUTELY VEHEMENTLY NOT!


It was a terrible mistake by the ACO to disallow from the get go privateers to enter into the LMP1 H class as privateers are the bread and butter of the racing field while the manufacturers generally have the needed budget to kick off major innovation and the stamina to run with them over several year programs without bankrupting the outfit.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with manufacturers developing highly expensive, innovative vehicles and then leave the racing series after a short term of success.
This has ALWAYS been the formula of great racing. Just look at the past how major manufacturers have entered highly successful racers, earned championships and won races (or failed at it) for a short term of 1-3 seasons while mildly developing the vehicles and then either left the series as a manufacturer outright or moved on to the next project.

The highly successful cars they developed and raced more often then not went on into privateer hands and continued racing for a few seasons, often times even as longliving as a full decade after their works entry and racing was wonderful!

The LMP1 H regulations should have been more cost controlling and from the get go should have allowed and encouraged privateers to enter with viable development partners.

It would have been wonderful to see a Rebellion LMP1 H with a Mercedes co-developed drivetrain.
It would have been amazing to have seen a midengined Corvette LMP1 H prgroam in partnership for an innovative hybrid drive train with Tesla outside of the strict boundaries the ACO has thought out in technical limitations for the past LMP1 H formula.

In a free market industry stringent regulations and limitations are never the formula to a diverse and innovative field of successful entities.

And yes, the same ACO letting Toyota suckle to the ACO tit for a few years longer allowing the clown show of the one entry LMP1 H was a biiig mistake and made a farce out of endurance racing just to keep the manufacturer from leaving.

An outright spec series as proposed (and looking likely to happen) is NOT what Le Mans endurance racing fans want to see.
I am not sure if we have the same understanding of a spec series. Personaly, I couldn't care less at this point how super innovative the cars are, because I care for great racing, that the cars look good and that they sound great. I think, it's time that we move on from the idea that everything has to be super innovative and diverse, because the costs for racing have increased so much that there won't be any high class racing if we keep going like that. Best example being the recent decline of DTM. The times that Porsche sold their 956s or 962s to some private teams are long gone. It is essentialy what those mentioned chasis manufacturers do these days. And as far as I understood the concept, those mentioned manufacturers aren't set in stone and it could very well be that we see more of them buidling their own LMDh chasis in the future, while the engineers will still have alot of room to find some clever solutions.
 

What is your favorite social network?

  • Twitter

    Votes: 69 30.8%
  • Instagram

    Votes: 85 37.9%
  • Facebook

    Votes: 38 17.0%
  • Other (specify in thread)

    Votes: 53 23.7%