What Did We Learn From Super Sebring?

The 2023 ‘Super Sebring’ is now in the history books and with hindsight after an intense, exciting and exhausting fortnight there are a number of conclusions that can be drawn from the first ‘gathering of the clans’ of the era of top class convergence.

Firstly, that hindsight allows us to conclude that it seems that had the FIA WEC race been run to IMSA rules, and the IMSA race to WEC rules, we might just have seen two better races at Sebring last week.

Toyota’s clear superiority was assisted by the opposition making too many errors, and suffering poor reliability giving a big gap  between the GR010s and their opposition.

The 12-hour race for IMSA, was caution heavy in the second half, which frankly ruined what was, for long periods, a truly enthralling race, that should have been a great advert for the GTP class and the world-class teams that make up the field.

Those repeated caution periods translated into a 12 hour race that ran to more than three fewer laps per hour than the 8 hour event on Friday.

After what looks increasingly likely to have been the final FIA WEC/IMSA doubleheader at the historic Floridian circuit, there are so many talking points as the WEC heads to Europe and the IMSA field begins its first stretch of shorter races.

Here’s some of our thoughts on the storylines that emerged over the past two weeks.

Discipline and reliability, as well as pace, needed to catch Toyota

The two-lap lead for Toyota flattered its comparative performance just a little.

Whilst the 2023 version of the GR010 visibly looks like a more stable platform, the post-race debrief for Ferrari in particular features some extremely low hanging fruit.

Mistakes that should not have been made, cost what is clearly a quick and reliable car in the 499P, chunks of time. The Ferrari has pace close to the now fully-mature Toyota. There is little doubt that at present, these two teams look the most likely to be fighting for race wins and podium places at each race. But Ferrari’s team, which is made up from a combination of staff from the AF Corse GTE, road car and F1 programmes, as well as a selection of new hires, needs discipline and experience to take the next steps.

The primary lesson to be learned by the rest though is that to beat Toyota you have to be both fast – and faultless!

Peugeot had a woeful trip to Sebring, from start to finish. It is difficult to come to anything other than the conclusion that this was a race the team had to endure rather than compete in.

Whether the 9X8 as a car simply isn’t suited to the challenges of Sebring, or needs significant development to become a front runner in this company, the reality is that from the first day of the Prologue, to the end of the race, the team’s event was ruined by a combination of reliability woes and a lack of pace.

The 9X8 looked awful over the ‘bumps’, which Peugeot hadn’t tested on prior to this event. The question arises: did the team know beforehand that the car’s aerodynamic concept wouldn’t work there? In addition, both cars, again, suffered gearbox actuator problems and the team intends at Portimao to have switched to a hydraulically actuated gearshift.

The hybrid system also gave the team trouble, the #94 was the only car in the class that suffered a significant issue in this department. Later (much later) it was permitted to rejoin the race, but it finished unclassified.

If the team’s performance is this poor at Portimao, a circuit at which the team has tested the 9X8 extensively over the winter, there will be even further cause for concern.

LMH vs LMDh

This weekend at Sebring provided the first of what we hope will be countless opportunities over the coming years to see LMH and LMDh cars competing together on the same track in the WEC. To make this possible, and viable, the FIA and ACO, along with the manufacturers in a working group, have decided to opt for stability with the BoP that governs the class, rather than leave the door open for frequent changes throughout the season in an attempt to keep everyone happy.

The theory is that if the BoP won’t change, then the temptation to ‘sandbag’ ahead of key races is eliminated. And in practice, it appears to be a good move thus far. Prior to Sebring the governing bodies were clear that no changes would be made to the BoP between the Prologue and the race, and revealed that anticipatory BoP values had been decided for the opening rounds of the season, through to the races post-Le Mans.

This plan, in many ways, has worked. It was refreshing to hear very little BoP chatter in the paddock, though it must be pointed out that, by regulation, teams have been told to avoid discussing it. On the quiet though, there didn’t appear to be much dissatisfaction throughout the Prologue and race week.

However, while the sample size, admittedly, is small, Ferrari and Toyota’s LMH challengers appeared to have an advantage on pace over their LMDh rivals, Porsche and Cadillac.

It’s too early to know whether all that’s needed is experience for the staff from Penske and Cadillac. Both teams had precious little time working together as units prior to the trip to Florida, to bridge the gap, or whether tweaks will need to be made ahead of Le Mans to ensure the competition is as fair as it can be.

While the BoP for individual cars is effectively fixed until Monza, platform BoP can be tweaked every two races, meaning the LMH or LMDh cars as a collective can be adjusted to eliminate any performance deficit.

What we don’t yet know, is how effective this system is at dealing with a clear disparity between specific cars running to either ruleset.

A clear example is the performance and potential for Glickenhaus, and Vanwall, that bring non-hybrid LMH cars to the class that are fundamentally different to their hybrid-powered counterparts. Neither car looked in any way competitive against the front running machinery from major OEMs last week, yet last year with the old system, Glickenhaus’ 007 managed to set pole against the GR010s.

IMSA’s driving standards in the spotlight

Whilst there were some standout driving performances in the 12 Hours of Sebring, very sadly, there were too many others at the other end of the spectrum, with caution periods into double figures during the race. Cautions really did ‘breed’ cautions.

It would be fair to say that LMP3 in particular, drew attention to itself throughout, and too often for the wrong reasons.

Whilst the debate is live over the likely removal of the class in the championship for 2024, the reality is, that this class is causing too many problems, particularly with inexperienced drivers. And frustratingly, this comes at a time where more eyes than ever are on the championship.

It is perhaps too late for a change in 2023, but there surely should be a minimum standard applied to allow drivers to compete in a championship at this level, to ensure their own, and their competitors safety?

There are precious few instances in world motorsport where this applies, and there is a relatively simple fix available. Should a meeting by meeting ‘rookie test’ element for Bronze drivers within an early session each weekend be explored?

The Le Mans 24 Hours and racing on the Nordschleife both apply a process for qualification. Why not Sebring or for that matter, any major international endurance race featuring cars racing at a variety of performance levels during the day and night?

Surprise winners

The late-race carnage in GTP in the 12 Hours of Sebring grabbed most of the headlines, including the final three-car incident that effectively handed the win to the #31 Action Express Cadillac, which had been heavily damage in an early-race clash with a spinning LMP3.

Look further down the class winners and there were other similar stories. Tower Motorsports took the win in LMP2, despite a substantial off that required repairs.

In GTD Pro, Pfaff Motorsports brought home the win after a woeful Daytona for the new 992-spec Porsche 911 GT3 Rs. The #9 needed a faultless run, with its race times still a little off the class standard.

The win came courtesy of great teamwork and stratgy. Assisted by caution periods Pfaff were able to take and retain tack position with an extraordinary stint from Patrick Pilet that saw him stretch a singe tank of fuel to last on hour and 51 minutes!

In GTD, Paul Miller Racing also took an unlikely win, after Bryan Sellers reported during the race that the BMW M4 GT3’s brakes wear far too quickly in endurance races, forcing the drivers to work with an increasingly tricky package – again the IMSA regulations enabled the car to stay in ultimate contention. A fuel save run and timely caution periods in the final hour played a big part in the team’s win.

The post What Did We Learn From Super Sebring? first appeared on dailysportscar.com.