The Riley-Multimatic MkXXX made its public debut in late 2016 at Daytona, at least in its LMP2 specification. Bob Riley, and son Bill had for many years been trying to develop a new LMP chassis with a project in continuous development at its facility in Mooresville, NC.
The designs included both LMP1, and LMP2 concepts, open and closed cars (examples of which are above and below). None of these came to fruition, though it is believed that at least one came very close.
When the new LMP2 technical regulations were announced, with the controversial tender system for just four spots for constructors, Riley realised that this was the opportunity it was after as there was demand for a US based constructor. However a potential rival was Larry Holt’s Multimatic organisation which had acquired much of the defunct Lola empire. To see off the potential threat a partnership was proposed. ‘When the tender came out it was clear we were going to go for it, and we thought that they would probably go for it too, so we thought that it would be a good time to start working together,’ Bill Riley explains. ‘It’s a good fit over who will do what on the car and so we created Multimatic-Riley together. The car was primarily designed by us, but we used their CFD capabilities, they did all the higher end composites work and the cars are assembled here in North Carolina. Riley is also be the point of sale, and manages parts distribution.’
The result of this partnership was the Riley-Multimatic MkXXX. An all new design with no carry over from the previous work by Riley, the new car was a fairly conventional design (below).
The nose of the MkXXX is slightly raised as is fairly common on modern Le Mans Prototypes, with the front brakes cooled via ducts on the leading edge of the front bodywork, something it has in common with the Dallara P217. Note the size of the rear view mirrors and the design of the outer edge of the front splitter with the semi cylindrical elements. Curiously the MkXXX is the only 2017 LMP2 design not to feature front dive planes.
At the front of the cockpit there is a single cooling duct (twin ducts are more common) note how the towing eye is offset to the right hand side of the tub, an unusual feature. The two bumps in the bodywork (one partially obscured by the Tequila Patron sticker) likely accommodate the upper parts of the inboard front suspension.
A look at the side bodywork of the MkXXX displaying all the usual turning vanes and aerodynamic elements between the chassis and the trailing edge of the front wheel pod. The rear brake cooling duct is clear to see on the leading edge of the rear wheel pod. Note the exhaust exit location. At the trailing edge of the rear deck of the car there appears to be a substantial flick up.
Some experimental bodywork was briefly tested at Daytona in December 2016 (above), this may be part of the low drag kit for Le Mans.
Mazda RT24-P (Daytona Prototype International)
The Riley Multimatic MkXXX actually made its public debut in its DPi trim at the LA Auto Show in 2016. Mazda had partnered with Riley Multimatic to create the striking looking Mazda RT24-P.
“The bodywork of the race car was developed by Mazda designers utilizing the KODO—Soul of Motion design philosophy. KODO represents the instant that energy becomes motion, such as the muscular beauty as an animal pounces or a human leaps into action” claims a press release unhelpfully, but the RT24-P had a universally good reception from racing fans and the media alike. In reality the aerodynamic development of the RT24-P was handled by Multimatic, who used CFD rather more than KODO.
At the front of the RT24-P there seems to be little carry over from the MkXXX, the front bodywork has been totally re-worked, the front wheel pods have been reshaped, as have the front brake ducts and even the wing mirrors, which appear to sit lower than they do on the MkXXX.
However there is some carry over from the MkXXX, the front impact structure can be seen in the central nose duct of the Mazda as can the supports. The entire front splitter carries over from the LMP2 design also.
The side panel of the RT24-P also differs significantly to the MkXXX, compare the Mazda version (above) with the Riley-Multimatic version (below). Note the horizontal element linking the turning vanes behind the front wheel pod.
When the MkXXX first ran it was notable for its lack of front dive planes and this was also the case for the RT24-P at its launch in Los Angeles (below)
By the time the car arrived for testing at Daytona large single dive planes had been fitted (below)
But aerodynamic development continued over Christmas 2016 the dive planes were again re-worked and new versions were fitted for the Roar (below) these new dive planes were much shorter than the original versions.
Instead of the Gibson V8 used in the LMP2 version of the car the RT24-P is fitted with a 2 litre turbocharged inline four designed and built by AER in England and dubbed the Mazda MZ-2.0T, it is claimed to produce in excess of 600bhp.
Curiously the Mazda powered RT24-P (below) uses an identical airbox to the Gibson powered MkXXX (above)
The full installation of this engine seemed not to be fully finalised as the two Mazda RT24-P chassis took part in the Roar before the 24 at Daytona in early 2017.
When the RT24-P tested for the first time at Daytona (in late 2016) it utilised a single side exhaust exit on the left hand side of the rear of the car. This was also utilised on the grey no.70 RT24-P at the Roar (above), however on the red no.55 RT24-P the exhaust exit was located on the engine cover. (below). Note that the original exhaust exit is blanked off on the red car.
A look at the rear of the car reveals some interesting detail, the trailing edge of the RT24-P is narrower than the MkXXX and this has resulted in a very interesting rear wing support being used (below).
Le Mans 2017
The Riley made its European debut at Le Mans, which was also the public debut of its low drag kit, the first hints of which were seen in testing at Daytona. Following the official Le Mans test day it was realised that the car had too much drag, even with the low drag kit installed.
For Le Mans Riley re-worked the front splitter, with the outermost elements totally different, compare the standards IMSA spec (above) with the Le Mans spec (below).
Note the lack of dive planes used in the low drag kit in fact the whole leading edge of the front wheel pod has been shaped using the clip on panels first seen at Daytona.
Riley and Multimatic utilised CFD, scale model testing and full scale testing to develop the MkXXX.
The rear wing of the car is new for Le Mans too, the large upper gurney has been removed entirely, the two planes sit lower than they do on the IMSA spec (above) compared to the Le Mans variant (below)
It is not just the wing angle and gurney which has been revised the entire end plate is a new design for Le Mans.
The IMSA end plates (above) have an entirely different upper section compared to the Le Mans version (below)
Note the gurney across the trailing edge of the IMSA bodywork, there have been a couple of iterations of this seen in use on the IMSA spec car, but on the low drag Le Mans kit no gurney at all is used.
There is a small cooling aperture on the centreline of the car, easily visible on the Le Mans version of the rear bodywork.
The aerodynamic detailing for Le Mans carries to other parts of the car including the side panels. On the top of the sidepod area of the car the Riley has a flat panel.
On the Le Mans variant (below) that flat panel extends further rearward than it does on the IMSA version (above).
On the IMSA version the panel terminates forward of the fuel filler while on the Le Mans version it terminates rearward of that point.
A look at the panel from above shows its rearward extension.
Here we get a good look at the front bulkhead of the MkXXX (above and below)
The Riley MkXXX in Le Mans trim had excessive drag, and the team running the car has done all it can to trim it out to improve top speed. Riley has opted against asking for an additional update package as permitted by the rules as long as Ligier, ORECA and Dallara agree.
