[WEC] New Perrin LMP1 !

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

Is this legit or just your personal fan fiction, Akrapovic?

Gesendet von meinem HTC Desire 526G dual sim mit Tapatalk

Legit. I'm no where near creative enough to write fan fiction, lol.

Really not sure about the autonomous mode. I appreciate it for road cars because of the safety aspect. But I don't see how it adds to a sport.

[Graham Goodwin]

Rather more on this story - Customer is still out there - target is Dacia badging

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2017/0...me-halted.html

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Japanese Samurai

Is there carriage space of front MGU in monocoque?

This shouldn't be confused with a final technical drawing, it's obviously just for illustration and presentation purposes. It suggests there is space in the front for an electric motor, but since the chassis hasn't run and has now been pushed to 2019, there is time to make room for it.

Car length increased by 35 cm, but this is to accommodate the battery rather than the MGU. Chassis length is increased so the battery can be included inside the monocoque. Assuming the battery will run along the bottom of the chassis, which gives the car a very low centre of gravity. Despite the weight (1100 kg), it could end up being quite a good car to drive. Low CoG and instant torque.

[S griffin]

What a shame, LMP1 needs more cars at this time, we better hope others come in next season

[kvenom]

This G56 entry seems laughably optimistic considering they couldn't even get a barebones regular P1 off the ground.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by kvenom

This G56 entry seems laughably optimistic considering they couldn't even get a barebones regular P1 off the ground.

Yup. It's another "believe it when I see it" type of thing to me. If they do get funding for it, cool. But I won't be bothered if it fails either.

[knighty]

The sooner LMP1 dies off the better, then the ACO will realise and accept the DPi route is far more attractive for manufacturers who want to compete in top level prototypes, but not with an F1 budget.

[carbsmith]

DPi is for participating, not competing

[AoB Special Stage]

[TF110]

Originally Posted by knighty

The sooner LMP1 dies off the better, then the ACO will realise and accept the DPi route is far more attractive for manufacturers who want to compete in top level prototypes, but not with an F1 budget.

Dpi is cool, but it's too 'spec' to present it as a top class in a World Championship with FIA sanctioning. If they could open the concept up by doing away with the excessive bop and spec tires and allow some development to actually show, I could see it working.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by TF110

Dpi is cool, but it's too 'spec' to present it as a top class in a World Championship with FIA sanctioning. If they could open the concept up by doing away with the excessive bop and spec tires and allow some development to actually show, I could see it working.

If DPi was to be the foundation, it would need the above items. Which in the grand scheme is small tweaks.

Richard

[chernaudi]

They'd need to get it back to LMP900/pre-hybrid LMP1 levels of development freedom before DPI can seriously replace present day LMP1.

Not to mention you have that whole air restrictor vs fuel flow performance balancing going on between DPI and LMP1. I don't see LMP1 privateers ditching fuel flow meters in favor of air restrictors after spending the money to develop their engines for fuel flow, and I don't see DPI-like efforts going to fuel flow, either.

LMP1 right now needs LMP1 specification cars. The ACO aren't going to dump their current rules a year or two early just to get more cars on the grid. Which I think at this moment is stupid, but you have at least two constructors developing cars to the current regs, which for privateers are supposed to be good until 2022.

[hondafan37]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

They'd need to get it back to LMP900/pre-hybrid LMP1 levels of development freedom before DPI can seriously replace present day LMP1.

Not to mention you have that whole air restrictor vs fuel flow performance balancing going on between DPI and LMP1. I don't see LMP1 privateers ditching fuel flow meters in favor of air restrictors after spending the money to develop their engines for fuel flow, and I don't see DPI-like efforts going to fuel flow, either.

LMP1 right now needs LMP1 specification cars. The ACO aren't going to dump their current rules a year or two early just to get more cars on the grid. Which I think at this moment is stupid, but you have at least two constructors developing cars to the current regs, which for privateers are supposed to be good until 2022.

I think if brands, Acura, Mazda, Nissan or Cadillac want to go to Le Mans the engine would not be problems, all of that have the possibility to use a engine with fuel flow limits. Nissan have the V6 used in by kolles, Acura have the V6 Honda of Indy Cars (engine that was to be used in the project of ARX 04 LMP1 that never happened), then Cadillac could be use the Chevy engine of Indy Cars and Mazda could benefit from the business agreement with Toyota and use the Toyota 4 in line turbo of GT500 and that is available for LMP1.
We know that the Chassis of Oreca and Ligier can lower their weight to 830 kg to adapt to LMP1 P, I guess the same thing happens with Dallara.
Joest and Mazda of course are more complicated with the currently overweight Riley chassis.
A new aerodynamic package for Le Mans and modifications to the suspensions for Michelin or Dunlop should not be complicated for the teams and brands involved.
I honestly do not see it possible for 2018, maybe for 2019 and only for Le Mans. A victory of Toyota in Le Mans in 2018 could reduce to 2 cars its participation in 2019 or even leave the series and that could be a great opportunity for Acura, Mazda, Nissan and Cadillac to win Le Mans.
Also we all know that Penske and Joest want to be there.

[chernaudi]

Problem also is that DPI is very much a BOP formula, vs LMP1 where only the engine and hybrid are supposed to be regulated. That's also part of where the LMP1 cost hike came from due to the ACO loosening up some of the aero regs (while IMO arbitrarily tightening others).

That's why the front floors of modern LMP1s are so evolved, even though the actual performance gains are probably fairly marginal.

We'd probably have to go back to pre-2005 BOP principals (IE, rarely enacted except in cases of extreme disparity in performance) to get what LMP1 really ought to be. And I'd also hope that would bring costs down, too.

[hondafan37]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Problem also is that DPI is very much a BOP formula, vs LMP1 where only the engine and hybrid are supposed to be regulated. That's also part of where the LMP1 cost hike came from due to the ACO loosening up some of the aero regs (while IMO arbitrarily tightening others).

That's why the front floors of modern LMP1s are so evolved, even though the actual performance gains are probably fairly marginal.

We'd probably have to go back to pre-2005 BOP principals (IE, rarely enacted except in cases of extreme disparity in performance) to get what LMP1 really ought to be. And I'd also hope that would bring costs down, too.

The point is that by putting a suitable engine, reducing weight, a new aerodynamic package and a modified suspension would be coming out of the BOP and the DPI would become an LMP1-P that should be very competitive against the private teams of the series.
I do not think any DPI will be at Le Mans in 2018 but it may be possible in 2019 and they have many chances to reach the podium or even win if the Toyota have problems.

[Juntos]

Originally Posted by kvenom

This G56 entry seems laughably optimistic considering they couldn't even get a barebones regular P1 off the ground.

Couldn't agree more.

How about it, Mr Perrinn? One last Cinderella moment before you turn into a bumpkin.

[Nicolas Perrin]

Hi guys, before I turn into a pumpkin, I would love to answer your questions and explain to you the PERRINN project and the reality of Motorsport. But can we do this on perrinn.com? If you go there, there is a visitor access, no login required, and you can chat with me there, it is public by the way - everyone can see what is said... It would be nice! Think about it and see you there.
Cheers
Nicolas Perrin (with 1 n)

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Nicolas Perrin

Hi guys, before I turn into a pumpkin, I would love to answer your questions and explain to you the PERRINN project and the reality of Motorsport. But can we do this on perrinn.com? If you go there, there is a visitor access, no login required, and you can chat with me there, it is public by the way - everyone can see what is said... It would be nice! Think about it and see you there.
Cheers
Nicolas Perrin (with 1 n)

Thanks Nicolas. Apologies on the thread title, seems nobody else had noticed that. I think the amount of discussion around this topic means people are interested, and I hope some of our members take the opportunity to ask you questions directly at your site.

[Maelochs]

Thanks for posting, Mr. Perrin. I will check out your site again ... haven't visited (if it is the same one) since the announcement a couple years back.

[Marcel ten Caat]

Seeing the name of the customer, this was always going to end badly.

[Hawkwood]

Originally Posted by Marcel ten Caat

Seeing the name of the customer, this was always going to end badly.

Who was the potential customer?

[Aysedasi]

ART Racing Services

Although that means nothing to me.....

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2017/0...me-halted.html

[YZFrider]

It mentioned badging the engines as Dacia but I haven't seen what the engines were supposed to be. Anybody know?

[Marcel ten Caat]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

ART Racing Services

Although that means nothing to me.....

Company registered by a certain Frank van Nunen.
Who was also behind the failed Team ECOSpeed Dome project in 2009 and was accused of fraud by at least one driver he managed (Francesco Sini).

[Bentley03]

Would love to see this as a 'Garage 56' entry at Le Mans:

Perrinn 424