|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
6 Jan 2007, 07:49 (Ref:1807976) | #51 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
What precedent is there for the ACO to allow an auto entrant in a specific class to compete in an alternate class?? I am under the impression that the invites are class specific. Am I incorrect?
L.P. |
||
|
6 Jan 2007, 09:55 (Ref:1808023) | #52 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 366
|
Quote:
This application would be reviewed by the selection committee and awarded, or not, on its own merits. It may be turned down or "left till after Sebring" as the application would most likely be for an unproven team/car combination. The "Sebring" allusion harks back to an earlier thread where the relevence of Sebring to Le Mans was questioned. The relevence has often been just that; "see how thet go @ Sebring"... Mariantic |
|||
|
6 Jan 2007, 11:02 (Ref:1808067) | #53 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,045
|
Quote:
Auto invites are class specific. Those teams who have qualified for an auto invite and intend to take up their invite must declare the exact car they intend to race with at Le Mans by January 8th. It must be an ACO legal car within the category for which they have received the auto invite. A team which has received an auto invite but wishes to compete in a different class must forfeit their auto invite and put their name in the pot with everyone else in the hope that they will receive an invite for the class they wish to change to. Every application for entry at Le Mans must include details of the car the team intends to race (whether it's an auto invite or not) and invites are offered on that basis. Once the process of invites is complete, an invited team can (theoretically) change the car with which they compete. But, in order to do so, they must apply to the ACO in writing with details of the change they wish to make. The ACO will then consider their applictaion and decide whether or not to permit it. If memory serves me right, both Larbre and Russian Age applied to change from Ferrari 550's to Aston DBR9's last year. Both applications were rejected. The most likely reason for this is that one of the most important criteria the ACO applies to it's invitation process, is variety. |
||
|
6 Jan 2007, 11:40 (Ref:1808098) | #54 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 366
|
Quote:
The more we can try and de-mystify this somewhat mysterious process the better. Yes, "variety" is a major consideration for the selection committee. So they will try to keep the balance of marques when allowing, or otherwise, changes after application. Mariantic |
|||
|
6 Jan 2007, 21:15 (Ref:1808453) | #55 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
So they do not let a team with an auto-invite change class. They may let the team change cars(ACO legal), but only in class and only if it keeps or expands the amount of marques, to keep a level of variety.
If the team wishes to change class they lose the auto-invite but may retain some favor with the committee on their application, if their performance is sufficient at Sebring to merit it. L.P. |
||
|
6 Jan 2007, 21:58 (Ref:1808478) | #56 | |
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 317
|
If the team is "professional, funded and with good drivers", coupled with what looks to be the only Zytek 07S LMP1 (with inevitable factory support) a Le Mans entry is as good as given.
The ACO want variety in LMP1 and the Zytek adds that. Furthermore after the Zytek's perfomances in 2005 & 2006 with their works 04S and 06S, I should think they are a pretty good name to have on the entry form. I would be far more worried about the Le Mans entry if I was running an LMP1 Pescarolo; numbers count against you when it comes to Le Mans and variety is key. I should think that the team concerned have looked at this and decided that the Zytek fits the bill very well; I think looking into who has and has not got a guaranteed entry will not help us get any closer to the team. My advice is wait.........but I still think that Danish is the flavour that is most likely PS. Do the ACO want a performance of 2005 where they turned down the car that made the entire LMES series.......I think not. |
|
|
7 Jan 2007, 06:11 (Ref:1808660) | #57 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,045
|
Quote:
For example, if Big John Nielsen/Team Essex are involved, yes, I'd be amazed if they didn't get an invite. But if the car has been sold to a team new to the LMS and Le Mans, their chances of an entry must surely be reduced. Don't get me wrong though, I do want to see that car at Le Mans this coming June!! BTW, re your Pescarolo comment, I'd actually take the opposite view... |
||
|
7 Jan 2007, 06:12 (Ref:1808661) | #58 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
Diesel
As we are discussing Zytek. Why is Zytek not deep in the diesel quagmire. They are a major player when it comes to small carbon footprint vehicles, on a global scale. You would think that they would try to set the stage for their business to gain by popularizing diesel.
L.P. |
||
|
7 Jan 2007, 06:29 (Ref:1808662) | #59 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,045
|
Quote:
|
||
|
7 Jan 2007, 11:26 (Ref:1808738) | #60 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 767
|
Quote:
Given that their hybrid had to be ballasted significantly, this sounds pretty hollow to me. I think they were striving for a competitve advantage (that has been given to diesels) through the regs. The fundamental problem that they face is that they struggle with a lack of torque compared to Judd, AER or the Audi. As it is unlikely that the Zytek V8 can be stretched any further, they need their hybrid technology to give them that added punch of torque. If, on the other hand, they cannot realistically stay within the weight, then the hybrid technology is not applicable to prototypes at present. That is probably the reason why Zytek appear reluctant to use their own money to develop it at present. |
||
|
8 Jan 2007, 12:39 (Ref:1809572) | #61 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
It is not Jota, but they will have some interesting news soon.
source: http://www.endurance-info.com/article.php?sid=3023 |
|
|
8 Jan 2007, 14:00 (Ref:1809628) | #62 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,406
|
[QUOTE=canam] The fundamental problem that they face is that they struggle with a lack of torque compared to Judd, AER or the Audi. As it is unlikely that the Zytek V8 can be stretched any further, they need their hybrid technology to give them that added punch of torque. [QUOTE=canam]
Totally agreed - I have said this before - quite why Zytec are still messing around with a high revving 4.0 V8 in LMP1 is beyond me....... when its blatantly obvious you need a minimum of 5 litres (lots of torque) and low revs to last the 24hr distance......obviously Judd are on to a winner with the 5.5.......I reckon its only a matter of time before they do a 6.0 V10 OK Zytec have won a few sprint type/10 hour races (I think?) with this combination, but 24hrs seems totally out of the question for this high revving 4.0 V8 LMP1 motor........it was known back in the days of the front engined Panoz that this particular Zytec V8 was a turd, aparrently it vibrates like hell and the chassis/ancillaries cant take the pounding from the flat plane crank vibrations........I bet it dosent have balancer shafts either - in order to cancel out the shaking motion from the flat plane crank. Zytec would be better off doing thier own 6 litre low revving V8 or V10 and having a go at Judds dominant market share of engine supply......then I'm sure they will probably find out there is more money in engine supply than chassis supply.......just my 2 pence worth! |
||
|
8 Jan 2007, 15:29 (Ref:1809694) | #63 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 317
|
[QUOTE=knighty][QUOTE=canam] The fundamental problem that they face is that they struggle with a lack of torque compared to Judd, AER or the Audi. As it is unlikely that the Zytek V8 can be stretched any further, they need their hybrid technology to give them that added punch of torque.
Quote:
Firstly it's ZyteK. Secondly the current 4.0l V8 has little or no links back to the Panoz engine. Thirdly the only engine problem Zytek have ever had was at Le Mans 2004 when 3 punctures put pay to it, has anyone ever seen a Zytek engine blow apart from that? Jota and Binnie seemed to do very well with their Zytek powerplants in recent Le Mans efforts......it is the gearbox that Zytek have struggled with, not the engine. Would Johansson say that the 06s is "hands down one of the best prototypes" he has driven if his fillings were being shaken loose by an engine that you bet "deosn't have balancer shafts"......lets not forget he drove the R8 too..... Was the 06S 4.0l V8 slower than the 5.5l Creation Judd? No. Lack of torque......rubbish too, except for the R10 which is a diesel. You make it sound like that with a click of the fingers Zytek will be able to throw out a 6 litre V10....have you any idea the amount of money and development that would be needed.....and anyway, what is the point when the current V8 is performing so well anyway? |
||
|
8 Jan 2007, 15:40 (Ref:1809700) | #64 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,045
|
Quote:
|
||
|
8 Jan 2007, 15:49 (Ref:1809703) | #65 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 317
|
Quote:
PS, it wasnt canam I was disagreeing with but knighty...... |
||
|
8 Jan 2007, 15:57 (Ref:1809707) | #66 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,045
|
Quote:
|
||
|
8 Jan 2007, 16:50 (Ref:1809739) | #67 | |||||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 767
|
[QUOTE=I love 04s]
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Axiomatically, larger capacity engines will have more torque. I think you would find that that 5 litre Judd would have 20% plus more torque than the 4 litre Zytek. I don't have the figures but it is similar to comparing the 5 litre Judd against the 4 litre Judd although, as a 4 litre, the Zytek probably would look quite good torque-wise (for a 4 litre). The Zytek is a good engine, if not a very good engine; but, as things are now, there is not much more they can do to make it competitive against the new 5.5 litre Judd or any large turbo engine (be it petrol or diesel). Someone needs to put their hands in the pockets. |
|||||
|
8 Jan 2007, 17:37 (Ref:1809773) | #68 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,406
|
04s - this is the second time on this forum you have told me to think before I type when talking about the Zytek chassis and engine......before lemans 06 I said the zytec motor was rubbish - and it went bang there too.....do you work for Zytek by any chance?......or perhaps KWM?......your signature would seem to indicate some sort of link with the chassis/engine, especially as you told me you had something to do with the original Reynard design.......come on spill the beans?
apologies for spelling zytek wrong - a deffo slip of the fingers!.........Can Am has already done the talking for me........the Zytec 4.0 is nothing special.......I stand by everything I said above.........I have been designing race and road engines for the past 7 years and understand the subject VERY well.......Zytec have got their numbers wrong on the engine front.....a 4.0 will not produce comparable torque with a 5.5.....power - yes......torque - no...... I am well aware how much it costs to design and develop an engine - and I was not implying it was easy for anyone to do..........but should you want one doing - get in contact with me at www.knightecengineering.com . |
||
|
8 Jan 2007, 17:40 (Ref:1809778) | #69 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 268
|
i agree with canam... the Zytek IS a very good engine but against "bigger" engine like the new Judd or the diesel powerplants from Audi and Peugeot it's probably lacking some cc...
|
||
|
8 Jan 2007, 18:18 (Ref:1809814) | #70 | |
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 317
|
Hahaha, now thats a proper discussion!
I think its only fair that I can have my turn now.....! Canam, the engine failures relating to Creation cannot be blamed upon the Zytek powerplant. When I refer to a Zytek engine expiring, I mean one that has been factory prepared and lifed properly. This is by no means a dig at Creation, however it must be pointed out that the preparation of their car and the works car was somewhat different in 2005. Are you saying that the current 4.0litre Zytek is not competitive against the 5.5 litre Judd? Results would suggest otherwise......or else nearly every other Judd powered chassis is not comparable to the 06S??? Furthermore the one second Nic was losing to tires is purely subjective, he nor Creation nor you nor I have any idea whether that is true. I do agree with you someone needs to put their hands in their pockets.....finding that someone is not easy. _______________________________________________________________ Knighty. Le Mans 06 - Engine fine, gearbox mush. Yes, I agree not an impressive outing.....early days though for a brand new engine and chassis, especially with middle of the road drivers. I do not work for Zytek and never have, nor have I ever worked for KWM.....my identity is not important. I just enjoy a good old chit chat! _______________________________________________________________ |
|
|
8 Jan 2007, 19:23 (Ref:1809847) | #71 | |||||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 767
|
Quote:
Zytek engineers would have been in situ every time the car was run and would have downloaded all the data every time the car went into the pit...largely in order to protect the value of their asset but also to ensure that the engine was running within established (by Zytek) tolerances. For the avoidance of doubt, the parts that failed were Zytek parts and were part of the engine. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
edited to get the quoting right - p-c Last edited by paul-collins; 8 Jan 2007 at 20:17. |
|||||
|
8 Jan 2007, 19:27 (Ref:1809849) | #72 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,699
|
Interesting discussion. I would like to contribute to the technical side, but can't. In P2 I would take the Zytek chassis with the Zytek motor. I think it would be a very competitive platform with the likes of the RS Sypders given comparable Michelins and drivers. I have to assume that the later iterations of the 3.4 liter powerplant have been much improved, as the reliability of the factory car has been pretty good.
In P1, it is a different proposition. It's fair to assume (even you 04s) that the 4.0 liter engine is down on torque. In my opinion, even the Judds are not good enough (good power, but not the complete package). I think you need a turbo, either petrol or diesel. That doesn't leave many alternatives unfortunately, which is why Judd currently have a hold on the market. I'd like to see a Zytek chassis with the new Cosworth turbo motor. But even then, you'd be gambling on reliability of an unknown motor. |
||
__________________
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." Albert Einstein |
8 Jan 2007, 19:31 (Ref:1809851) | #73 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 402
|
Ok, dunno how reliable this site is, but the Official LeMans 24h site says the Zytek 4-litre V8 has 530Nm torque @ 7500 and 620hp @ 9200. By comparison the Judd 5-litre V10 is listed as 615Nm @ 6500 and 640hp @ 8500.
Could always take the Zytek down to 3.6 and bolt on a couple of turbines! Last edited by Hammerdown; 8 Jan 2007 at 19:33. |
||
|
8 Jan 2007, 20:02 (Ref:1809879) | #74 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 317
|
Quote:
You have got completely the wrong end of the stick. What I am saying is that the preparation that went into the Creation car was not done to the same standard as the Zytek car (apart from the engine where it was exactly the same) A car is not made up of chassis and engine only remember. I am in no way saying that Zytek provided duff components - I would like to make this very clear. Creation suffered many problems in 2004 and if you research them you will find that close to, if not all, had nothing to do with the Zytek engine. They had oil pump issues, gearchange issues and radiator problems - none of these were contributable to Zytek. Is the 5.5L Judd going to be that different this year.....time will tell, how much further can you push an engine that has been going under developement for quite a period of time?......again time will tell. One thing is for sure, the Zytek 07S with the 4.0L V8 is bound to be a very competitive car when in the right hands. Oh and for the record. Clearly the 4.0l will be down on torque - however what it lacks in torque, it more than makes up for in reliability, fuel consumption and weight. edited to get the quoting right - p-c Last edited by paul-collins; 8 Jan 2007 at 20:16. |
||
|
8 Jan 2007, 20:17 (Ref:1809895) | #75 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,390
|
04S - word to the wise - When in a hole..........................
|
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Your LMP1 team, if you had to choose | Geva-Nelson | Sportscar & GT Racing | 39 | 3 Oct 2006 03:39 |
Zytek LMP1 | JAG | Sportscar & GT Racing | 1 | 31 Mar 2005 20:35 |
Works Zytek?? | almzkid | Sportscar & GT Racing | 6 | 9 Jul 2004 10:28 |
Johansson Zytek? | JAG | Sportscar & GT Racing | 31 | 28 May 2004 05:28 |
New ALMS Team in LMP1 | Tim Northcutt | ACO Regulated Series | 88 | 27 Jan 2004 08:16 |