|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
18 May 2017, 16:32 (Ref:3734282) | #5401 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 128
|
Quote:
As far as I know, they've changed the layout drastically and no longer using CF for the piping between intercooler and manifold. |
||
|
19 May 2017, 01:49 (Ref:3734372) | #5402 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,392
|
All aluminum now?
|
|
|
19 May 2017, 04:38 (Ref:3734386) | #5403 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,464
|
It all points out the fact that last year's car was a rushed job, with having to develop the new V6 much earlier than they expected. This year, they finally had time to optimize the car, and so far it seems to be quite good in the reliability department.
|
|
|
19 May 2017, 08:41 (Ref:3734417) | #5404 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,600
|
Toyota will stream J-sports live broadcast of LM24 race for free (only in Japan ?).
http://toyotagazooracing.com/jp/wec/...4h-lemans.html |
|
|
19 May 2017, 13:41 (Ref:3734463) | #5405 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,600
|
Car Watch reports Toyota Le Mans tech briefing meeting.
http://car.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1060699.html 2017 TS050 battery system electric pressure: 815V (2016 spec: 750V) 2017 TS050 battery running possible temperature: 85 degree (2016 spec: 60 degree) Necessary time is 4 minutes and 30 seconds to charge 8MJ. Last edited by Japanese Samurai; 19 May 2017 at 13:53. |
|
|
19 May 2017, 13:56 (Ref:3734468) | #5406 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 612
|
Li-ion cells at 85°C
|
|
|
20 May 2017, 00:50 (Ref:3734567) | #5407 | |
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 102
|
No I do not think so (I stand corrected). The writer does not understand this context. The actual slide is a comparison between Prius Prime and TS050. Prius takes 3 hours to charge 10.3 MJ (from the 200V outlet) while TS050 takes 1.3 lap of Circuit de la Sarthe (converted to 4.5 minutes) to charge the same but actually it only requires the braking time which may be several ten seconds. The performance of the racing car battery is astronomical.
Last edited by Hiro; 20 May 2017 at 00:58. |
|
|
20 May 2017, 02:25 (Ref:3734573) | #5408 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,600
|
Thank you for correcting.
|
|
|
20 May 2017, 14:26 (Ref:3734658) | #5409 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 47
|
Quote:
|
||
|
20 May 2017, 17:45 (Ref:3734698) | #5410 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,392
|
||
|
20 May 2017, 20:08 (Ref:3734727) | #5411 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,934
|
Quote:
The line graph/arrow they've drawn through the points isn't accurate though. Both the lines should be significantly lower if they're to be accurate. |
||
|
20 May 2017, 20:14 (Ref:3734730) | #5412 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,827
|
Yep, diesel racing engine corresponds to about 1998 or '99, which was the year that BMW won the Nurburgring 24 with a diesel.
To be honest, other than their current engine, I don't see any of Toyota's racing engines being that efficient, since the were high revving NA V8s without DFI. Granted, about the same can be said for anyone else, since especially at LM in '11 and '13 Audi burned more fuel to make more power, combined with the fact that they were running more downforce and needed that power to maximize top speed. |
||
|
20 May 2017, 23:14 (Ref:3734770) | #5413 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,600
|
Quote:
In box: We chose gasoline engine, but its thermal efficiency figures closes up (=nearly equal to) that of diesel engine. *However, it's ambiguous whether the comparative target is a production diesel engine or a racing diesel engine in Japanese. |
||
|
21 May 2017, 00:11 (Ref:3734781) | #5414 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,392
|
Thanks for the translations. I didn't look at it right the first time. I agree with you guys and see now the year for the diesel race engine is around the '99, 2000 mark so too early to be the R10. But if Audi was only that efficient 5 or 6 years later it's still a good deal higher than the petrol engine cars. No wonder Audi and Peugeot were said to be making near 800hp.
|
|
|
21 May 2017, 06:41 (Ref:3734820) | #5415 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 612
|
Toyota claimed "over 40%" for TS-040, they also claim 40% for last generation Prius (pfi) and 41% for last generatin 2.5 hybrid engine (Camry).
Graph doesn't reveal anything about new TS-050 engine, I think it's just old graph they showed for representation, that diesel and gasoline efficiency are about to meet. |
|
|
21 May 2017, 12:31 (Ref:3734944) | #5416 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,934
|
Quote:
The graph is pretty inaccurate in a lot of ways, but it is good at demonstrating the attitude towards the fuels and how governments pushed certain agendas at certain times. Remember that a diesel engine is generally more efficient, and diesel contains more energy per litre than petrol, but it requires a larger and heavier engine to extract it, which makes it difficult for racing use, and more suited to high torque vehicles (lorries, tractors), and long distance motorway travelling where you don't have to do a lot of stop starting with the extra weight. |
||
|
21 May 2017, 13:32 (Ref:3734965) | #5417 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,126
|
In the US, I remember the old Mercedes diesels that smoked and rattled. If, you got behind one, you would think they were burning coal for fuel. With the increase in emissions laws, they faded.
Along comes the Audi LMP with "clean diesel". I bought into it even when my eyes were seeing something different. I hoped that the efficiency of the diesel could be a viable tool for increased efficiency and clean while doing so. The last time I saw Audi and Peugeot racing at PLM, late in the night it looked like they were fogging for mosquitoes they had so much smoke coming out. Some said at the time, "All race cars smoke late in a race." I've seen many race cars at the end of a race and I know when some cars are not smoking at all and some are puffing. VW's deception sealed the deal in the US, I think. Full electric will probably be the future while diesel stays where the torque is needed for moving larges masses. |
|
|
21 May 2017, 13:55 (Ref:3734973) | #5418 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,934
|
Yeah the ACO regs regarding diesels said there must be no visible emissions. This was fine with the R10, but come 2008 Peugeot had turned up the fuel mixture and it was very clearly visible from trackside. Stood trackside at the esses looking up at the Dunlop bridge and you could see it against the sky in the morning. Since the ACO were then ignoring it (rule obviously didn't apply to the French cars), Audi had to respond and come the R15 they had visible fumes too, and the ACO decided to not bother with that rule.
Where did the Toyota graph come from? It's a very odd one. Doesn't seem to fit with the scales and since its LMP based you'd expect a bit of data on the Audi diesels, but they've highlighted toad cars. Its a bit strange that one. |
|
|
21 May 2017, 14:29 (Ref:3734985) | #5419 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,827
|
Also same rules don't apply to Ford, Chevy and Dodge pick ups with diesel engines, which probably pollute a lot more than VAG's cheater engines ever did. Diesels are better at carbon emissions, but NOX emissions have never really been much different between the two.
|
||
|
21 May 2017, 14:54 (Ref:3734993) | #5420 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,934
|
Quote:
|
||
|
21 May 2017, 14:59 (Ref:3734998) | #5421 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,827
|
Never the less, I think that they should have to abide by similar emissions standards, considering their popularity, and that gasoline engined trucks already use modified V8s from Ford, GM and Chrysler road cars.
|
||
|
21 May 2017, 15:19 (Ref:3735003) | #5422 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,934
|
Yeah, I agree but it's because they're classified differently (utility vehicles) which is how they get away with. One of the many reasons pickups are not that popular in Europe. In the UK you'd bankrupt yourself on the emissions tax. That might change with the new tax laws we have starting this year.
|
|
|
21 May 2017, 21:57 (Ref:3735138) | #5423 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,126
|
Quote:
When everyone was talking about equalizing diesel and petrol, with a petrol engine you can restrict the air on the front end, with a diesel, you have particulate filters that restrict the engine on exhaust. Later on, it seemed the particulate filters weren't focused on as they were earlier. |
||
|
22 May 2017, 02:03 (Ref:3735164) | #5424 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,392
|
I don't think we'll see a diesel back in lmp1 unless it's with Peugeot. But that doesn't look likely either.
On topic, does anyone think we'll see Toyota do a qualifying type run at the test day? These last few years they seem to have been focusing mostly on race pace. But now with three cars they have that much more data to compile and can split programs through three cars instead of two. |
|
|
22 May 2017, 02:29 (Ref:3735166) | #5425 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,755
|
Qualifying serves no real purpose in a 24 hour race other than bragging rights. The test day priority is going to be the race setups. Fundamentally is poor management to pursue anything otherwise.
Will they put low fuel on a race setup, new tires, max turbo boost, max ers in qualifying practice on wednesday/thursday of raceweek? Absolutely. |
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Audi LMP1 Discussion | gwyllion | ACO Regulated Series | 11685 | 16 Feb 2017 10:42 |
Nissan LMP1 Discussion | Gingers4Justice | Sportscar & GT Racing | 5568 | 17 Feb 2016 23:22 |
Strakka LMP1 discussion | Pontlieue | Sportscar & GT Racing | 56 | 12 Jul 2015 19:12 |
The never ending Toyota return to Le Mans (LMP1) Saga | The Badger | ACO Regulated Series | 6844 | 8 Jan 2014 02:19 |
How about a LMP1 Pro & LMP1 Privateer class | Holt | Sportscar & GT Racing | 35 | 6 Jun 2012 13:44 |