Audi LMP1 Discussion

[Guardian]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

1.5.4 – Any system operated automatically and/or controlled by the driver to modify the airflow on the rear wing when the car is in motion is forbidden.

There it is , I was all the way down where the aero regs were for the rear wing and Big Honkin' Fin...

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

1.5.4 – Any system operated automatically and/or controlled by the driver to modify the airflow on the rear wing when the car is in motion is forbidden.

"on the rear wing" is that the top side or bottom side. sounds like the top time. under the rear wing sounds different. could you stall a gurney flap?

[Gingers4Justice]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

1.5.4 – Any system operated automatically and/or controlled by the driver to modify the airflow on the rear wing when the car is in motion is forbidden.

Thanks very much, that's been bugging me for a while.

Probably a wise move, prototype drivers should be busy driving around GTE cars, not covering holes with their knees.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

"on the rear wing" is that the top side or bottom side. sounds like the top time. under the rear wing sounds different. could you stall a gurney flap?

There's nothing in the wording that makes me think you can do this at all and certainly nothing that differentiates between top or bottom. "On the rear wing" to me means just that, you can't create any system that modifies flow to the rear wing. Period.

[cdsvg]

This may be stating the obvious or covering something we had already sussed out, but based on the livery drawings here:

http://www.fourtitude.com/gallery/ga...&dispsize=1024

It would seem that the removable panels on the outer sides of the rear fenders can be replaced with a louvered section for cooling.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by cdsavage

This may be stating the obvious or covering something we had already sussed out, but based on the livery drawings here:

http://www.fourtitude.com/gallery/ga...&dispsize=1024

It would seem that the removable panels on the outer sides of the rear fenders can be replaced with a louvered section for cooling.

Interesting...

[chernaudi]

Those have been there since the March Sebring test. No purpose has ever been established for them. The vents above the engine on the fin mount are presumably for either the turbocharger, particle filter, or both.

It's also interesting to see that Audi have really paid attention to airflow through the car. It's sort of like the channel concept of the early R15, but in reverse. Instead of cluttering up the sidepod of the car with all kinds of crap to produce downforce and obstruct cooling flow, Audi with the R18 instead is trying to leave the sidepods uncluttered to improve airflow to the radiators, oil coolers and intercoolers. That allows for shorter sidepods (and less drag), a shorter rear deck (less drag) and more efficent flow through, with improves cooling and also reduces drag because the air is vented more effiecently.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

According http://endurance-info.com/version2/a...ance-6998.html Henri Pescarolo estimates that Audi and Peugeot have at least 100 horse power more than the petrol cars

The Spa preview of Pescarolo Team contains the following quote from Henri:

"So can we repeat the achievement of Le Castellet? Impossible, I forgot to say that there will be 7 diesel cars at Spa, and that the acceleration times achieved at Le Mans prove once again that the equivalence diesel/petrol is even worse than before. The Audi diesel engine, quoted at 540 hp according the official statement of the brand, allows accelerations identical to those of the Oreca Judd-2009, whose engine produced 670 hp! Maybe one day they decide to recognize this evidence."

[chernaudi]

Probably not until a factory team (which Mike's site has proven that the Acura ARX-02 program was a half-hearted project) with a turbo gasoline engine shows up.

As Henk4 has said, a team like Henri's that barely able to scrape by and break even can't expect to compete with the might of Audi or Peugeot on a consistant basis, and the bigger the stage, the bigger the gap.

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Probably not until a factory team (which Mike's site has proven that the Acura ARX-02 program was a half-hearted project) with a turbo gasoline engine shows up.

As Henk4 has said, a team like Henri's that barely able to scrape by and break even can't expect to compete with the might of Audi or Peugeot on a consistant basis, and the bigger the stage, the bigger the gap.

It seems the 'might' of a manufacturer racing at Le Mans starts with being able to negotiate some favourable regs

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

It seems the 'might' of a manufacturer racing at Le Mans starts with being able to negotiate some favourable regs

I think the might of the manufacturer is the money. When is the last time that Judd developed an engine. Thats an old engine(that wasnt that good) that has been restricted again so its even worse. The Diesels are new V6's and V8's. Quite frankly its not fair and thats cheap if henri is trying to get equivalence. those engines arent equal because the diesels are 2011 technology.
If audi and puegeot built petrols theyd still have the 100hp advantage. that judd is an old engine

Rebellion havent shown their hand yet. their trying to earn all the regulation breaks they can first. Aston doesnt count.

[Pandamasque]

Yes, I do agree that Henri's grandfathered V10s shouldn't be the quickest of the petrols. At least that's what ACO promised.

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

Rebellion havent shown their hand yet.

Neither did the diesels, I'm afraid.

[Lola T70]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

It seems the 'might' of a manufacturer racing at Le Mans starts with being able to negotiate some favourable regs

Am I forgetting an HPD petrol LMP1 finishing second at the Sebring 12 Hours just a week after it's first track run, finishing just behind the winning Peugeot (2010) and in front of the 2011 spec Peugeot diesel, the HPD was not overtaken on the straights, was not slow in the corners to get it's straight line speed and did not complain about the regulations.

As the advertisement of a tyre manufacturer says, "power is nothing without control", in this instance reminding that if you don't have a good chassis extra horsepower does not always help too much!

The ACO have the data logging boxes on the cars so can see what the true picture is and they know much more about it than we do. But I don't think a private team with customer engines, whoever they are, will ever be able to compete with factories in this era, and in era, I mean last 20 years.

Don't get me wrong I want to see more teams at the front but until HPD or the like turn up with something at Le Mans we cannot make any rules comparison imo.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

If audi and puegeot built petrols theyd still have the 100hp advantage. that judd is an old engine

Please explain how manufacturer resources will buy you a 20% increase in power output. Direct injection is only good for an increase in power of 5% (and a reduction in fuel consumption) and there is only so much you can do with friction loss reduction, etc.

Just to remind you. In 2008 the Porsche MR6 engine produced 478 bhp with manifold fuel injection and 503 bhp with direct fuel injection. With the slighty bigger restrictor of LMP1 2011 (43.3 vs 42.9 mm), the Porsche would officially produce 512 bhp.

In comparison HPD claims 500+ bhp, Toyota 500+ bhp and Judd 540 bhp for their current LMP1 engine.

Manufacturers have the tendence to underqoute their numbers, but those numbers are nowhere near the 640+ bhp that the diesel engines supposedly produce.

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

Rebellion havent shown their hand yet. their trying to earn all the regulation breaks they can first. Aston doesnt count.

Bart Hayden of Rebellion was also very vocal that the diesel/petrol equivalance is completely wrong:

owever, this test day at Le Mans has highlighted a fact that we feared, the current 2011 regulations have not effectively addressed the equivalence between diesel and petrol engines. We could understand a 4-5 second gap which would be in line with the ACO’s intention of an acceptable 2% difference, but 10 seconds is way off the mark. We hope that the ACO will look seriously at this situation in the next few weeks.

[Holt]

"Maybe one day they decide to recognize this evidence." - Henri Pescarolo

That day will be when a big manufacturer using a gasoline car takes Lemans as seriously as Audi or Peugeot.

I dont think Aston Martin helped the gasoline cause with its recent blunders. Even the recent Lola Aston efforts fell way short of Audi 's and Peugeot's in terms of budget, driver quality, car count etc.... not enough to be able to really cry foul with the current regulation equivalents

We need Porsche or Toyota etc to mount a realistic assault on the overall victory at Lemans in a gasoline car and Im sure we'll see the regulations become much more equivalent

[FordCosworthPanoz]

Originally Posted by Holt

"Maybe one day they decide to recognize this evidence." - Henri Pescarolo

That day will be when a big manufacturer using a gasoline car takes Lemans as seriously as Audi or Peugeot.

I dont think Aston Martin helped the gasoline cause with its recent blunders. Even the recent Lola Aston efforts fell way short of Audi 's and Peugeot's in terms of budget, driver quality, car count etc.... not enough to be able to really cry foul with the current regulation equivalents

We need Porsche or Toyota etc to mount a realistic assault on the overall victory at Lemans in a gasoline car and Im sure we'll see the regulations become much more equivalent

Exactly, if somebody ever comes in and spends as much money on car development, drivers ect as Audi and Peugeot then things would probably change. Problem is even if Diesel and Petrol were equal in todays circumstances Audi and Peugeot would still come out on top. Just look at Penske/Ganassi in Indycar as well as the Ganassi Grand Am program. At Homestead they were able to run 4 seconds faster than the other cars when they needed to push after the Rojas penalty.

Highcroft and HPD appears to be a slight hope and I hope the rumour spreading around the Muscle Milk paddock at Sebring is true, but what you said in your final line pretty much sums it up.

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by Holt

"Maybe one day they decide to recognize this evidence." - Henri Pescarolo

That day will be when a big manufacturer using a gasoline car takes Lemans as seriously as Audi or Peugeot.

They do already. That's why they are not entering LMP1. Nobody in the right mind would, unless they just want to take part and hope things will change someday, while settling to be the best of the rest. It's a vicious circle.

[Lola T70]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

They do already. That's why they are not entering LMP1. Nobody in the right mind would, unless they just want to take part and hope things will change someday, while settling to be the best of the rest. It's a vicious circle.

Which manufacturers are not entering because of the petrol regulations?

[Adam43]

The ones that aren't there

[JAG]

Alll teams are out for the best equivalence they can haggle prior to Le Mans, Highcroft showed what new P1's are capable of at Sebring, but then they are racers first, play politics second, and needed to show the cars full potential to attract sponsorship.

If the diesels are over 640bhp, did Highcroft finish second with 100bhp less.............

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by Lola T70

Which manufacturers are not entering because of the petrol regulations?

Maybe all of them, including Lada. That is a question you know can't be possibly answered.

[sssssssss]

however, i see no reason for those "other manufacturers" to stay out of the diesel lmps. i mean, audi and peugeot are not the only manufacturers that sell loads of diesel cars. mercedes could be there as well, bmw, ford, even toyota. and also, i suppose if someone say like jaguar or ferrari or porsche would announce they want to enter lmp1 with petrol cars, the rules would suddenly be changed in favour of the petrol cars to the extent of really giving them equal chances for the win. i can't really see why exactly all the other great manufacturers choose to stay out of sportscar racing, maybe except for already very busy - and sucessful - sport programmes in other areas. if they're used to a certain championship, they don't feel like starting from scratch in sporcar racing against the might of audi and peugeot, who already have lots of experience here.

[Pandamasque]

Aston Martin did come. Rules didn't change. No, wait... the rules actually did change. But we'll see after Spa if they are applied or not. If not, that would be a major detraction from ACO racing.
Why not enter with a diesel car?
- barely anyone has experience with racing diesel technology of this level
- hence it would be way more expensive and take more time to catch up
- some say the years of diesel cars as an economical alternative are numbered (due to possible change in the emission standards)

[Lola T70]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

Maybe all of them, including Lada. That is a question you know can't be possibly answered.

So if it cannot be answered then what is the point in making a statement that has no back up to it?

If I look at sector times at Le Mans pre test it in no way says that Rebellion or Pescarolo lost more time in sector 2 (the 3 parts of Mulsanne straight) than it did in other sectors. The BEST petrol car looses 1 second alone in Porsche corners, not much power needed there! This tells me that the petrol car chassis is maybe not as good as the Audi or Peugeot either!

[Spyderman]

Isn't trying to read any meaning (for outsiders) into sector times from Le Mans pretest a bit like confusing a cook book and the Holy Bible?