Audi LMP1 Discussion

[MyNameIsNigel]

Isn't it time to move on and simply wait for the result of the appeal ?

[bobec]

Originally Posted by GasperG

As for the diesel gate scandal, problem is only in US, where EPA strictly states no defeat devices and the defeat device was really not that hard to prove - it's a black and white thing

That's a very good point. But then again, the LMP1 rules stated and still state "no movable bodywork/elements", very black and white as well. If the rules only said something like "car's bodywork has to withstand N amount of pressure with only X amount of flex, then it would have been perfectly OK.

Anyway, God knows when the decision on Audi #7 becomes final.

[Creep89]

http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/a...one-exclusion/

Case closed, Audi accepts the decision and doesn't appeal.

[chernaudi]

We already know that there's a 90% chance that the appeal won't change anything. Probably better to move on to current testing and Spa.

EDIT: Audi withdrew the appeal to move and and focus on Spa and current testing. They admitted fault for miscalculating the set up. Also supports what some observed about the car bouncing/proposing a lot.

[chernaudi]

Tech stuff: Has Audi reverted to running conventional strakes on the front diffuser?

http://lemansprototypes.over-blog.it/

[sssssssss]

as expected:
http://www.dailysportscar.com/2016/0...exclusion.html

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by Creep89

http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/a...one-exclusion/

Case closed, Audi accepts the decision and doesn't appeal.

Originally Posted by chernaudi

We already know that there's a 90% chance that the appeal won't change anything. Probably better to move on to current testing and Spa.

EDIT: Audi withdrew the appeal to move and and focus on Spa and current testing. They admitted fault for miscalculating the set up. Also supports what some observed about the car bouncing/proposing a lot.

Which "annihilates" the tire-pressure-related thesis suggested by AutoHebdo. The "heavy bouncing" mentioned in the statement appears to be close to confirming that the issue was possibly related to improper adjustment of the FRIC suspension.

[chernaudi]

Also, Audi are running at Aragon for 5 days now. I do wonder if they're testing both the sprint and LM bodywork for possible use at Spa. I also wonder if they're testing the FRIC system to dial in the set up to eliminate that proposing. Audi Sport have basically admitted that's the primary culprit for the skid wear, and it couldn't have helped the car's performance, either.

It's stuff like this why I suggest that there's a lot more to come out of this car.

[chernaudi]

Long term rumor for Audi: Sport Auto are saying that Audi are working on fuel cell tech for road cars and racing cars. If Audi stay in LMP1 beyond 2020, they may use such technology on their car.

[gustavobamba]

That´s why i believe BMW will make an LMP1 car ... because WEC and Le Mans will be the one´s to accept fuel cell tech in the future...

[cokata]

Big no to the fuel cell. Horrible technology that has no future.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by cokata

Big no to the fuel cell. Horrible technology that has no future.

Audi doesn't seem to think so. That's on top of BMW and Toyota already disagreeing with that.

[Akrapovic]

The auto industry, especially in Detroit, also proudly said that electric cars had no future. Then some mad billionaire made a Tesla roadster, followed by the Model S and then magically GM and Nissan are making electric cars suddenly.

It's a technology with no future until someone spends the time and money to make it worthwhile.

[cokata]

Originally Posted by TF110

Audi doesn't seem to think so. That's on top of BMW and Toyota already disagreeing with that.

Look at the Mirai. It's expensive, and slow, and yet Toyota take a big loss on every car they sell. The only advantage they will have is faster "charging" then a BEV. But at the moment there is almost no infrastructure build for FCEV. FCEV station are quite expensive and the fuel in itself is very expensive as well. Couple this with poor efficiency and you have very high running costs. On top of that you have massive safety issues, hugely inefficient process in electrolysis, and the energy needed to maintain pressure in the storage tanks. Fuel cells also have an even bigger endurance problem then batteries and are more expensive.

If you draw the line you have a bucket list of huge disadvantages with that technology for just 1 advantage. The only reason it's even considered in the first place is that oil companies are for obvious reasons hugely supportive of FCEVs over BEVs.

[TF110]

Most of what you just said is opinionated or fixable. This isn't the thread to talk about fcv's or the Mirai. But lots of the same things were said about the Prius.

[TWRv12]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Long term rumor for Audi: Sport Auto are saying that Audi are working on fuel cell tech for road cars and racing cars. If Audi stay in LMP1 beyond 2020, they may use such technology on their car.

Honda and Hyundai just followed Toyota in offering road cars with a choice of Fuel Cell, EV or Hybrid from the same platform.

LPG fuel cell anyone?

[cokata]

Originally Posted by TF110

Most of what you just said is opinionated or fixable. This isn't the thread to talk about fcv's or the Mirai. But lots of the same things were said about the Prius.

No it's not. BEVs are the future it's not even debatable. I don't think anyone could make such a negative case about the prius, but it's still true that it's much more expensive then a petrol only car making it very difficult to recoup your investment.

Sorry for going off topic again.

[JoestForEver]

The thing is, fuel cell tech relies purely on electro-chemic reaction and isn't constrained by fuel type, be it hydrogen, fossil fuel, biomass. And it's way more efficient than ICE while avoiding the problem of EV (limited range, limited charging dock, not as eco-friendly as you might think).

Prius, exactly, exhibits every problem of current EV/hybrid cars. The production of battery is disastrous for environment, and the electricity production still uses fossil fuel with the same pollutants.

Sent from my SM-G9250 using Tapatalk

[GasperG]

How disastrous is production of batteries? Sources?

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by JoestForEver

The production of battery is disastrous for environment, and the electricity production still uses fossil fuel with the same pollutants.

This bold part is missing a lot of important information. A standard petrol/diesel engine runs at around 25% efficiency. Electricity does not have to be produced by fossil fuels, but even if the electricity produced is from 100% natural gas, the efficiency level is raised to around 40% in electrical generators because you can use bigger heavier parts and different production techniques. So a 100% electric car that is charged using electricity from fossil fuels, still achieves better efficiency than the car burning petrol itself.

Source: Elon Musk documentary.

As for batteries being bad for the environment, that's certainly an issue. But then again, when was the last time an oil well or coal mine was good? You know what is good for the environment? Solar, wind and wave. How do we store that energy? Batteries. And of course battery technology is still developing all the time and we will get better with it.

[cokata]

You are also not counting how much energy is used for refining crude oil, and how much energy is needed for it's transportation.

[Creep89]

As a non-professional I think fuel cell technology is the way to go, because you can refuel way faster than charging your battery. Of course there are fast-charging technologies out there, but fuel cell technology has still an advantage when it comes down to refueling time. It takes 4 minutes to fill up the tank for the next 500 kilometers, quite comparable to what we are getting used to today.

So I really hope Audi pushes the technology further and get it ready for racing.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Creep89

As a non-professional I think fuel cell technology is the way to go, because you can refuel way faster than charging your battery. Of course there are fast-charging technologies out there, but fuel cell technology has still an advantage when it comes down to refueling time. It takes 4 minutes to fill up the tank for the next 500 kilometers, quite comparable to what we are getting used to today.

So I really hope Audi pushes the technology further and get it ready for racing.

Your reasons are why hydrogen fuel cell technology will be progressed when we start seeing low oil reserves. Whilst all electric battery cars will be acceptable for 90% of the populations daily use (Tesla Model S has 350 mile range), there will need to be a different type of fuel for longer drivers. Long distance buses and lorries will need something else.

[godlameroso]

If batteries had better ability to handle fast charging, and had an energy density of ~600w hr/kg I would sell my gas car for electric in a heartbeat.

[chernaudi]

And that's why we have diesels, gasoline electric and diesel electric hybrids. The electric motors are supposed to be range extenders. Granted, that's not exactly how they're used in racing, but there's also potential for good electric hybrid vehicles that can be used for both economy and performance in the nearer term.

And of course, smaller diesel engined cars in Europe get just as good if not better mileage and economy as hybrids do.

I also find it strange and ironic that the enhanced mobility LMP2 car that Audi are supporting for LM is a Pescarolo/Morgan with a Nissan engine in it, especially after the threats of lawsuits and countersuits between Audi and Nissan over the use of the Q name being part of each companies' SUV line ups and is now used for Infiniti sedans.