[WEC] Toyota LMP1 Discussion

[Akrapovic]

The low downforce 908 from 2011 was nice, but the higher downforce package with the larger turbo intakes was a bit uglier.

The 2011 Audi R18 and the 2013 TS030 with the eye styled headlights are 2 of the best looking LMPs in decades.

[TF110]

I posted in the Silverstone race thread about my reason for thinking Toyota is the favorite. Im not privileged to the "1:36 rumor's" source, so I don't have all the information. But if Toyota did a 1:36 at Ricard in private tests, it had to be with the high d/f package. They admitted they haven't run the low d/f package before bringing it to the prologue! Either the rumors are bogus or Toyota did some serious homework to run that quick. Even if they ran all 6mj and soft tires for a one-lap qualifying sim, to do that time without the low d/f car is incredible. But of course, Porsche's 1:37.2 wasn't with their low d/f car either!

[tyronnezx]

Originally Posted by Chiana

The 2011 908 was probably the best ever to hide/merge the shark fin with their colors and shapes. It even suited the car.

I have noticed that the shark fins are no longer part of f1 or any other series. is is it necessary in the WEC?

[DistortedSmile]

IMO the best looking recent P1 is the Aston Lola by far, followed by the Rebellion R-One and the 2012 spec TS030.

Originally Posted by tyronnezx

I have noticed that the shark fins are no longer part of f1 or any other series. is is it necessary in the WEC?

Unlike F1, the fins in LMPs are supposed to be a safety feature. Could alternative ways to stop the cars from going airborne be found? Probably.

[J Jay]

Some Toyota tidbits, fresh from the latest edition of RCE:

- The 2015 TS040 began development straight after Le Mans
- The new nose's front crash structure was a substantial enough redesign to require a crash test
- Litjens states that the regulation changes to chassis flexibility "were already fulfilled"
- Although weight saving was extensive and it allowed for improvements to the hybrid system, ultimately not enough could be saved to move to 8MJ
- The hybrid system has more cells than last year to maintain power output over race distances
- This year's supercapacitor has an improved power/weight ratio
- Increasing the power output of the electric motors reduced the need and the impetus to move to 8MJ (so the decision was only made at the last opportunity)
- Murata says that the revised hybrid system will "achieve the maximum hybrid energy much more consistently than last season"
- Redesigned rear suspension led to a new but still aluminium gearbox casing that houses the same internals
- There are two ECUs in the TS040; one for the engine and one for brake-by-wire
- The 25,000+kms of testing have been conducted in three-day tests at Paul Ricard, Aragon (twice) and Portimao
- The engine is carried over with expected improvements, but approximately 80% of the parts have been redesigned
- The wiring loom issue "has been addressed"

[cokata]

Originally Posted by J Jay

Some Toyota tidbits, fresh from the latest edition of RCE:

- The 2015 TS040 began development straight after Le Mans
- The new nose's front crash structure was a substantial enough redesign to require a crash test
- Litjens states that the regulation changes to chassis flexibility "were already fulfilled"
- Although weight saving was extensive and it allowed for improvements to the hybrid system, ultimately not enough could be saved to move to 8MJ
- The hybrid system has more cells than last year to maintain power output over race distances
- This year's supercapacitor has an improved power/weight ratio
- Increasing the power output of the electric motors reduced the need and the impetus to move to 8MJ (so the decision was only made at the last opportunity)
- Murata says that the revised hybrid system will "achieve the maximum hybrid energy much more consistently than last season"
- Redesigned rear suspension led to a new but still aluminium gearbox casing that houses the same internals
- There are two ECUs in the TS040; one for the engine and one for brake-by-wire
- The 25,000+kms of testing have been conducted in three-day tests at Paul Ricard, Aragon (twice) and Portimao
- The engine is carried over with expected improvements, but approximately 80% of the parts have been redesigned
- The wiring loom issue "has been addressed"

Is that 80% of the engine or the 80% of parts of the whole car that was said to be redesigned?

I was disappointed to learn that they didn't increase the displacement of the engine, considering that they stayed in the same MJ class. They could have probably afforded to have a heavier engine.

[J Jay]

Originally Posted by cokata

Is that 80% of the engine or the 80% of parts of the whole car that was said to be redesigned?

I was disappointed to learn that they didn't increase the displacement of the engine, considering that they stayed in the same MJ class. They could have probably afforded to have a heavier engine.

It's 80% of the whole car, but the exact quote from TMG is "normal engine development," so I assume a good number of parts in the engine are also new.

I'm not up to speed on the block in the TS040 but it is a little odd that for all the weight saving measures the displacement wasn't increased. Maybe they didn't consider it until too late, having left the decision on ERS class as late as possible? From what I've read it looks like getting better electric motors was TMG's main aim and that 8MJ was desirable but not necessary.

[YorkshireLad]

Originally Posted by J Jay

It's 80% of the whole car, but the exact quote from TMG is "normal engine development," so I assume a good number of parts in the engine are also new.

I'm not up to speed on the block in the TS040 but it is a little odd that for all the weight saving measures the displacement wasn't increased. Maybe they didn't consider it until too late, having left the decision on ERS class as late as possible? From what I've read it looks like getting better electric motors was TMG's main aim and that 8MJ was desirable but not necessary.

How much information on Toyotas engine is actually available? I've always thought they'd hidden this engine very well from the keen eye.

Toyota did very well last year so maybe 'not fixing wasn't isn't broken' works well for them.

[MyNameIsNigel]

The 2015 car very much looks like a "normal" evolution of last year's car. Will that be sufficient ?

Time will tell for sure, but I was expecting a bit more from Toyota to be honest.

[GasperG]

I also think the weight saved was used up by updated hybrid system, only to find out that it wouldn't be enough for 8MJ.

[Bandicoot17]

Was this the only noticeable aero difference between the cars at the prologue??

[cokata]

Originally Posted by YorkshireLad

How much information on Toyotas engine is actually available? I've always thought they'd hidden this engine very well from the keen eye.

Toyota did very well last year so maybe 'not fixing wasn't isn't broken' works well for them.

They were very conservative in '13 after a wildly successful first season, and they got slaughtered by Audi. We will see what happens this year, because they had a pretty good lead last year, but at least on paper the other 2 teams improved their cars much more than Toyota did.

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

The 2015 car very much looks like a "normal" evolution of last year's car. Will that be sufficient ?

Time will tell for sure, but I was expecting a bit more from Toyota to be honest.

We know they have a vastly different hybrid system next year, so I guess they've gone evolutionary for this year's car in order to go revolutionary next year.

[TF110]

I would say it looks justified staying at 6mj. They weren't even 'fully' at 6mj last year, so this year they're able to meet that limit everywhere. I look at Porsche and see an evolution of last year's car with updated monocoque and aero/mechanical. Why is it bad Toyota did the same? We know so far there's a redesigned front and rear, gearbox casing, upgraded electric motors, upgraded capacitor, underbody aero, 80% new car, engine performance (Wurz said 600hp) etc. Seems to me some people see these test times and assume Toyota is off pace, just like last year. Lets not think of 2013 which was under air restricted engine performance. Even then, they were faster than 2012 and more efficient with longer stints (Audi lost efficiency but gained more speed). Plus these new rules seem much more 'equal'. This year the fuel flow has been relaxed just a bit. It'll be a great season. I doubt Toyota have shown their hand. Porsche and Audi believe the same thing!

[cokata]

I root for Toyota too, but trying to spin the '13 car as decent is as ridiculous as the porsche fans preaching to the non-believers that the '14 car was great for a first year effort.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by cokata

I root for Toyota too, but trying to spin the '13 car as decent is as ridiculous as the porsche fans preaching to the non-believers that the '14 car was great for a first year effort.

What's not "decent" about it? It was faster and more efficient than 2012's car. Audi's was faster than 2012 but didn't improve on efficiency. But 2013 has nothing to do with 2015. Two different eras!

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by Bandicoot17

Was this the only noticeable aero difference between the cars at the prologue??

The differences at the front are pretty subtle indeed:
Low-drag LM package:

Sprint package:

(source: endurance-info.com)

[Hiro]

http://serakota.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2015-04-02

[MyNameIsNigel]

And a couple of shots from the side to highlight the differences between the two aero packages.

Low-drag LM package:


Sprint package:


(source: endurance-info.com)

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by Hiro

http://serakota.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2015-04-02

Thanks Hiro. Juste took the liberty to extract and post the direct links to the comparison shots coming from this article:

[gustavobamba]

Excellent job guy´s

Is all about small details that can make big changes

[TF110]

Yes, now there are more pictures of the slight differences. Fender shape, front diffuser opening, diveplanes are the main differences.

A question for you all; have you noticed the Toyota running a lot of rake compared to Porsche and Audi? They look more 'flat' in their ride height or stance but the Toyota looks more 'nose down' like the older RED BULL F1's and recent Mercedes'. Look at this picture from the prologue of the Toyota leaving the pits

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by TF110

Yes, now there are more pictures of the slight differences. Fender shape, front diffuser opening, diveplanes are the main differences.

A question for you all; have you noticed the Toyota running a lot of rake compared to Porsche and Audi? They look more 'flat' in their ride height or stance but the Toyota looks more 'nose down' like the older RED BULL F1's and recent Mercedes'. Look at this picture from the prologue of the Toyota leaving the pits

As a matter of fact, several pictures taken at the Prologue do show that Audi did similarly play with quite aggressive rake angles:

[J Jay]

The angle of that picture is a little misleading but the point stands, Audi & Toyota are definitely using rather large rake angles - the Sebring test videos also provide more good evidence for Audi. I wouldn't be surprised to see Porsche doing the same, but I've been a bit lazy in not noticing it by now.

[TF110]

Watch the vids on youtube of the prologue. Toyota's car looks like the rear ride height is giving a lot more fender gap. You can see the front looks like its sealed to the pavement at certain turns. The others are doing it too, but in my eyes it looks like the Toyota has the most extreme angle. This pic is a little misleading with the angle, but look at the gap between tire and fender front and rear-