[WEC] LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules - now hypercar rules)

[Akrapovic]

If we're going to use safety as the get out, and say traffic is an issue, then we can use the same argument for doing away with multi-class racing.

I do agree that I'm not a huge fan of the 1km on electric power rule. But I'm not going to say it's bad based on safety (because it really isn't), I just don't like it. It is road relevant though, which is what the ACO Are aiming for.

I don't like the rule, because as much as I love the LMP1-H cars, I also love noise and think it's part of the show. But it isn't unsafe. The same argument was made with LMP1-H regen braking, and LMP2 speeding up etc. Yet we're seeing less major traffic accidents than we used to. I don't see this causing more.

It's also why the ACO has extensive simulator work now.

[Japanese Samurai]

Chunichi shimbun (local newspaper of Nagoya, HQ of Toyota) reports that Toyota to sell new gen all-solid-state battery EV in Japan in 2022.
It takes only few minutes to charge full.
http://www.chunichi.co.jp/s/article/...590085647.html

[chernaudi]

I don't see the 1km EV mode rule as a safety issue. If the cars are intended to be at least as fast as LMP2s, then they'd, by proxy, would be at least as fast as LMP900s would probably be on newer tires.

We have to remember that the ACO almost crapped a brick when the Toyota GT-One did under 3:30 at LM in qualifying, as did the Audi R8 a couple of years later. And we know that the R8, just on modern tires alone, probably would be doing well under 3:25s at LM, as could the GT-One.

We do have to remember that the ACO have changed rules often out of the sake of keeping cars at or below a laptime at LM (used to be 3:30, now approx 3:20), and most of the changes that have been made by the cars by the teams is to get around the ACO's attempts to slow the cars. Which leaves us with the fact that modern cars, in terms of laptime, aren't really much faster than an old Audi R8 or R10 put on modern tires with a factory driver in them. Which that says a lot just for advances in tire technology.

But no, I don't like the 1km EV rule out of safety, I think it's a gimmick. Just as to a large degree right now Formula E is a gimmick. If the ACO want teams to save fuel on EV mode, why not make the cars do the whole length of pit road on EV mode, something that Toyota don't even do now (when leaving the pits, once it hits pit road speed, the engine cranks over and idles on all the Toyota LMP1s since 2012).

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

If the ACO want teams to save fuel on EV mode, why not make the cars do the whole length of pit road on EV mode, something that Toyota don't even do now (when leaving the pits, once it hits pit road speed, the engine cranks over and idles on all the Toyota LMP1s since 2012).

Because one car already does it, the others could easily do it, so that means there is no advancement on the current rules. If they want them to save more fuel, then this won't achieve anything

[chernaudi]

As I said, even Toyota don't really do it, because the engine refires basically as soon as the car comes out of the pit box. I don't consider that true EV mode. Even when idling, you're still burning fuel.

I see a lot of this EV stuff as a gimmick to try and fill in the time until someone makes a fully EV car, which I fear for LM is probably years away. FE are having issues with cars lasting a full race to the point where they have car swaps, and performance is restricted partly to increase the endurance of the cars.

Granted it's not as contrived a gimmick as things like BOP/EOT or stuff like pay off races and things like that in other series, but it's still IMO a gimmick that probably won't add anything interesting. We already have plug in hybrids on the road that can travel at worthwhile speeds for worthwhile distances on the road. That was tech developed without the help of racing and will naturally get better on its own.

[Akrapovic]

No matter how they currently run the pit lane, that suggestion doesn't save any significant amount of fuel. The 1km rule will. And that's what the ACO is going for.

You have to define the word gimmick. A gimmick is fan boost and drs and hash tag racing. This is actually road relevant as this is how plugin hybrids operate. It isn't being done to artificially improve the show. Its being done to link it to road cars. Whether or not the tech was here first doesn't actually matter.

We don't have to like the rule, but it is certainly relevant to Road vehicles and does provide a bigger saving over just pit lane electric mode.

[Adam43]

Toyota might not, but they and Porsche could easily run the length of the pit lane at pit lane speeds on EV if they wanted to. That is done, introducing that as a rule is nothing and pointless.

As an aside if they have to do something that is more of a challenge like 1km is it from pit out? Does that mean you want the pit boxes near pit out with less running before?

Gimmick? Or harking back to the original days of Le Mans? This kind of rule was commonplace then.

[Scorchess]

I really don't see much to complain about. People complaining about "safety" are just trying to find a scapegoat instead of just saying "I don't like it because that's what my gut says." Perfectly valid reason I would say but somehow people are reluctant to say what they really mean

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

I see a lot of this EV stuff as a gimmick to try and fill in the time until someone makes a fully EV car, which I fear for LM is probably years away. FE are having issues with cars lasting a full race to the point where they have car swaps, and performance is restricted partly to increase the endurance of the cars.

So, no ICE cars have ever been detuned to make the engine last the race??

Try with actual complaints that have a basis in a non-agenda driven reality.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Scorchess

I really don't see much to complain about. People complaining about "safety" are just trying to find a scapegoat instead of just saying "I don't like it because that's what my gut says." Perfectly valid reason I would say but somehow people are reluctant to say what they really mean

People seem very scared to say "I just don't like it". Like you say, "I don't like it" is a perfectly valid reason to not want something.

I personally don't like the 1km rule. It just doesn't seem fun to me. But it is most certainly not a safety issue, and it is not a gimmick - it's completely road relevant. Arguably it's the most relevant the powertrain of any racing car has been for quite a while. But that doesn't mean I have to like it, and I'm not going to try and justify that.

And yeah Formula E has massive short comings, but that's new technology and it'll get there. It's road relevant. And guess what? I still don't like it. Even if they got rid of fan boost and car swaps, I just don't find it fun. I also don't find F1 fun anymore - but I won't sit and say it should be closed wheel for safety reasons just to justify the fact I don't like it.

It's fine to not like things. It's also fine to like things for no real reason.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Toyota might not, but they and Porsche could easily run the length of the pit lane at pit lane speeds on EV if they wanted to. That is done, introducing that as a rule is nothing and pointless.

As an aside if they have to do something that is more of a challenge like 1km is it from pit out? Does that mean you want the pit boxes near pit out with less running before?

Gimmick? Or harking back to the original days of Le Mans? This kind of rule was commonplace then.

How dare you bring common sense and thought to this discussion. Gut reaction and hatred is all that will be accepted. Never mind that the ACO knows what teams are doing and what them to push for something else. Great, the lap times of old cars are out there and as fast. But they were burning through lots more fuel and tires than now. Blindly looking only at lap times without remembering how the new cars make their lap is intentionally ignoring the reason for the rules. The ACO has challenged the builders and they have responded so the ACO moves the goalposts again. I'd much rather see them make the cars run further on less at the same lap times and see what teams can do.

But then I think the most amazing thing I've ever seen on a track was the Audis taking turn 1 at Road Atlanta back on the throttle, faster than anyone had before, and only hearing the tires straining to keep the car on the black stuff. Would love to see what Toyota or Porsche could do now.

[Scorchess]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

People seem very scared to say "I just don't like it". Like you say, "I don't like it" is a perfectly valid reason to not want something.

I personally don't like the 1km rule. It just doesn't seem fun to me. But it is most certainly not a safety issue, and it is not a gimmick - it's completely road relevant. Arguably it's the most relevant the powertrain of any racing car has been for quite a while. But that doesn't mean I have to like it, and I'm not going to try and justify that.

And yeah Formula E has massive short comings, but that's new technology and it'll get there. It's road relevant. And guess what? I still don't like it. Even if they got rid of fan boost and car swaps, I just don't find it fun. I also don't find F1 fun anymore - but I won't sit and say it should be closed wheel for safety reasons just to justify the fact I don't like it.

It's fine to not like things. It's also fine to like things for no real reason.

When you get down to it there's really no rational reason to like anything regarding racing! In the end it's entertainment

[chernaudi]

I don't like the fuel flow in LMP1 and F1. If someone wants to save fuel for strategic purposes, let them. But don't force it as a policy.

I don't like the narrower cars. F1 went back to the 2000mm wide cars this year, and the cars look and perform better than they have in quite a while.

I appreciate when teams want to think outside the box or do or promote something that they think is a road relevant solution, or even just something to gain a competitive advantage if it's a new or obscure principal.

I dare someone to get the balls to say "we can have a car that runs primarily on EV power that's as fast as a car that runs on gasoline or diesel, but we only need an internal combustion engine for generating electricity to keep the batteries charged". And that such engine can run so cleanly and is so small that any emissions it puts out is inconsequential.

I want to see stuff like the Audi e-gas and e-diesel and other similar programs that make renewable low emissions fuel out of algae, pond scum, garbage and crap. Make stuff that's not useful, usable.

I even still have a book copyrighted in 1972 about things like steam engines, Sterling engines, EVs, turbine engines and how ICEs were being advanced back then to clean up emissions, boost fuel mileage and boost performance. It's 2017 and a lot of that stuff you'd have thought would've become viable by now.

What I don't like is when a racing series takes it upon themselves to push an agenda for self-servng reasons. The ACO pushed diesel to keep Audi Sport but mostly get Peugeot in. They pushed hybrids to keep Audi and Peugeot interested, and get Toyota and Porsche. They pushed for fuel flow because it was Todt's baby.

There's enough of that stuff going around in politics and business. If the ACO want to grow the WEC and LMP1, that's fine. They can knock themselves out to their heart's content there. However, I feel that they can't do it and push their agenda, because only so many people will bite each time.

We're in an era where purse strings are getting tighter, car makers want more return on their investments, and racing is becoming less and less of a proving ground. It's become more and more entertainment and marketing driven.

Doing gimmicks of some kind isn't always going to bring in the fans or teams. People complain enough of contrived racing, be it NASCAR, F1, or BOP in GT classes or DPI in IMSA. But I also don't see having a revival of Can Am/Formula Libre as a cure all, either. In fact, that's probably the worst thing sanctioning bodies can do. It would rise costs and pose a genuine safety risk to competitors.

I've freely stated why I don't like certain things, as well as why I like certain things. And I certainly don't like the path that certain things are on now. Just simply due to the old maxim of "if you don't learn from history, you're doomed to repeat it".

Not heeding that lesson, especially willfully, is the thing that scares me the most about anything, especially in the context of racing. And anytime there's been insane spending in the top class of ACO endorsed racing with diminishing ROI, it just becomes a boom or bust cycle.

I may be suffering from a case of rose-tinted glasses, but there needs to be more variety in racing, not less. No one solution should be the end all, be all. IMO, with the present rules package for LMP1, the ACO had a grand opportunity, but blew it. They don't need to repeat that same mistake with the 2020 rules.

[Matt]

man i thought you were quitting racing.

[Adam43]

Let's keep it civil and also keep to posts that move the discussion on.

Thanks.

[chernaudi]

I wouldn't be opposed to someone trying to race a car powered by a nuclear reactor--if it can be done safely.

We have large ships and submarines powered by nuclear reactors, and the US Air Force tried to build a plane that was mostly powered by one. Unfortunately, we only need to look at Chernobyl and Fukushima to see what can happen when nuclear powers goes haywire for example.

I also get why the ACO are tying for the 1km EV mode. But it doesn't mean I have to be in love with the idea, which I'm not. If we already have cars that can travel for a significant distance on EV power at highway speeds, how hard can it be for a car to do 1km on EV mode at a decent speed (at least when viewed in isolation)?

1km I believe is equal roughly from pit out at LM to the Esses. So for one lap at LM, it's not that big a distance, and it's mostly downhill.

Only question for me is can current hybrids manage that, since the ACO are still sticking with a 8MJ max hybrid rating? If teams get it right, it shouldn't seem like much of a challenge. One mile on EV power is harder to manage, as 1km is about five-eights of a mile.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

If we're going to use safety as the get out, and say traffic is an issue, then we can use the same argument for doing away with multi-class racing.

I do agree that I'm not a huge fan of the 1km on electric power rule. But I'm not going to say it's bad based on safety (because it really isn't), I just don't like it. It is road relevant though, which is what the ACO Are aiming for.

I don't like the rule, because as much as I love the LMP1-H cars, I also love noise and think it's part of the show. But it isn't unsafe. The same argument was made with LMP1-H regen braking, and LMP2 speeding up etc. Yet we're seeing less major traffic accidents than we used to. I don't see this causing more.

It's also why the ACO has extensive simulator work now.

Not sure why you're being argumentative. The 1km of electric is right out of the pits, where you have to merge into traffic slowing from something near 150mph. Then it's perhaps at "lmp2 speeds". Just seems like an ill-thought out rule and goes against their safety push in lmp1. We know it's a gimmick to persuade green friendly manufacturers to join/stay. So what? I don't have an issue with using only electric, but it doesn't seem like a wise move to make them use it right there. I think it'd be better if they forced to use it on the start finish straight for the first flying lap or something, and use it for the entire pit lane on an in/out lap.

[carbsmith]

No different than cold tires.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by carbsmith

No different than cold tires.

Tires aren't really that cold in the wec. They're pretty much on it when they switch to new rubber.

[Adam43]

If everyone could just repeat what they've said before that would be great.

To summarise. Some see it as a safety issue, others don't.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by TF110

Not sure why you're being argumentative. The 1km of electric is right out of the pits, where you have to merge into traffic slowing from something near 150mph. Then it's perhaps at "lmp2 speeds". Just seems like an ill-thought out rule and goes against their safety push in lmp1. We know it's a gimmick to persuade green friendly manufacturers to join/stay. So what? I don't have an issue with using only electric, but it doesn't seem like a wise move to make them use it right there. I think it'd be better if they forced to use it on the start finish straight for the first flying lap or something, and use it for the entire pit lane on an in/out lap.

It takes more than 1 person to make an argument.

I don't understand the train of thought. It's dangerous exiting the pits, but it'd be ok on a start finish straight? I'm also not sure why LMP2 speeds are dangerous. We have GTEs?

I haven't seen a decent argument as to why it's dangerous at all. Maybe in a single class formula, but multi-class, no.

[chernaudi]

And if they mean current LMP2s, we know that they're as fast in a straight line as LMP1s if given enough road. And with EV mode, acceleration should be virtually instant, basically like having a supercharger on an engine or a VTG turbo.

I don't think it's a big safety issue. LMP1 fuel flow cut vs LMP2 air restrictor is a bigger issue IMO, and we've not really seen very many problems with that so far, even at LM were if it was going to be a problem, it would've been there.

[canaglia]

maybe I'm wrong but are not used anymore restrictors on lmp2 cars

[chernaudi]

LMP2s run a spec air restrictor set up for the Gibson engine.

[AoB Special Stage]

Originally Posted by Adam43

If everyone could just repeat what they've said before that would be great.

To summarise. Some see it as a safety issue, others don't.