Home Mobile Forum News Cookbook FaceBook Us T-Shirts etc.: Europe/Worldwide. eBay Motorsport Links Advertising Live Chat  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides MotorsportAds  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Saloon & Sportscar Racing > Sportscar & GT Racing


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 31 Mar 2017, 21:16 (Ref:3722908)   #4771
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,316
chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!
One thing that I noticed dating back to the Audi R18 '17 scale model is an opening up of the shutter panels above the radiator intakes on all the current LMP1 factory cars. I thought that the ACO had rules that mandated that something like them be there for legality reasons, or there was some benefit to using them. But since that Audi scale model showed up, those panels have disappeared on the Toyota and Porsche.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 13 Apr 2017, 16:17 (Ref:3726130)   #4772
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,316
chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!
A look at the new LMP1 regulations for factory teams, and how they's side stepped them:

http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/t...-aero-deficit/
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Apr 2017, 13:57 (Ref:3727973)   #4773
hondafan37
Veteran
 
hondafan37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Argentina
Buenos Aires, Argentine
Posts: 1,197
hondafan37 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
These would be the technical exceptions for the new participants in LM P1 registered in the sports regulations.

http://www.endurance-info.com/fr/les...ement-sportif/
hondafan37 is offline  
Quote
Old 6 May 2017, 22:40 (Ref:3731778)   #4774
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,316
chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!
It seems this weekend that the LM spec cars were fast over the course of one lap, but had nothing come the race.

I'm thinking that maybe because the rear diffuser changes to the cars, that the LM and sprint packages have become more specialized and I think, like the ACO changes in 2000, shifted the aero balance forward. So I guess that it's little wonder why the LM spec cars struggled for most of the race. Even Porsche got no where near backing up their qualifying performance with the #1.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 17 May 2017, 16:16 (Ref:3734090)   #4775
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,316
chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!
ACO Brass gives a sneak peak at 2020 LMP1 proposals for rules:

http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/n...id-technology/
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 17 May 2017, 18:55 (Ref:3734120)   #4776
deggis
Veteran
 
deggis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Finland
Posts: 5,595
deggis is going for a new lap record!deggis is going for a new lap record!deggis is going for a new lap record!deggis is going for a new lap record!deggis is going for a new lap record!deggis is going for a new lap record!
I wish there was some talk of a more radical chassis concept change, i.e. less aero and more mechanical grip, less corner speeds but higher top speeds. All of the stake holders probably prefer status quo in this sense instead of stepping into a bit of an unknown.
deggis is offline  
Quote
Old 17 May 2017, 19:48 (Ref:3734130)   #4777
TF110
Veteran
 
TF110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United States
Posts: 12,662
TF110 should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridTF110 should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridTF110 should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
Isn't that what they were trying to do by narrowing the cars in 2014? That was a mistake imo. They should widen them to 2050mm and go to 16" slicks like f1 has just done. Allow for some simple under body aero tunnels and move the driver to the center of the car. Batteries will be getting smaller and the rules will probably allow for lower hybrid levels to be equal to the 8mj so packaging shouldn't be an issue.
TF110 is offline  
Quote
Old 17 May 2017, 20:16 (Ref:3734134)   #4778
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,316
chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!
That is something hinted at, not widening the cars (IMO, there was nothing wrong with the 2000mm wide cars--if anything the narrower cars make more downforce for less drag, which does little (actually, nothing) for slowing the cars down), but eliminating the ERS incentive. I don't want to sound like I'm ripping on hybrids, but the ACO setting such hybrid limits and driving teams to get to the max as soon as possible due to performance incentives IMO was the recipe for escalating costs.

Because, we have to face it, not every car maker is gung ho about hybrids, or spending tons of money on them because of rules bias when simply saying that they're running one is usually enough for marketing. We also have to remember the 2012/13 limits on hybrids was because of Peugeot in large part. That was intended to make cheap hybrids viable and not make such a huge gap between hybrids and non-hybrids.

And it seems that the ACO thinking of doing away with the ERS incentive is partly to placate Peugeot and maybe get more factory teams in. I always felt that the ERS incentive was a short sighted move by the ACO, as this was supposed to be a modernized revival of Group C--you have a certain amount of energy allotted, do with it as you wish. Instead, the ERS incentive largely killed off the variety that I liked seeing in sportscar racing. Now in LMP1 it's all tiny engines and huge hybrids, because that's what the rules were biased towards. Killing variety is never a good thing in racing IMO.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 18 May 2017, 02:43 (Ref:3734156)   #4779
TF110
Veteran
 
TF110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United States
Posts: 12,662
TF110 should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridTF110 should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridTF110 should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
I don't care about an incentive or not. I think they should all get the same amount of energy on the fuel and then count hybrid power as a type of success ballast with 0 or 2mj weighing something like 800kg but maybe a couple liter bigger fuel tank. We'll see soon, but it better be worth it.
TF110 is offline  
Quote
Old 18 May 2017, 17:16 (Ref:3734294)   #4780
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,316
chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!
As I understood it, the original rules were supposed to be like that--choose your hybrid class, and they'd all be about equal when their advantages and disadvantages weighed in. That was until the ERS incentive came in and was clearly biased towards big hybrids. And hybrids do have to be singled out as the single biggest cost increaser, and is a big reason why, for instance, Porsche are claimed (or verified?) to have spent 280 million Euros a season on their LMP1 program, or at least the majority of that amount on it. Just a few years ago, a factory team could dominate the WEC on half that much or less.

Granted, the ACO moving away from air restrictors, narrowing up the cars and allowing some more aero freedom all contributed to the cost rise, but IMO, the biggest two are allowing so much more hybrid power, and with the rules being good for only three years originally, giving the teams a relatively short time to get there. Only Audi and Toyota having new cars last season pushed the new rules introduction back to 2018, and Audi Sport leaving exposing some of the issues with the regs and exposing the need to cut the teams some slack on costs (mostly time constraint related) lead to pushing back those rules to 2020.

Yeah, you can argue that it's the teams' fault, even Toyota's (who's budget went up significantly for 2016 and this season), but the reality is that tech and speed does cost money, especially when a rules set written to exploit it is only good for three years, as this rules set originally was.

I think that the ACO did realize that their current rules don't appeal to a broad realm of manufacturers, especially from a ROI stand point (spending boat loads of money for little media coverage outside of Le Mans), and not everyone wanted to invest huge sums of money on hybrid tech, even if every mainsteam car maker has at least one in their line up. They still don't think that 8MJ hybrids should be a requirement to be competitive.

And this seems is where Peugeot comes in, the guys who originally got the ACO to place a limit on hybrids of 3.5MJ and strict controls on how teams can harvest and deploy recovered energy. It seems that they're pushing a similar, if less restrictive, agenda. The Hybrid genie is out of the bottle, but that doesn't mean that costs can't be brought back down to more sane levels. And if the ACO resort to placing nationalistic pride as a priority, Peugeot might get what they want, which in this case might be a good thing.

But the ACO can ill afford to alienate Porsche and Toyota, who've spent quite a bit of money on their huge hybrid systems that were designed to exploit the current rules. But I think that even they'd be happy to have more than one route to go with technology, and if it saves them money, that should only help to keep them around longer.
chernaudi is offline  
Quote
Old 18 May 2017, 17:42 (Ref:3734309)   #4781
canaglia
Racer
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 177
canaglia should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
originally there had to be equilavence of performance due equilavence of energy... the plan was that a 2MJ car could equally compete against a 8MJ car, because the same energy per lap achieved by 2 different ways: more ICE power/less hybrid boost for 2MJ - less ICE power/more hybrid boost for 8MJ.
Actually plan went out the rails and to be competitive a manufacturer need to use a 8MJ battery ERS combined to a very efficient small turbo engine.

In next regs, if guidelines will be the same... well, no room for save money peugeot
canaglia is offline  
Quote
Old 31 May 2017, 07:52 (Ref:3737580)   #4782
GasperG
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Slovenia
Posts: 518
GasperG has a lot of promise if they can keep it on the circuit!
There are some speculations that if Peugeot quits Dakar (because of the rules changes), it may give them a faster push towards WEC:
http://www.autobild.de/artikel/rally...-11690499.html
GasperG is offline  
Quote
Old 31 May 2017, 08:09 (Ref:3737583)   #4783
GT6
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
England
MAIDSTONE, KENT, ENGLAND
Posts: 7,588
GT6 is going for a new world record!GT6 is going for a new world record!GT6 is going for a new world record!GT6 is going for a new world record!GT6 is going for a new world record!GT6 is going for a new world record!GT6 is going for a new world record!
that would be good but i think it is still unlikely for a few years
GT6 is offline  
Quote
Old 31 May 2017, 09:58 (Ref:3737609)   #4784
Sodemo
Veteran
 
Sodemo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
United Kingdom
Solihull, West Mids, UK
Posts: 9,401
Sodemo should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridSodemo should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridSodemo should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
I'd like to see a totally non-hybrid class with a pure V8 / V10 / V12 or turbo V6 option. Give them a 150-200kg weight advantage and a slightly larger fuel tank by say 25-30 litres. That way they might be able to fight at the front.
Sodemo is online now  
Quote
Old 31 May 2017, 10:01 (Ref:3737610)   #4785
Scorchess
Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 249
Scorchess has a lot of promise if they can keep it on the circuit!
You're in luck, that's what LMP1 is almost exactly! For private teams, that is.
Scorchess is offline  
Quote
Reply

Bookmarks




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ACO Publish 2010 Le Mans Regulations Gingers4Justice Sportscar & GT Racing 88 10 Dec 2009 03:41
[LM24] Whats the future of LMP's at Le Mans?? Garrett 24 Heures du Mans 59 8 Jul 2004 15:15
[LM24] 2004 Le Mans Rules pirenzo 24 Heures du Mans 6 16 Dec 2002 18:35
[LM24] No Lister LMP 900 for Le Mans. pink69 24 Heures du Mans 1 30 Nov 2001 12:17
[LM24] Entry Rules for le Mans? Liz 24 Heures du Mans 5 5 Nov 2000 22:41


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:06.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2016 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.