[LM24] Audi plans for 2010 revealed

[chernaudi]

We might have a guess. I know that I've brough this up, but when others complianed about the 908s doors not suiting the spirit of the ACO/IMSA regs, Audi was one of a relatively few teams to not complaint about it-before or after the clarifcation.

So quickly some forget...

[1969MGCGTdriver]

I wouldn't expect anything less from Pugeot. They'll probably make a big deal over finally "winning" Sebring. Too bad there won't be any competition thanks to their whining. Maybe the P2 guys can light 'em up. Would the little puggies cry if an ancient P2 RS Spyder whips 'em?

[chernaudi]

Probably won't happen unless the Pugs break a lot of stuff like in '08-LMP2 run to ACO tech regs at Sebring and PLM by agreement with IMSA and the ACO. PLM is the same due to the Intercontental Cup deal.

[Ur Q 83]

Originally Posted by Acid09

They´re open? They blame their competitors for not allowing something they would never ever allow themselves just because they´re not able to have their car ready in time.

I think that's incredibly low...asking someone for something he just can't agree to just to have a good sounding excuse.

I'm not seeing how anything Audi has said or done as "incredibly low", but I can see how some people can see as "incredibly low" a team protesting a car just before the biggest race of the year when the car has passed tech twice. Especially when there own car meets the letter of the rules but not the spirit of them. What's that old story about people living in glass houses ?.

As I understand it Audi didn't think they would have the R15+ redesigned with the latest rule changes and have enough spares to go racing before Sebring. They asked to be allowed to run a inter spec, Pug said no ( which was there right ) so Audi said OK we miss Sebring. At no point have I heard anyone from Audi blame Pug or anyone for that matter, so can I ask where is the "incredibly low" act ?.

[Ur Q 83]

Originally Posted by Hugewally

If the car had a real sports car nose instead of an F1 style, there wouldn't be a problem...

But can you blame them for finding the loop holes ?. And isn't the fact Audi could design new concept within the rules a good thing for sportscar racing ?.

[isynge]

Following on from Hugewally and Ur Q 83 I wonder if, in 1969, people were saying "if only the 917 had a proper backend instead of those moveable wing things nobody would have a problem"?

I don't think we can blame Audi for coming up with a comparatively revolutionary concept with the R15, innovation should be encouraged, nor for asking to run a compromise car at Sebring. Equally I don't feel I can really blame Peugeot, rules are rules, even if they are arrived at late - and at some stage you've got to draw the line otherwise you'd be as well call it Formula Libre and allow Gianni Mussato to turn up with his Lancia LC2.

That said doesn't mean I don't regret Peugeot not being willing to rise above things and allow Audi in for the good of the race, March will be a poorer spectacle without Audi there.

[Lola T70]

I agree with isynge completely, it is just sad that a waiver could not be granted even with restrictions on weight or restrictor size as we have lost another potentially great race.

[chernaudi]

Well, I'll give it to Peugeot. Kristen Stewart rode a bicycle that they made in the movie Speak. A low blow, I know, unless one is a Kristen Stewart fan

And I know now that some may counter that Audi, through VW, bought NSU in 1969, a motorcycle manufacturer.

That all being said, the fact that KStew rode one of their bicycles in one of her best films doesn't change my view on what Peugeot has done, considering that the Pug doesn't fit the spirit of the ACO's regs, either-kinda like the pot calling the kettle black.

[Mal]

http://www.endurance-series.com/

There are suggestion on this link that Benoit Treluyer is joining the Audi LMP drivers squad.

Any ideas why they need an additional driver?

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Mal

http://www.endurance-series.com/

There are suggestion on this link that Benoit Treluyer is joining the Audi LMP drivers squad.

Any ideas why they need an additional driver?

Treluyer in, Premat out? (says in the headline)

Interesting that Treluyer has driven the 908, and now the R15+!
Is Audi trying to get some info on the Peugeot?

[courageous]

Trying to decipher Murphey the bear can be tricky at the best of times, but reading the past couple of blogs is it just me or is there a hint at Dumas/Bernhard in an Audi R10 for Sebring?

[joeb]

Originally Posted by courageous

Trying to decipher Murphey the bear can be tricky at the best of times, but reading the past couple of blogs is it just me or is there a hint at Dumas/Bernhard in an Audi R10 for Sebring?

I think they may be in an audi for LeMans, but Sebring is unlikely.

[cmk]

Is Treluyer being brought in for a DTM seat as well? With his Super GT experience, Audi may feel that he will be a good hand in the DTM car as well as a fast prototype driver given his reasonable CV including that Pug drive last year. Let's face it, Premat was pretty decent in the R10 but he didn't exactly set the world alight in the DTM.

I think that Bernhard and Dumas for Audi at LM in 2010 is a very reasonable expectation.

[ger80]

Well, the R10 waivers for aero/engine are only valid for drivers that didnt drove for Audi in the past. Both drove for the Audi team last year and therefore the car then has to comply with 2010 regs. Dont think that will happen

[CTD]

Originally Posted by ger80

Well, the R10 waivers for aero/engine are only valid for drivers that didnt drove for Audi in the past. Both drove for the Audi team last year and therefore the car then has to comply with 2010 regs. Dont think that will happen

This only matters if Audi was fielding the R10 once again (which wont happened as they then have to comply 2010 rules). What we talk about is Treluyer being a Audi Works Team driver, filing in for Tom K, and replacing Dumas, so they only have 1 driver on the payroll instead of 2..

But what might be interesting out of all this is, could Dumas go back being a Porsche Works Driver?, and this being a hint for a 2011 Porsche Lmp?

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by CTD

This only matters if Audi was fielding the R10 once again (which wont happened as they then have to comply 2010 rules).Hmm, and where does it state that in http://www.lemans.org/files/reglemen...ortif_2010.pdf I surely do not see it!

What we talk about is Treluyer being a Audi Works Team driver, filing in for Tom K, and replacing Dumas, so they only have 1 driver on the payroll instead of 2..

As to the second part, I suggest that post #136 be read.




L.P.

[CTD]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

As to the second part, I suggest that post #136 be read.

My mistake with the post #136.

But still Audi can't race the R10!, they can have a de-facto team running it, but they can not themselves... From Mike's site:

LMP1 Audi R10: The complete car (chassis, bodywork, engine, restrictor, ballast, etc.)
remains in the 2009 configuration provided: the team who manages the car is not a factory team, the drivers have never competed with the official team Audi. If necessary, the ACO can adjust the performance of the car after the first race of Le Mans Series.

[The Badger]

They could send a lot of staff to support Kolles , and Treyuler didnt race an Audi before either .

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by cmk

I think that Bernhard and Dumas for Audi at LM in 2010 is a very reasonable expectation.

I don't see that yet. Both drivers seemed to struggle with the Diesel a lot and unless Audi is going to give them major seat time before the race, I dont think that will change.

They were way off the pace and I remember Bernhard talking not too favorably about the R15 compared to RS Spyder.

Anways, interesting rumor about Benoit Treluyer. I don't think he has any substantial info on the 908 to share with Audi though. After all, he only drove the car for one test and half a race. And given the fact that it's the 908 last season and the 9XX might be a completely different car (open top, petrol..), there's not much to gain for Audi there.

I´m happy for him though, he's a good guy and very quick. Not too happy about him joining Audi though, I always hoped the Peugeot squad would pick him up one day.

[Tom908V12]

Originally Posted by Ur Q 83

I'm not seeing how anything Audi has said or done as "incredibly low", but I can see how some people can see as "incredibly low" a team protesting a car just before the biggest race of the year when the car has passed tech twice. Especially when there own car meets the letter of the rules but not the spirit of them. What's that old story about people living in glass houses ?.

As I understand it Audi didn't think they would have the R15+ redesigned with the latest rule changes and have enough spares to go racing before Sebring. They asked to be allowed to run a inter spec, Pug said no ( which was there right ) so Audi said OK we miss Sebring. At no point have I heard anyone from Audi blame Pug or anyone for that matter, so can I ask where is the "incredibly low" act ?.

Well, at Audi's perhaps not, but in this thread there's a lot of Peugeot bashing though

[Acid09]

Yeah there are lots of members here heavily leaning towards the Audi side of things...

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by CTD

My mistake with the post #136.

But still Audi can't race the R10!, they can have a de-facto team running it, but they can not themselves... From Mike's site:

But, that Audi was running an R-10 was not being put forth! This is the quoted text that was being answered in post #140:

Well, the R10 waivers for aero/engine are only valid for drivers that didnt drove for Audi in the past. Both drove for the Audi team last year and therefore the car then has to comply with 2010 regs. Dont think that will happen

The drivers of an R-10 at Sebring, being the subject, and the consequences of the fact that the pair in question have driven a 'werks' entry before.







L.P.

[Mal]

Originally Posted by Acid09

I don't think he has any substantial info on the 908 to share with Audi though. After all, he only drove the car for one test and half a race.

He has a good understanding of the aero qualities of the 908

[ger80]

Originally Posted by Acid09

Yeah there are lots of members here heavily leaning towards the Audi side of things...

Yes, my grandfather sold VW/Audi for 35 years ...

[Ur Q 83]

Originally Posted by Tom908V12

Well, at Audi's perhaps not, but in this thread there's a lot of Peugeot bashing though

I wasn’t trying to bush Peugeot ( even if I don’t like how the newer team management had gone about doing things last year ) I was trying to understand how/why Acid09 thought Audi was “incredibly low” asking for a waiver to run Sebring with a inter spec car and blaming Peugeot ( which Audi never did ) was Audi “PR BS” ?. As for why members are leaning towards Audi, it could be because they actually went about things the right way. First they had a concept, went to ACO and got approval, then built the car and it passed race tech ( twice ! ).

But back on topic as far as I understand any team can ran the R10 bar the Audi factory ( so Joest and probably Champion if there were still around ) and any drivers who hasn’t raced the R10 for the factory. So the banned driver list should be Biela / Pirro / Werner / Capello / Kristensen / McNish / Luhr / Rockenfeller and Premat. But should/could also includeFassler and Albers ( who both drove single races at the end of ’08 in the ALMS by memory ), so where does this leave Albers & Kolles ?.

And lastly I also don’t think a driver could tell you a lot about the design of one car to another apart from set up and general stuff. And as David Brabham put it, drives should think of cars as girlfriends, and you never talk about the old one with the new one J And speaking of David, it doesn’t look like he will be racing with the Peugeot this year so could he be a chance at Audi or will he be in a P2 ?.