[WEC] Toyota LMP1 Discussion

[chernaudi]

Then why the rumors of him being associated with HPD's DPI program, unless him being with Penske has anything to do with it?

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

He's not. Simple proof of that - his most recent sportscar outings since he joined Penske have all been in Chevy-powered machinery in IMSA (the old DPs and the GTE Corvette).

Yeah, guess team ganassi in the only one who makes everyone happy
ford in WEC/IMSA
chevy in nascar
honda in indy

they just need to buy a pair of viper gt3

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

He's not. Simple proof of that - his most recent sportscar outings since he joined Penske have all been in Chevy-powered machinery in IMSA (the old DPs and the GTE Corvette).

Why is driving a DP and a Corvette a couple of years ago proof he isn't involved in the Penske Honda DPi?

[ederss7]

Originally Posted by canaglia

you're right, in 2011 le mans #2 lotterer/treluyer/fassler was the third car for audi!
The most stable formations for audi during 2011 ILMC were: bernhard/fassler in #1 and mcnish/kristensen in #2

Anyway without that crash (and other hybrid issues) this year toyota #9 could realistically win the race just waiting the porsche #1 engine failure

Yes, that trio could be considered the third car, but since they were Audi drivers and Dumas/Benhard are Porsche's, I considered Lotterer/Fassler/Treluyer as not being a third car.
Anyway, coming back to Toyota, the fact that they'd be the only one to benefit from a third car shows that they should've always brought an additional car, but at the same time shows their dependency on it. This dependency shows a weakness that Porsche/Audi haven't had.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Why is driving a DP and a Corvette a couple of years ago proof he isn't involved in the Penske Honda DPi?

I believe it was said as evidence he is not an HPD driver, could still be with that program but does not seem like he is a contracted HPD driver on loan to Penske, but rather a Penske driver who is allowed to race outside of his main contract as well. Penske is no fool and only a fool would not want to bring him or Derani into their team in a P2 based car. Is Derani a Ford driver or just in the GTE car?

[AoB Special Stage]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

I believe it was said as evidence he is not an HPD driver, could still be with that program but does not seem like he is a contracted HPD driver on loan to Penske, but rather a Penske driver who is allowed to race outside of his main contract as well. Penske is no fool and only a fool would not want to bring him or Derani into their team in a P2 based car. Is Derani a Ford driver or just in the GTE car?

“I think I am hopefully in a better position right now to have opened another door in GT, but also keeping my door open in Prototypes.” -Derani

[bobec]

Originally Posted by canaglia

Anyway without that crash (and other hybrid issues) this year toyota #9 could realistically win the race just waiting the porsche #1 engine failure

Is it clear what caused that #1 engine failure? Any chance taking it too easy could have played a role?

[TF110]

I think the #8 would have won if they didn't do the precautionary battery change. Either way, Toyota are kicking themselves and crunching the numbers as we speak. I look forward to the rest of the year. The #8 is probably going to receive preferential treatment unless the #7 car is continuously dominant and they can do 1-2's every race. It's only logical for the wdc.

[ederss7]

Apology accepted:
https://www.racingbytmg.com/toyota-g...mans-24-hours/

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by ederss7

Apology accepted:
https://www.racingbytmg.com/toyota-g...mans-24-hours/

Good, well said.

[cokata]

I though some more about the clutch issue and i have a theory.

We know that Toyota use only 6 gears instead of 7 like Porsche do. And we also know that they use EV power the car up to the pit limiter speed and then they bump start the engine. I think that they use another advantage of the EV start, and that is the use of a long 1st gear.

Now everyone who has driven a manual car even knows how short the 1st gear is. You use only to get going and you have to immediately shift into 2nd once you get going. The reason for that is to save the clutch.

The shorter the first gear the sooner the engine will have enough rpm to be able to drive the car and not stall and that means that you need to slip in less.

If you have watched motorsports from different categories (bike excluded) you may know that in most cases the 1st is only a starting and a pit lane gear, and once the car is at speed on the track it never gets used as it's too short and you are grip bound anyway at that speed so the short gear will do nothing for you in terms of speed.

From the telemetry and the counting the shifts by sound i can make out that the Toyota was using 1st gear in Mulssane, Arnage corners and at the ford chicane. For other prototypes this is basically a 2nd gear situation. So in effect Toyota's first gear is roughly equivalent to Porshe's 2nd.

The advantage is obvious you have a lighter gearbox, that also takes less space and will have very slightly reduced frictional losses if all else is equal.

What if for whatever reason the car could not start on EV mode and had to do it the conventional way with slipping the clutch. Now a tall first gear alone should not be enough to break the car after just one or two starts, but as we know everything is made to such fine margins the clutch might have not been designed to slip start that car.

[skeeskirrt]

Originally Posted by TF110

I think the #8 would have won if they didn't do the precautionary battery change. Either way, Toyota are kicking themselves and crunching the numbers as we speak.

Do you think it would have made a difference if they brought Seb in sooner? He knew right away something broke but they kept him out at speed. Did keeping him out cause more damage? He sounded furious.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by cokata

I though some more about the clutch issue and i have a theory.

We know that Toyota use only 6 gears instead of 7 like Porsche do. And we also know that they use EV power the car up to the pit limiter speed and then they bump start the engine. I think that they use another advantage of the EV start, and that is the use of a long 1st gear.

Now everyone who has driven a manual car even knows how short the 1st gear is. You use only to get going and you have to immediately shift into 2nd once you get going. The reason for that is to save the clutch.

The shorter the first gear the sooner the engine will have enough rpm to be able to drive the car and not stall and that means that you need to slip in less.

If you have watched motorsports from different categories (bike excluded) you may know that in most cases the 1st is only a starting and a pit lane gear, and once the car is at speed on the track it never gets used as it's too short and you are grip bound anyway at that speed so the short gear will do nothing for you in terms of speed.

From the telemetry and the counting the shifts by sound i can make out that the Toyota was using 1st gear in Mulssane, Arnage corners and at the ford chicane. For other prototypes this is basically a 2nd gear situation. So in effect Toyota's first gear is roughly equivalent to Porshe's 2nd.

The advantage is obvious you have a lighter gearbox, that also takes less space and will have very slightly reduced frictional losses if all else is equal.

What if for whatever reason the car could not start on EV mode and had to do it the conventional way with slipping the clutch. Now a tall first gear alone should not be enough to break the car after just one or two starts, but as we know everything is made to such fine margins the clutch might have not been designed to slip start that car.

I think the Audis used 1st gear at Mulsanne corner and Arnage. In F1 it's always been used since they have been showing telemetry, for both corners and accelerating from a start.

For regular road cars I think it depends what you are trying to do, but I don't think 1st should be dropped (half clutch and immediately 2nd). I use 1st to accelerate, both a gentle a start with a short half-clutch, or a more aggressive launch. What's the point of shifting at at 4-5k revs at every other gear, but shifting out of 1st when under 2.5k (unless you are trying to avoid the 1st to 2nd shift which is trickier to get right when revs are higher). Keeping the car in 1st can also be great for traffic, depending on how long your 1st gear is.

But this is road cars. I think it's obvious the Toyota was not made to start from a standstill using the clutch. And maybe their 1st was long, I don't know. But again, Audi were using 1st for the slow corners, and their car always started with the clutch.

[chernaudi]

Audi always used to use second for Muslanne and Arnage with the R8, R10, and R15. But then again, the R8 never used traction control and the R10 and R15 had huge gobs of torque. I think that losing a couple hundred lbs/ft of torque and an effective ASR system allowed Audi to use 1st gear in the R18.

Porsche usually don't use first because of having a 7 speed gearbox, and they also shift into top a lot earlier than Audi did with any R18 variant (Toyota also went into 6th earlier than the Audis recently were known to do), and both have a shift pattern from 2nd (3rd for Porsche) to top similar to what the R8 had.

IMO, it seems that the deal with the Toyota was either a design flaw or something they didn't think would happen. I know that one can't plan for everything, but IMO the clutch deal seems like a bit of an oversight.

[cokata]

Audi used a diesel engine which has a lot more torque near idle RPM so they could get away with a long 1st gear, and not have to slip the clutch too much to get going.

[GasperG]

That's not logical, because diesel engine tops out sooner than petrol engine and must have even taller gearing.

Let's just say both R18 and TS050 shift to 2nd at 100 kph (from onboard telemetry)
- R18 has ~4.500 rpm at 100 kph, that means 450 rpm at 10 kph
- TS-050 has ~7.000 rpm at 100 kph, that means 700 rpm at 10 kph

My take on the clutch issue is that they were just saving too much weight on the clutch, thinking it's so rarely used for starting.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by Japanese Samurai

According to ZF tech seminar (by Kota Sera),
Toyota has a backup system that allows engine start by using clutch when the electric system malfunctions.
This article also mentions that it's possible to shave the safety margin of the clutch thanks to MGU start.
https://www.zf.com/japan/ja_jp/corpo...inar_vol2.html

Aren't we just repeating the tech article? Very much alludes to failure because it was never designed for starting without MGU.

The only issue here is the decision makers who allowed this to become an design target. They will no doubt learn from it and move on.

[cokata]

Originally Posted by GasperG

That's not logical, because diesel engine tops out sooner than petrol engine and must have even taller gearing.

Let's just say both R18 and TS050 shift to 2nd at 100 kph (from onboard telemetry)
- R18 has ~4.500 rpm at 100 kph, that means 450 rpm at 10 kph
- TS-050 has ~7.000 rpm at 100 kph, that means 700 rpm at 10 kph

My take on the clutch issue is that they were just saving too much weight on the clutch, thinking it's so rarely used for starting.

That is true, but also mainly because of the long stroke that is usually used with diesel engines they are much happier at low rpm and are able to be put in gear without stalling much sooner than petrol engines. Anyone who has driven a manual petrol and diesel car can confirm how much easier it is to get the diesel car going from a stationary position.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Articus

Aren't we just repeating the tech article? Very much alludes to failure because it was never designed for starting without MGU.

The only issue here is the decision makers who allowed this to become an design target. They will no doubt learn from it and move on.

Why should it be designed any different? They need another fail safe if anything.

[Victor_RO]

Sidenote for next weekend's racing: saw a report on Twitter that Buemi might do the first FE race in New York and then jump on a red-eye flight to Germany to take part in the WEC race. Surely he'd need a dispensation from the FIA and the stewards at both events to jump in the Toyota on Sunday with zero track time at the Nurburgring on the race weekend?

[AoB Special Stage]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

Sidenote for next weekend's racing: saw a report on Twitter that Buemi might do the first FE race in New York and then jump on a red-eye flight to Germany to take part in the WEC race. Surely he'd need a dispensation from the FIA and the stewards at both events to jump in the Toyota on Sunday with zero track time at the Nurburgring on the race weekend?

That would make my day. And it's not like Buemi doesn't have the experience with the car and circuit. It wouldn't look good on WEC to not let him if Toyota thumbs it up and the logistics work out.

[XtC24]

Don’t know why Toyota doesn’t let him go for the whole weekend.
It is a 6 hours race and many times the cars started with 2 drivers, even Toyota in Spa with Conway + Kobayashi this year.
Is there some regulation for it ?
Maybe force majeure could be used, he leads the championship in FE, right ?
Buemi himself said that flying + stress did not help him to perform well in either series when he had to do both the same weekend.

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by XtC24

Don’t know why Toyota doesn’t let him go for the whole weekend.
It is a 6 hours race and many times the cars started with 2 drivers, even Toyota in Spa with Conway + Kobayashi this year.
Is there some regulation for it ?
Maybe force majeure could be used, he leads the championship in FE, right ?
Buemi himself said that flying + stress did not help him to perform well in either series when he had to do both the same weekend.

Contract terms I guess. Lopez is doing the same double campaign but he's being retained by Toyota for Nurburgring and Alex Lynn is taking his place in FE, but he's not in the running for the championship. Since Buemi is, the situation is more complicated.

[TF110]

Pretty sure that winning the drivers title in the wec trumps the one in formula e. That's how I read from the drivers at least. They don't want to miss either but if they were to miss one, it'd be f-e. Let's see if Buemi does both!

[AoB Special Stage]

Victor's on the money. The TGR contracts state that in the event of a conflict, the LMP1 program takes primacy.

Although it isn't very good PR for Toyota to cause all this ruckus when the other double duty drivers are going to FE, I suspect.