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

[Creep89]

Originally Posted by JoestForEver

With that, IMO, ACO is opening a can of worms. What should be defined as engine? Is partial repair and replacement of parts regarded as a new one or not ?
Is ERS part of the engine or they can use whatever they want?
Sad to see a once hopeful regulation ruined by following every piece of stupid restriction F1 uses, from Grade 1 obsession to test limits, now aero and engines?

Really hate the new regulations. It's definitely going into the wrong (F1) direction.

[deggis]

Well, WTF to above comments. There was already a practical limit, just a bit more relaxed and worded differently (1 per race, except 2 per LM). Ironic that putting more emphasis on durabilty of parts suddenly isn't a great thing.

I would think this was result of the cost cut talks, since it is fairly easy to regulate.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by JoestForEver

With that, IMO, ACO is opening a can of worms. What should be defined as engine? Is partial repair and replacement of parts regarded as a new one or not ?
Is ERS part of the engine or they can use whatever they want?
Sad to see a once hopeful regulation ruined by following every piece of stupid restriction F1 uses, from Grade 1 obsession to test limits, now aero and engines?

It's probably defined somewhere else in the regs whether "engine" includes ERS but LM24 has had the engine restriction for several years and it's done by a simple sealing parts way. How many controversies do you remember?

[Bandicoot17]

Originally Posted by deggis

Well, WTF to above comments.

Some people will find anything to complain about

[TF110]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

The limited budget may explain why Toyota did not bother redesigning the entire rear end after LM. Time will tell if Toyota will stick with their current rear wing mounting solution. I expect a more conventional solution next year.

Or maybe they designed the rear end with reduced width and drag in mind. Not sure why they would be pressed on their budget to redo the rear end after LM, when they redid the front on the high downforce package. Just looking at the rear end you can see the tightening of the bodywork-

[JoestForEver]

Originally Posted by deggis

It's probably defined somewhere else in the regs whether "engine" includes ERS but LM24 has had the engine restriction for several years and it's done by a simple sealing parts way. How many controversies do you remember?

As far as I am concerned, I welcome and support wholeheartedly for all these restrictions ONLY if they apply to LMP2 classes in which cost control and gentlemen attractiveness is everything, but these restrictions for budget, or endurability, or whatever simply won't work for P1.
For one, restrictions on tyres, engines and tests are unfair to the privateers who never have state-of-art wind tunnel facilities like Toyota or any type of simulator. They'll have to retire unnecessarily to save mileages to save engine for Le Mans.
On the other hand, such restrictions to save cost simply never work. You put ban on certain areas, manufacturers explore other. Test? No problem, let's have the best simulation facility. Blown diffusers?No problem let's have flexible parts. The simplest way to control cost escalation is leave the rules as it is, open places where privateers can catch up(copy) the factory teams most easily.

[Deleted]

Third cars from Audi, Porsche and Nissan (and any other possible non-full season P1) will get to use three engines for Le Mans so it's actually even better for those cars than it used to be, except this year. So the additional entries can waste two engines prior Saturday morning, then switch to new one for warm-up...

[tomerswayler]

Do the current regulations allow to limit the power sent to the wheels be programmed as a function of speed?
I'm asking because of the rumours that the new Nissan should have up to 2000hp available, enough power to spin the wheels even at higher speeds. Such a limitation would help the driver during acceleration and would also help conserving the tyres.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by tomerswayler

Do the current regulations allow to limit the power sent to the wheels be programmed as a function of speed?
I'm asking because of the rumours that the new Nissan should have up to 2000hp available, enough power to spin the wheels even at higher speeds. Such a limitation would help the driver during acceleration and would also help conserving the tyres.

Traction control is allowed under the rules.

[tomerswayler]

Thanks, it should be interesting to watch a 2000hp(if true) car accelerating out of the chicanes. I'm doing some simulations currently on how to best use the available energy for one lap and how the electric power influences the laptime. So far 900kw of boost power gives the best lap time with my model.

Maybe i'll post some of my results in a few days, are you interested?

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by tomerswayler

Maybe i'll post some of my results in a few days, are you interested?

We always are !

[gustavobamba]

Originally Posted by tomerswayler

Thanks, it should be interesting to watch a 2000hp(if true) car accelerating out of the chicanes. I'm doing some simulations currently on how to best use the available energy for one lap and how the electric power influences the laptime. So far 900kw of boost power gives the best lap time with my model.

Maybe i'll post some of my results in a few days, are you interested?

PLEEEAAASSEEE bring it on

[deggis]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

Traction control is allowed under the rules.

plus obviously the electric motors won't give full power all at once (is it right to call it TC?) and engine maps are not very regulated or if at all. Which is why at least on a tv broadcast you see a true opposite lock moment about once a season.

[TF110]

On that note, lots of people want to see loose cars with a driver sliding the tail, but Id rather not. If you wanna see that, theres plenty of drift sports.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by TF110

On that note, lots of people want to see loose cars with a driver sliding the tail, but Id rather not. If you wanna see that, theres plenty of drift sports.

Since reading between the lines was so hard: opposite lock moment = small corrections, seeing drivers actually have hard time with keeping the car in control especially when getting out of corners. Instead of just flooring the throttle and waiting computer to do the rest (disclaimer: simplification).

[Maelochs]

Right. Seeing the drivers actually having to drive now and then adds to the sport. I don't yearn for hard, skinny tires so we can see everybody fishtailing, but the hyper-controlled, computer-modulated point-and-squirt almost killed F1 (hyperbole, for those looking to criticize) ... the electronics drove the car more than the drivers.

The occasional reminder that the guys behind the wheel are there because they have exceptional sensitivity and reaction time is welcome to me.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by deggis

Since reading between the lines was so hard: opposite lock moment = small corrections, seeing drivers actually have hard time with keeping the car in control especially when getting out of corners. Instead of just flooring the throttle and waiting computer to do the rest (disclaimer: simplification).

Did I offend you or something? I was talking about people wanting to see sliding cars. Nothing about your "opposite lock". I guess since were on that subject, when do we even get the chance to see the driver make steering inputs? Every onboard camera is the same static windshield shot. Sorry if you thought I was countering your post. I was elaborating on "grip vs slip".

[deggis]

Originally Posted by TF110

Did I offend you or something? I was talking about people wanting to see sliding cars. Nothing about your "opposite lock".

Ok, misunderstood

I guess since were on that subject, when do we even get the chance to see the driver make steering inputs? Every onboard camera is the same static windshield shot.

True, in a way maybe it is better that they are because now we don't see how uninspiring (that's the word that comes to my mind) it often looks like.

[MyNameIsNigel]

I am still a bit intrigued by Nissan's statements regarding the minimum car weight that they target for the GT-R LM. They consistently quote a minimum weight of 880kg.

The Technical Regulations as they stand however still refer to a minimum weight (excluding driver and with no fuel on board) of 870kg for a hybrid LMP1 (Art. 4.1 of the Technical Regulations).

So, where does this 10kg difference come from ?

A simple mistake in Nissan's communication or a last-minute change in the regulations or EoT ?

Something else ?

The newly-introduced driver ballast should not normally explain that 10kg difference as driver ballast should have no bearing on the minimum car weight as such. Driver ballast (which is capped at a maximum of +20kg) only bears relevance in respect of the additional weight ballast that the car has to be engineered to accept (Art. 4.2 of the Technical Regulations).

While there is no explicit reference to this in the Technical Regulations, it is worth noting that the minimum car weight does not take into account the weight of the onboard camera system that most LMP1s are to be equipped with. This is dealt with in a separate decision issued by the Endurance Committee. LMP1 cars that are not equipped with an onboard camera system are supposed to carry additional ballast of 3kg to compensate for the weight of the onboard camera system.

[TR.]

Slightly off topic but does anyone have any idea when the next evolution of GTE is due? Or are the regs set for the foreseeable future?

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by TR.

Slightly off topic but does anyone have any idea when the next evolution of GTE is due? Or are the regs set for the foreseeable future?

The new GTE regulations are due to be finalized in time for the 2016 season. This being said, we haven't heard much about this matter since last October.

[Deleted]

Updated P1 EoT for Le Mans
http://www.fia.com/sites/default/fil...EOT_150313.pdf

[Pandemonium]

So what are the changes??

[GasperG]

Very small changes, I see fuel flow up by 0.5%-1%, Petrol tank capacity up by 0.3 %, diesel tan capacity down by 0.2 %. Fuel allocation per lap is the same.

[Pandemonium]

That means increased horsepower??