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

[Deleted]

In perfect world, all midway adjustments are illogical.

[/spock]

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by TF110

This adjustment seems illogical and rewards less hybrid power.

Could be that the ACO-FIA ultimately realised that they possibly went too far with the ERS incentive under the previous two iterations of the EoT and are now trying to correct things a bit

[cokata]

So generally the quickest car gets a slight increase in max fuel flow, while the slightly slower one gets a big decrease.... weird.

[TF110]

Money talks? Maybe they just want Audi to stay or their data is showing something contrary to the results.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by cokata

So generally the quickest car gets a slight increase in max fuel flow, while the slightly slower one gets a big decrease.... weird.

At least in principle it should not be about "cars" but the powertrains alone, so actually, lap times should have no say in this. But it is a bit shady how they come up with the numbers.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by cokata

So generally the quickest car gets a slight increase in max fuel flow, while the slightly slower one gets a big decrease.... weird.

What dou you mean by the "quickest / slightly slower car" ? Could you elaborate ?

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by TF110

Money talks? Maybe they just want Audi to stay or their data is showing something contrary to the results.

Looking at the new EoT figures, it rather seem to me that the ACO-FIA have realized that an adjustment of the balance between petrol and diesel technologies had to be undertaken (Mr. Obvious speaking). The reduction of the FTF is a rather clear indication that the EoT had to be adjusted either because the BSFC of the best petrol powertrain (most likely the Porsche) was ultimately better than previously targeted or because the actual BSFC of the best diesel powertrain (i.e. Audi's) was worse than hypothesized by the ACO-FIA.

I am more inclined to believe that the adjustments are due to the improvements made by Porsche in terms of engine efficiency.

[TF110]

I think its Porsches Hybrid that is the difference maker. I think thats why the fuel for diesel is more lenient now. They realize (realise?) Audi/diesel has a harder time reaching 6 or 8mj so reward more fuel energy.

[chernaudi]

You also have to remember that Toyota were overweight by a good 30 or so kg last year. And though this year's car is lighter, it wasn't lightened enough to make Toyota pull the trigger on going 8MJ.

And since a V6 turbo probably won't be a ton lighter than the current NA V8 (they'll lose engine weight because of dropping two cylinders, but the turbochargers, intercoolers and probably larger radiators will make up most of what they lose), I can't see Toyota moving up to 8MJ like they want to if weight again becomes a consideration.

And that's considering that they're reportedly building a whole new car to match the engine concept.

Audi are still able to make it to 870kg roughly with ballast, but the improved hybrid system did cost them some ability to play with ballast.

But that's the way things are now--if you want more power, you'll more than likely take a weight penalty, want light weight, you'll more than likely will take some power penalty.

[TF110]

They werent overweight. Go through the Toyota thread and youll find the quote they said about being at 870kg. Maybe youre thinking of the statement where they say they have to cut 20kg to go to 8mj with the capacitor. Its just has to be that big to jump up to that step.

[GasperG]

They have direct BSFC info and the decision is IMO based on that data. Car performance is not based on engine alone.

[kvenom]

Toyota just got BOP'd

[Spyderman]

So... Porsche wins Le Mans and Audi wins the WEC. All is clear.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by kvenom

Toyota just got BOP'd

Negatively, along with Porsche. The data they have shows one thing, but the lap times show another. Must be those countless windtunnel hours. I think that may be one of the things on the aco's list to consider for cost reduction. Hopefully they dont go too far.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by GasperG

They have direct BSFC info and the decision is IMO based on that data. Car performance is not based on engine alone.

Indeed: http://www.fia.com/sites/default/fil...2014%20EoT.pdf

BSFC Average formula does include lap time though.

[cokata]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

What dou you mean by the "quickest / slightly slower car" ? Could you elaborate ?

Audi have been much quicker in Silverstone, and a little quicker in Spa and Le Mans when it comes to outright "perfect, traffic-free lap" compared to the Porsche.

[Bandicoot17]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

I can't see Toyota moving up to 8MJ like they want to if weight again becomes a consideration.

.

Surely that depends on how much the batteries weigh as well. The supercap system is heavy iirc

[chernaudi]

Originally Posted by TF110

They werent overweight. Go through the Toyota thread and youll find the quote they said about being at 870kg. Maybe youre thinking of the statement where they say they have to cut 20kg to go to 8mj with the capacitor. Its just has to be that big to jump up to that step.

In 2014, Toyota on average weighed in at around 900kg at most races.

This year, there's much closer to 870kg, but they stuck to 6MJ because they couldn't risk jumping up to 8MJ without a significant weight increase, they very thing that they worked on for the 2015 spec car.

[chernaudi]

Originally Posted by Bandicoot17

Surely that depends on how much the batteries weigh as well. The supercap system is heavy iirc

My biggest issue is that the turbocharging equipment/upgrades will negate the weight savings with having a smaller, lighter engine.

Though as you're referring to, hopefully the batteries will be a bit lighter than the supercap box.

[chernaudi]

Only rationale I can come up with is maybe addressing hybrid power or maybe trying to make the qualifying rounds not a foregone conclusion (Porsche under the current system will almost assuredly get at least one car on the front row at every race, probably on pole, too).

However, if the latter was a motivation, all that they're doing is closing up one lap qualifying pace between Audi and Porsche, possibly (probably) at the expense of giving Audi more engine power in race trim. Either that, or they wanted to trim off Porsche top speed advantage that they had at the sprint races this year.

This does really screw Toyota, though, as BOP changes are only governed by the fastest in each fuel class. So whatever hit that Porsche takes, Toyota gets, too.

Interestingly, all LMP1s do take a fuel capacity hit. Losing that fuel might shorten everyone's stints at LM by about a lap and probably a couple at every other circuit.

The the fact remains that Audi have had a pace advantage (fairly large at Silverstone, less so at Spa and Le Mans) in race trim, and the fuel flow increases might be marginal, but an edge is still an edge if they decide to use it. And these changes can only help Audi, especially in race trim.

Granted, if you're Porsche and Toyota, when you consider that Audi have been fast and consistent in race trim basically everywhere this year, can seemingly double stint tires whenever they want everywhere they've been so far this year (quadruple stint at LM) without major performance loss, and the LM kit as a great balance in terms of both agility and speed, those guys would argue that having an extra bit of fuel to burn--while Toyota and Porsche get less--is an extra weapon that Audi doesn't need right now.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

In 2014, Toyota on average weighed in at around 900kg at most races.

This year, there's much closer to 870kg, but they stuck to 6MJ because they couldn't risk jumping up to 8MJ without a significant weight increase, they very thing that they worked on for the 2015 spec car.

Source for this? Because Toyota said otherwise.

EDIT: Found the quote by Kinoshita in an image scanned by dbagtbag

[chernaudi]

This mentions that Toyota were much closer to 900kg last year than 870:

http://tentenths.com/forum/showpost....postcount=1718

Back on topic with the EOT changes, were the teams running with the changes at the Nurburgring, or did the ACO finalize them afterwards/teams weren't notified of them until after the test?

If the teams ran with pre-LM BOP, then the question does remain as to how much Audi will gain and what will Porsche/Toyota lose?

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Back on topic with the EOT changes, were the teams running with the changes at the Nurburgring, or did the ACO finalize them afterwards/teams weren't notified of them until after the test?

If the teams ran with pre-LM BOP, then the question does remain as to how much Audi will gain and what will Porsche/Toyota lose?

I would expect that the teams had been notified of those EoT changes before the test at the Nurburgring and that they likely applied these changes at the test.

It will be interesting to see indeed how much closer Audi will be able to run compared to Porsche.

[chernaudi]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

I would expect that the teams had been notified of those EoT changes before the test at the Nurburgring and that they likely applied these changes at the test.

It will be interesting to see indeed how much closer Audi will be able to run compared to Porsche.

The PDF document I found for the decision claims to have been made/issued on July, 29th. That's the day after the test ended.

There was another dated on the first day of the test (July, 27), but with those dates, I doubt that any of the teams were actually able to enact the changes prior to the test.

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

I would expect that the teams had been notified of those EoT changes before the test at the Nurburgring and that they likely applied these changes at the test.

It will be interesting to see indeed how much closer Audi will be able to run compared to Porsche.

Closer to what.? Audi has consistently been the fastest car (race pace).