Home Mobile Forum News Cookbook FaceBook Us T-Shirts etc.: Europe/Worldwide. eBay Motorsport Links Advertising Live Chat  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides MotorsportAds MotorsTV (Sky 447)  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

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


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 19 Aug 2008, 19:20 (Ref:2271760)   #61
ger80
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Germany
Birmingham
Posts: 1,710
ger80 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Diesel makes performance balance problems in LMP1 and in WTCC, do we need that in LMP2 too?
ger80 is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Aug 2008, 19:28 (Ref:2271765)   #62
Taxi645
Racer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 223
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by ger80
Diesel makes performance balance problems in LMP1 and in WTCC, do we need that in LMP2 too?
Well, generally performance balance problems are caused by unbalanced regulations, if you have a fair rule book, you'll get good races. On a side note, AFAIK diesels are allowed in LMP2 already in LMS, it's just that it's kinda difficult to get down to 825kg (certainly with room left to be able to shift weight around) with a diesel with sufficient power to be competitive.

Last edited by Taxi645; 19 Aug 2008 at 19:33.
Taxi645 is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Aug 2008, 19:32 (Ref:2271768)   #63
HORNDAWG
Veteran
 
HORNDAWG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
United States
Oregon
Posts: 8,685
HORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Yes, we need the ability for someone to run in the P-2 class with similar options as there are in the P-1 class. After all, is it not prototype racing also?


L.P.
HORNDAWG is offline  
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent
Quote
Old 19 Aug 2008, 19:34 (Ref:2271770)   #64
ger80
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Germany
Birmingham
Posts: 1,710
ger80 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Nevertheless I would like to see them removed, you cant really balance engines with such a different touque over rpm curve from my point of view. If one starts using diesel in LMP2 and has a performance advantage, everybody else has to develop diesel solutions too. That makes P2 even for expensive than it is today with the RS Spyder ....
ger80 is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Aug 2008, 19:35 (Ref:2271772)   #65
HORNDAWG
Veteran
 
HORNDAWG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
United States
Oregon
Posts: 8,685
HORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645
Well, generally performance balance problems are caused by unbalanced regulations, if you have a fair rule book, you'll get good races. On a side note, AFAIK diesels are allowed in LMP2 already in LMS, it's just that it's kinda difficult to get down to 825kg (certainly with room left to be able to shift weight around) with a diesel with sufficient power to be competitive.
Yes, diesel is already allowed in the 2008 P-2 rules.


L.P.
HORNDAWG is offline  
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent
Quote
Old 19 Aug 2008, 19:50 (Ref:2271781)   #66
Taxi645
Racer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 223
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by ger80
Nevertheless I would like to see them removed, you cant really balance engines with such a different touque over rpm curve from my point of view. If one starts using diesel in LMP2 and has a performance advantage, everybody else has to develop diesel solutions too. That makes P2 even for expensive than it is today with the RS Spyder ....
I wouldn't mind that much if they're left out, just think the A.C.O. likes to keep them in (why add them otherwise?). You say can't balance engines with such a different torque curve, well that's pretty much what I tried to do. I gave the petrols less weight with a better peak power to weight ratio. Possibly with slightly more room to shift weight. The diesels on the other hand have a fuller power curve (more torque) and better mileage.

Different tracks will give different cars an edge, but I think if you leave politics out experts would be well able to create a balanced rule book.


BTW, I tried to make the rules such that weight wise, a chassis can (with modifications) work with any of the listed engines, be it LMP1 or 2, diesel or petrol, free or homologated.

Last edited by Taxi645; 19 Aug 2008 at 19:55.
Taxi645 is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Aug 2008, 21:15 (Ref:2272395)   #67
deggis
Veteran
 
deggis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Finland
Posts: 5,423
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!
Quote:
Originally Posted by HORNDAWG
Yes, diesel is already allowed in the 2008 P-2 rules.

L.P.
But only production engines.
deggis is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Aug 2008, 22:54 (Ref:2272415)   #68
AU N EGL
Veteran
 
AU N EGL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
United States
Raleigh, North Carolina
Posts: 4,418
AU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridAU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by ger80
Nevertheless I would like to see them removed, you cant really balance engines with such a different touque over rpm curve from my point of view. If one starts using diesel in LMP2 and has a performance advantage, everybody else has to develop diesel solutions too. That makes P2 even for expensive than it is today with the RS Spyder ....
actully you can. ((RWTQ+ RWHP ) / 2) / wt

So it does not matter where the torque or HP is in the curve.

Again need to use a standard Dyno( DynoJet for example) and Society of Automotive Engineers ( SAE ) guild lines to measure HP and TQ
AU N EGL is offline  
__________________
"When the fear of death out weighs the thrill of speed, brake." LG
Quote
Old 21 Aug 2008, 16:44 (Ref:2272814)   #69
ger80
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Germany
Birmingham
Posts: 1,710
ger80 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
RWTQ: torque on the rear wheels
RWHP: horse power on the rear wheels
wt: weight?
which unit system is used for this?
ger80 is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Aug 2008, 17:24 (Ref:2272841)   #70
HORNDAWG
Veteran
 
HORNDAWG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
United States
Oregon
Posts: 8,685
HORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by deggis
But only production engines.
Yes it is. And I would imagine that it was introduced in that way to keep the cost down in the 'privateer class', while allowing someone to explore the possible value of running a diesel in P-2. Someone like ECO, but that was more willing to go for wins with a diesel yet not have to spend on the level of Audi or Peugeot. We shall see.

Also as long as we are talking rules per se, the LMS needs to be allowed to make 1or2 adjustments during the year. In the case of the rules being lopsided to start, 2 adjustments would allow for a tweak and then a second in case it was to far or not quite enough. But only in a clear cut extreme need.

L.P.
HORNDAWG is offline  
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent
Quote
Old 21 Aug 2008, 17:33 (Ref:2272844)   #71
AU N EGL
Veteran
 
AU N EGL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
United States
Raleigh, North Carolina
Posts: 4,418
AU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridAU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by ger80
RWTQ: torque on the rear wheels
RWHP: horse power on the rear wheels
wt: weight?
which unit system is used for this?
Not ON the rear wheels but FROM the rear wheels to the pavement.

torque = lb ft and wt in English pounds or Torque in Newton Meters and wt in Kg.


Which system? SAE = Society of Automotive Engineers
http://www.sae.org/servlets/index
AU N EGL is offline  
__________________
"When the fear of death out weighs the thrill of speed, brake." LG
Quote
Old 21 Aug 2008, 18:44 (Ref:2272880)   #72
ger80
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Germany
Birmingham
Posts: 1,710
ger80 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by HORNDAWG
Yes it is. And I would imagine that it was introduced in that way to keep the cost down in the 'privateer class', while allowing someone to explore the possible value of running a diesel in P-2. Someone like ECO, but that was more willing to go for wins with a diesel yet not have to spend on the level of Audi or Peugeot. We shall see.

Also as long as we are talking rules per se, the LMS needs to be allowed to make 1or2 adjustments during the year. In the case of the rules being lopsided to start, 2 adjustments would allow for a tweak and then a second in case it was to far or not quite enough. But only in a clear cut extreme need.

L.P.
And then everybody who doesnt win a race starts complaining about the regs to try that his car gets a bigger restrictor, less weight, ... at the 2 adjustments .....
ger80 is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Aug 2008, 18:53 (Ref:2272885)   #73
HORNDAWG
Veteran
 
HORNDAWG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
United States
Oregon
Posts: 8,685
HORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by ger80
And then everybody who doesnt win a race starts complaining about the regs to try that his car gets a bigger restrictor, less weight, ... at the 2 adjustments .....
So, and your point would be? Just because someone is sniveling, does not mean that the ACO or LMS have to make those adjustments. But when there is a clear disparity, as in the diesel P-1 to petrol P-1, they have the ability to rectify the situation in a much more timely manner!


L.P.
HORNDAWG is offline  
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent
Quote
Old 21 Aug 2008, 18:57 (Ref:2272889)   #74
ger80
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Germany
Birmingham
Posts: 1,710
ger80 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
all ok, nevertheless I would like to see the P2 diesels removed. Nobody needs them from my point of view. In P1 the diesel are used for marketing, but the ACO wants that P2 gets more a privatear class so there is no need for a diesel
ger80 is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Aug 2008, 19:23 (Ref:2272904)   #75
Taxi645
Racer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 223
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by ger80
all ok, nevertheless I would like to see the P2 diesels removed. Nobody needs them from my point of view. In P1 the diesel are used for marketing, but the ACO wants that P2 gets more a privatear class so there is no need for a diesel
Could you explain to me why you reckon privateer and diesel are incompatible? AFAIK Porsche and Aston are doing just as much for marketing as any diesel team.

Last edited by Taxi645; 21 Aug 2008 at 19:27.
Taxi645 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 22:39.


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.