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

[deggis]

I wish there was some talk of a more radical chassis concept change, i.e. less aero and more mechanical grip, less corner speeds but higher top speeds. All of the stake holders probably prefer status quo in this sense instead of stepping into a bit of an unknown.

[TF110]

Isn't that what they were trying to do by narrowing the cars in 2014? That was a mistake imo. They should widen them to 2050mm and go to 16" slicks like f1 has just done. Allow for some simple under body aero tunnels and move the driver to the center of the car. Batteries will be getting smaller and the rules will probably allow for lower hybrid levels to be equal to the 8mj so packaging shouldn't be an issue.

[chernaudi]

That is something hinted at, not widening the cars (IMO, there was nothing wrong with the 2000mm wide cars--if anything the narrower cars make more downforce for less drag, which does little (actually, nothing) for slowing the cars down), but eliminating the ERS incentive. I don't want to sound like I'm ripping on hybrids, but the ACO setting such hybrid limits and driving teams to get to the max as soon as possible due to performance incentives IMO was the recipe for escalating costs.

Because, we have to face it, not every car maker is gung ho about hybrids, or spending tons of money on them because of rules bias when simply saying that they're running one is usually enough for marketing. We also have to remember the 2012/13 limits on hybrids was because of Peugeot in large part. That was intended to make cheap hybrids viable and not make such a huge gap between hybrids and non-hybrids.

And it seems that the ACO thinking of doing away with the ERS incentive is partly to placate Peugeot and maybe get more factory teams in. I always felt that the ERS incentive was a short sighted move by the ACO, as this was supposed to be a modernized revival of Group C--you have a certain amount of energy allotted, do with it as you wish. Instead, the ERS incentive largely killed off the variety that I liked seeing in sportscar racing. Now in LMP1 it's all tiny engines and huge hybrids, because that's what the rules were biased towards. Killing variety is never a good thing in racing IMO.

[TF110]

I don't care about an incentive or not. I think they should all get the same amount of energy on the fuel and then count hybrid power as a type of success ballast with 0 or 2mj weighing something like 800kg but maybe a couple liter bigger fuel tank. We'll see soon, but it better be worth it.

[chernaudi]

As I understood it, the original rules were supposed to be like that--choose your hybrid class, and they'd all be about equal when their advantages and disadvantages weighed in. That was until the ERS incentive came in and was clearly biased towards big hybrids. And hybrids do have to be singled out as the single biggest cost increaser, and is a big reason why, for instance, Porsche are claimed (or verified?) to have spent 280 million Euros a season on their LMP1 program, or at least the majority of that amount on it. Just a few years ago, a factory team could dominate the WEC on half that much or less.

Granted, the ACO moving away from air restrictors, narrowing up the cars and allowing some more aero freedom all contributed to the cost rise, but IMO, the biggest two are allowing so much more hybrid power, and with the rules being good for only three years originally, giving the teams a relatively short time to get there. Only Audi and Toyota having new cars last season pushed the new rules introduction back to 2018, and Audi Sport leaving exposing some of the issues with the regs and exposing the need to cut the teams some slack on costs (mostly time constraint related) lead to pushing back those rules to 2020.

Yeah, you can argue that it's the teams' fault, even Toyota's (who's budget went up significantly for 2016 and this season), but the reality is that tech and speed does cost money, especially when a rules set written to exploit it is only good for three years, as this rules set originally was.

I think that the ACO did realize that their current rules don't appeal to a broad realm of manufacturers, especially from a ROI stand point (spending boat loads of money for little media coverage outside of Le Mans), and not everyone wanted to invest huge sums of money on hybrid tech, even if every mainsteam car maker has at least one in their line up. They still don't think that 8MJ hybrids should be a requirement to be competitive.

And this seems is where Peugeot comes in, the guys who originally got the ACO to place a limit on hybrids of 3.5MJ and strict controls on how teams can harvest and deploy recovered energy. It seems that they're pushing a similar, if less restrictive, agenda. The Hybrid genie is out of the bottle, but that doesn't mean that costs can't be brought back down to more sane levels. And if the ACO resort to placing nationalistic pride as a priority, Peugeot might get what they want, which in this case might be a good thing.

But the ACO can ill afford to alienate Porsche and Toyota, who've spent quite a bit of money on their huge hybrid systems that were designed to exploit the current rules. But I think that even they'd be happy to have more than one route to go with technology, and if it saves them money, that should only help to keep them around longer.

[canaglia]

originally there had to be equilavence of performance due equilavence of energy... the plan was that a 2MJ car could equally compete against a 8MJ car, because the same energy per lap achieved by 2 different ways: more ICE power/less hybrid boost for 2MJ - less ICE power/more hybrid boost for 8MJ.
Actually plan went out the rails and to be competitive a manufacturer need to use a 8MJ battery ERS combined to a very efficient small turbo engine.

In next regs, if guidelines will be the same... well, no room for save money peugeot

[GasperG]

There are some speculations that if Peugeot quits Dakar (because of the rules changes), it may give them a faster push towards WEC:
http://www.autobild.de/artikel/rally...-11690499.html

[GT6]

that would be good but i think it is still unlikely for a few years

[Sodemo]

I'd like to see a totally non-hybrid class with a pure V8 / V10 / V12 or turbo V6 option. Give them a 150-200kg weight advantage and a slightly larger fuel tank by say 25-30 litres. That way they might be able to fight at the front.

[Scorchess]

You're in luck, that's what LMP1 is almost exactly! For private teams, that is.

[Gingers4Justice]

We just need someone to put their neck on the line and stick that glorious Judd V10 into the back of the privateer P1.

Looking at you, Perrinn.

[Akrapovic]

Answering here so we don't hijack the Porsche thread!

Originally Posted by broadrun96

Would Ginetta in LMP1-P met the rule or is the rule based on subscription to the LMP1-H class? Honestly don't know but I'm the ACO/WEC are working on that just in case.

That's where it gets complicated. You cannot have a class of one team. That's why there is no LMP1-P this year. The ByKolles is just lumped in with the LMP1-H teams. So this year, we have just LMP1.

So I'd imagine the same would happen if you just had Toyota. You can't run a class of them on your own, so everyone gets put back into one giant LMP1 class again. You ask Ginetta to run a works car (Tomlinson did it at the Road to Le Mans race in 2016), and you now meet the FIA requirement for a World Championship. So in that sense, it's quite easy to solve.

But the WEC rules require any manufacturer to run a hybrid system, and there's no way Ginetta have the ability to do that. So do you then change that? Maybe for manufacturers who sell X amount of cars a year, or whatever?

It's complicated. Far too complicated. I almost wish they'd just move the LMP class names about. LMP1-P becomes LMP2. LMP2 becomes LMP3. LMP3 becomes LMP4. I don't like having half classes like that at the top. I get it for the series and classes that need Am drivers to fund the cars, but the P1 stuff is too complicated.

Now I'll suggest something that nobody will like. The LMP1 cars all were converging on a similar hybrid system. We lost super capacitors and flywheels because they simply weren't as good as batteries. Batteries is also where road cars are going and staying, so it's road relevant. So...rather than having teams spend a hundred million a year developing systems which are all trying to achieve the same thing, can a customer hybrid system be setup? An off the shelf system, that (for the sake of discussion), Hyundai could buy for their brand new LMP1, and it has the battery, generator unit etc. You could still develop your own, but is it worth having a generic set anyone could use? That's how engines used to work back in the day - only the biggest works teams designed there own, everyone else bought them in.

[chernaudi]

I'm thinking, based on the MSA article, that the ACO could be wise to make a class based on DPI, but with more open rules, optional hybrids/alternative fuels, and that teams can build their own cars or buy someone else's.

[Adam43]

Which, apart from the mandatory works hybrid approach, is what LMP1 is now. So not much change needed.

[Akrapovic]

I love DPi, but I don't see what it would bring to Le Mans. The problem with LMP1 is the massive cost of hybrid systems. If you're going to address the costs, then you don't need to go to the length IMSA has done and base it on LMP2 cars. You could just cut the hybrids out and go back to how it all was in the 2000s.

I love DPi, and it suits IMSAs needs, and I'd love a DPi invitational class at Le Mans, but I don't see that as a solution to the LMP1 costs. I also think being worried about the entire sport and event is an over reaction when the ACO has LMP2, LMP3, GTE and GT3 classes dotted about, and more than enough cars to fill the grid should it be opened to LMP3 and GT3 cars.

[chernaudi]

The problem is that if you read the translated MSA article (rough translation, but it gets the job done), you reportedly have both Audi and Lamborghini looking at a DPI program with Joest, with either the Audi 3.0 twin turbo V6 or the Lamborghini/Audi V10.

But more significantly, it seems that same article has revealed how much money Peugeot are willing to spend to come back to LM, which is about 50 million Euros/$55 million USD. That's a lot more palatable than the believed to be nearly $75-100 million TMG are spending, let alone the $200 million that Porsche are.

Personally, I'd love to see a modern LMP900/first generation LMP1 concept with closed cars, but getting rid of the fuel flow meters as far as them being mandatory (especially given the top speed of the current LMP2 cars) and having air restrictors being optional, hybrids being optional with an emphasis on them being less expensive, and more options as far as engines, such as big and small being balanced and stock block engines being given a chance.

[Akrapovic]

Not trying to play down DPi, but we've had even more DPi rumours than we have had LMP1 rumours. Would it not be wise to play things cautiously when it comes to these new projects on both sides of the pond?

[chernaudi]

I think that you kinda missed the point of my previous post, which is that even if teams are/aren't interested in DPI, they want something cheaper than current LMP1, but with the freedom to develop their own cars, as long as they don't have to spend into the nine figures.

The most significant point that should come out of that is that the MSA article does seem to hint that Peugeot want a spending cap (on their end, not mandatory for everyone; basically what Peugeot themselves want to spend) of 50 million Euros to field a competitive program. That's much less than what even Toyota are reportedly spending. And such regs I feel would end the get painted into a corner regs we have now that are also ultra expensive.

Personally, I think that spending 100 million dollars or Euros on a program is excessive, but sustainable. Not the $150-200 million that Audi and Porsche were spending, and the less you have to spend to be competitive, the better.

This means probably the end of huge hybrid systems, but hopefully it'll open up other areas of development that are more sane in cost that the ACO's single minded vision have overlooked. Just merely running a 2MJ or 3.5MJ hybrid system will suit the marketing people. Not to mention that in the real world, people don't buy diesels or hybrid or small engined cars for performance, or even emissions, but to save money at the gas pumps.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Not trying to play down DPi, but we've had even more DPi rumours than we have had LMP1 rumours. Would it not be wise to play things cautiously when it comes to these new projects on both sides of the pond?

Esp given that Rebellion can't get enough cars delivered early in the season. Where are the DPi chassis going to come from? Great idea in theory but teams are needed to run all these DPi programs as well and there really aren't a lot of teams twiddling their thumbs waiting for a program.

Penske-HPD/Honda/Acura
Joest-Audi, possibly Lamborghini
???-Lamborghini if not Joest
???-Bentley, why not have a VAGfest in DPi
???-Hyundai, the ethereal rumors are always floating around it seems
Ganassi-Ford after GT program ends, hinted at on Racer I think it was but only as the team had apparently mused about what if after and plenty of other EcoBoost engines to try out
Keating/Riley/???--MB as ethereal a rumor as Hyundai has been


Any one I've missed in the wishful thinking pool?

[chernaudi]

The MSA article (I know the focus is on Porsche and the future of LMP1) also hinted that if not a VAG company, Joest could do a Ford DPI program, however, Ford have denied that they're very interested in a DPI deal.

Basically, I'm to the point where for LMP1, things need to be rolled back to being a modernized LMP900/first gen LMP1, where you had more engine and chassis options, different ways of doing things and not getting painted into a corner, and sensible costs. That won't just lure factory teams in, but it'd make things easier on the privateer market and could open up the possibility of customer cars from factory teams.

I also think that the ACO's ultra stiff homologation rules also need to be thrown down the crapper. That's why Oreca appears ready to curb stomp everyone at LM in LMP2, and why you don't see the variety we used to see in LMP1, in addition to ridiculous costs.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

The MSA article (I know the focus is on Porsche and the future of LMP1) also hinted that if not a VAG company, Joest could do a Ford DPI program, however, Ford have denied that they're very interested in a DPI deal.

That one was a separate rumor: Ganassi had talked about continiuing with a DPi program after the GT program ends, nothing to do with Joest. I read the translation here.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by deggis

That one was a separate rumor: Ganassi had talked about continiuing with a DPi program after the GT program ends, nothing to do with Joest. I read the translation here.

Which was the same thing Racer had in two articles about Ford, it seemed like it was a Ganassi idea looking for Ford backing after the GT ends. But you can't fault a team for looking to their next project to keep everyone working.

[deggis]

***Leupen said the ACO’s expected release of the 2020 LMP1 regulations on Friday will be with the hope of attracting additional manufacturers. Toyota’s current program is confirmed through the end of 2019. “Nevertheless, for us, we have anticipated this and we would like to be here very much in 2020,” he said. “That’s where we have to fight hard for.”

***Should Toyota pull off an elusive victory on Sunday, Leupen said it would not impact the longevity of its program. “From my point of view, no.” he said. “I think if we would win here, you would like to defend your title, and not take it and turn your back and run away.”

http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/l...ay-notebook-4/

The announcement will obviously not be a surprise for Toyota or Porsche, but we need to wait.

[TF110]

I sure hope they don't make the cars taller, again. They already look like bubble sitting on top of a body lol. Whatever they do lets hope they're more open in freedom and it attracts additional entries.

[deggis]

Considering the talk and rumors now, I can only decode that bolded part as "simpler tech / reduced hybrid and much cheaper".