Quote:
Originally Posted by deggis
I have never really understood the point of mandating so short stints via fuel tank sizes to begin with. This trend goes back a long time, at least a decade and including both P1/P2. Are pitstops supposed to be so exciting that it is better to have more of them.
Also there's a bit of irony in having historically the most efficient engines yet the shortest stint lengths.
|
There are no technical reasons to decrease fuel tank size to let lmp2 having shorter stint, WEC lmp2 got shorter stints because, despite extra weight, power cut and mandatory LM bodywork, performance wise they are very close to LMH, so forcing them to refuel more frequently is a cheap and artificial expedient to cut them off from leading LMH after 30 minutes. IMSA lmp2 can't keep up dpi pace, so IMSA didn't need to kill their power output and stint length.
Anyway when they were at 600hp full power, lmp2 could run about 40-42 minutes with 75L, rebellion and BR1 had similiar stint length with their 75/70L fuel tanks but were in the order of >700hp.
Gibson lmp2 engine has never been very efficient in general.