|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
22 Mar 2009, 21:12 (Ref:2422223) | #951 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 494
|
Quote:
Back at the ALMS side of things...they are definitely improving but they don't have as deep a set of files as LMS. try here. http://www.americanlemans.com/index_....php?r=Paddock |
|||
|
22 Mar 2009, 22:27 (Ref:2422285) | #952 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 690
|
Quote:
Quote:
Things I learned From Sebring - Peugeot still has it's top speed advantage though Audi is closer, but still 2-3 mph off. This advantage for the 908 could grow to 4-5mph at Le Mans when speeds go from 180mph to 215mph. - The Audi's handling advantage over Peugeot seems to be in weight. I have a feeling the R15 is very close to or at 900kgs while the 908 now with AC and all may be 30 or 40kgs heavier. This was very evident in the braking zones. The R15 made up alot of time in the braking zones. Frank Montagny was so fast in the 908 because he was a demon with the brakes, as was Bourdais. - The Audi R15 is terrible on tire wear. Just absolutley terrible. When the #1 Audi tried to double stint the tires before sunset his lap times dropped into the 49s and 50s and the car dropped way back while the Peugeots could manage 47s on double stinted tires in the middle of the day. I don't buy the excuse that they are worried about it being a new car, they know they have tire wear issues. - Peugeot treated this race too much like a test. I don't buy the excuse that they changed the AC fan in the 07 during green flag racing because it cooled electronics. I think they changed it during green flag conditions to simulate something similiar happening in Le Mans - The Peugeot pit stops have improved dramatically. And that may be and understatement. The crews lost no time with the driver changes. At Le Mans last year they were throwing 10s of seconds away every stop by struggling with driver changes after the tires were put on. - Audi's fuel mileage advantage over Peugeot appears to be gone. To get enough power out of the V10 they are probably using more fuel then before with the V12. - I expect Peugeot to have a 1 to 1.5 second advantage over the R15 at Le Mans because I was not impressed enough with the R15's pace at a track that should heavily favor it's low weight/balance advantage over the 908. - Peugeot couldn't run a mistake free race if their life depended on it. I'm still waiting for the day when they can complete a race with all their cars not running into major trouble. - I can count off the top of my head 4 or 5 major mistakes by Peugeot drivers...and only 1 by Audi drivers...and he had broken ribs. - I'm putting my money on the all French crewed 908 of Sarrizan/Montagny/Bourdais to win Le Mans now |
|||
|
22 Mar 2009, 23:18 (Ref:2422314) | #953 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,630
|
Quote:
DK |
|||
|
22 Mar 2009, 23:54 (Ref:2422338) | #954 | |
Official Timekeeper!
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,420
|
The R15 was designed and built to be underweight, and requires ballast to meet the 900kg minimum weight rule. This is definitely going to work in Audi's favour, as they will be able to play around with the balance of the car more that Peugeot will.
|
|
__________________
I wasn't speeding, officer. I was qualifying. |
23 Mar 2009, 00:30 (Ref:2422351) | #955 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,623
|
Quote:
To leave it short. 1. Top Speed Wrong. We dont' know. Audi definetely had more downforce. 2.Advantage in weight-not really (not lightness of the car it's weight distribution. The peugeot could have 50/50 weight distribution and ne heavier by 40 kgs. Weight means absolutely nothing. Could the Radical or lola LMP2 compete with the audi even at street circuits. No. The other Porsche and acura could. They were light but also balanced and good handlign 3. Tire Wear. Why would they ever build a car bad on tire wear with the neww LM24 rules. Never had dry running. It's a complex thing thing took Peugeot three years for peugeot to double stint efficiently. the audi r10 did not double stint at sebring in it's first race. Changing tires while they could have double stinted cost the race in 08 4. Fuel Mileage- Just like topspeed we don't know. Firsts race means nothing. They could have played it safe all race even at full power. A car on track with no fuel is no good. Also with the the added downforce you need more power to be fast. when both the cars are trimmed out at lemans the V10 fuel economy will show as it would feed fuel to 2 less cylinders and effortlessly against little downforce make power Acuras P1 and P2 needed more power even with there superhandling design. Zytek also created a super small V8 5. I expect Peugeot to have a 1 to 1.5 second advantage over the R15 at Le Mans because I was not impressed enough with the R15's pace at a track that should heavily favor it's low weight/balance advantage over the 908. It's the first race with a car thats already gone as fast as three years could make it! |
||
|
23 Mar 2009, 00:37 (Ref:2422356) | #956 | |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,623
|
Can somebody compare the Acura and Zyek P1 V8's. I'm sure by next year the power and torque especially will be up without having to change the engine. Some different internals should fix that
|
|
|
23 Mar 2009, 01:06 (Ref:2422363) | #957 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 286
|
Im willing to bet audi will figure out how to double stint tires with the help of michelin.
|
||
|
23 Mar 2009, 03:24 (Ref:2422406) | #958 | |
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 406
|
With the R10 in 2008 Audi did not double stint tyres in Sebring and Peugeot tried it.
At Le Mans they both could only double stint, so I see no difference there. |
|
|
23 Mar 2009, 03:55 (Ref:2422418) | #959 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 494
|
Quote:
Zytek has moved up to a 4.5L V8. Even that is not enough to compete with the diesels. Judd's 5.5L or the Aston V12 powered cars last year that could follow the Diesels but never catch them. Several reports have stated the 4.0L Acura P1 V8 is similar to the P2 powerplant. Probably a slightly bigger block to allow for bigger cylinders. High revving V8's, by their very nature, will never be stump pullers. The revs are too high for heavier internals that would help improve the torque. Acura will have to go the way of Judd and Zytek and build a larger lower revving engine if it hopes to compete with the diesels. I suspect they are going to call this year a development year and then hope the ACO holds firm and uses the P2 engine for P1 in 2011. The greatest strength of the Acura is it's large front tires, but that also is a huge detrement. The tires take longer to get fully heated up. Either the Pug or Audi could put many seconds between themselves and the 02a before the Acura can fully attack. It was a good idea, one that will do well in ALMS(Unless Champion Shows up with a new shiney R15), but I doubt it will ever be on equal footing with the two diesels. I do recall, however, some comments about the Acura being very easy on tires. Perhaps with the ACO 1 man tire change rule, the Acura could press on and exploit a double stint while the Audi would be forced to change more often. (but that still leaves the PUg to deal with...merely 22 seconds slower than the Audi. ) ((faster actually if you can prevent spins)) |
|||
|
23 Mar 2009, 07:37 (Ref:2422464) | #960 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,354
|
Seabass's interview on Motors was very honest - he said that they were beaten by McNish - stating that as a driver 'he is on a different planet to the rest of us'
He particularly cited McNish's ability to get through traffic without affecting his lap times. Big compliments coming from a driver of his standing. |
||
|
23 Mar 2009, 08:20 (Ref:2422492) | #961 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 972
|
Audi didn't seem to really push that hard in my opinion. Again, remember the R15 did a 1:43.4 in Monday practice and that was at the very beginning of its laps at Sebring. And in the race too, the R15 seemed to have more consistency than the 908 - that is, slightly better laps usually. The fastest laps went from Peugeot to Audi and back to Peugeot, but on a regular basis, Audi seemed to be more stable in their pace.
And also, it didn't seem to me like Peugeot treated this Sebring so much like a test that they weren't interested in winning it. To me, they actually seem a bit too desperate to win races against Audi, just like they were last year. From where I stand, Audi do have a bit of advantage over Peugeot this year even as far as the machine is concerned and Peugeot feel that and really try everything they can to keep up. Something tells me the R15 didn't show its full potential yet, although this was eventually enough to win. Quote:
|
||
|
23 Mar 2009, 08:39 (Ref:2422507) | #962 | |
Racer
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 285
|
I am certain McNish and Montagny were going as fast as they could at the end. Unless you beleive it is more important to not show full pace than to win Sebring?
Peugout was faster, and i don't beleive topdrivers laptimes should swing 2 seconds each lap. The reason of the changing laptimes i beleive was traffic. And because of the visibility advantage of Audi and McNish being McNish he was able to go through trafic and lose hardly any time, unlike Montagny. But at the same time, a disappointing final stint from Montagny. Had he been able to make a stint like the one Bourdais did, even McNish would not have had a chance. |
|
|
23 Mar 2009, 09:12 (Ref:2422532) | #963 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,618
|
first stint from Montagny was good .. slighlty behind what Bourdais did later in the race ..
same with Sarrazin .. was good first time in the car . but not that impressive the 2nd time |
||
__________________
Apocalypse becomes creation / Gor-Gor shall erase the nation Before you leap into his gizzard / Fall and worship Tyrant lizard Ciao Marco |
23 Mar 2009, 09:43 (Ref:2422550) | #964 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Quote:
|
||
|
23 Mar 2009, 14:11 (Ref:2422775) | #965 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 972
|
Quote:
|
||
|
23 Mar 2009, 14:21 (Ref:2422785) | #966 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,630
|
Quote:
DK |
|||
|
23 Mar 2009, 15:15 (Ref:2422817) | #967 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,793
|
The amount of rampant speculation in this thread and armchair analysis, some of which reads as sensible and some of which certainly does not, is rather overwhelming. I think we need some of the professional analysts who've been following this sort of stuff their entire lives to show their faces - Trussers, where are you?! Could you at least do one of your analysis pieces for DSC?
|
||
|
23 Mar 2009, 15:57 (Ref:2422848) | #968 | |||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,491
|
Quote:
that sentiment came over the PA at Sebring too. They said the Peugeot was faster than Audi, except for McNish. |
|||
|
23 Mar 2009, 16:09 (Ref:2422860) | #969 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 494
|
Quote:
dh |
|||
|
23 Mar 2009, 16:17 (Ref:2422867) | #970 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 22
|
There is no longer any rule "breaks" to allow larger restrictors for running A/C.
|
||
|
23 Mar 2009, 16:20 (Ref:2422871) | #971 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 12,045
|
SPEED claimed IMSA said they would monitor the temps but wouldn't hold teams in the pits to make repairs as the ACO will do in June. I'm guessing that like they were joking about on SPEED, the engineers were worried about something else failing and brought it in to fix the problem. Now why they dont have a quick exchange part for things like that. Seemed like a bit of confusion at first about what they needed to make the repair.
|
|
|
23 Mar 2009, 16:23 (Ref:2422873) | #972 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 494
|
Quote:
Yes, something about some of the onboard electronics needed cooling to survive. I don't know so I'm asking. Was the Pug always air conditioned? Wouldn't it's original design have been for not having AC? If so, why would they have any components that would require AC? |
|||
|
23 Mar 2009, 16:25 (Ref:2422875) | #973 | ||
Racer
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 285
|
Quote:
I beleive that considering pitstop strategy, when Bourdais handed over the car the Peugout had a lead of around 20-30 seconds. McNish gained that and more to make it a 20 second lead. So i really don't beleive any of them sandbagged at that time. Why on earth would you give up on a Sebring win? |
||
|
23 Mar 2009, 16:34 (Ref:2422879) | #974 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
@cmk: I doubt it is possible to make any predictions about Le Mans based on what we saw this weekend.
The important facts I will remember:
|
|
|
23 Mar 2009, 17:43 (Ref:2422912) | #975 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,793
|
I agree with those conclusions as broadly stated by yourself. I also agree they may bear little relevance to the state of affairs in June. The R15 package, for example, will see some fairly significant evolution between now and June. The one truly stunning thing I think we can all take away from this weekend is just how impressive the latest Audi Sport creation was on what was essentially its 3rd test.
|
||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ALMS Rnd 1: 12 hours of Sebring 19 Mar 2005 | Fab | North American Racing | 64 | 1 Apr 2005 11:30 |
ALMS Rnd 1: 12 hours of Sebring 17-18 Mar 2005 Qualifying | The Badger | North American Racing | 100 | 24 Mar 2005 13:23 |
ALMS Rnd 1: Sebring 12 Hour 18-20 Mar 2004 (closed: comments in "after race" thread) | rdjones | North American Racing | 825 | 21 Mar 2004 12:57 |
ALMS Rnd 1: 12 Hours of Sebring 16-18 Mar 2000 | marcus | North American Racing | 2 | 20 Mar 2000 20:34 |