|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
28 Oct 2012, 08:12 (Ref:3158864) | #3801 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,926
|
Radio Le Mans has confirmed that Audi will adopt a Toyota-like rear wing endplate solution for their 2013 car--only thing that has been confirmed as for Audi Sport's 2013 plans, and the confirmation of the modifcation came from Audi Sport second in command Dieter Gass.
|
||
|
28 Oct 2012, 08:46 (Ref:3158883) | #3802 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,654
|
Quote:
Wasn't it going to be banned for next year? |
|||
__________________
Hvil i Fred Allan. (Rest in Peace Allan) |
28 Oct 2012, 08:49 (Ref:3158885) | #3803 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,561
|
||
|
28 Oct 2012, 09:23 (Ref:3158901) | #3804 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 723
|
Copying? Audi already has the solution for the rear wing, they just didn't use it because they thought its illegal.
|
||
|
28 Oct 2012, 09:39 (Ref:3158909) | #3805 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,654
|
|||
__________________
Hvil i Fred Allan. (Rest in Peace Allan) |
28 Oct 2012, 09:40 (Ref:3158910) | #3806 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
Then they dont have a solution . If they think its illegal , then it most probably is . Or they could have cleared it with the stewards fiest , or the ACO .
|
||
|
28 Oct 2012, 09:41 (Ref:3158911) | #3807 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
See http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...stcount3150830 and subsequent discussion.
I still find this a stupid decision of the ACO. Banning it would only affect Toyota. Now all the teams have to develop a solution, which clearly was never intended by the rule book, for only 1 year. A large amount of money will be wasted for nothing. Maybe the other teams should have filled a complaint like Peugeot did when the R15 showed up at Le Mans. |
|
|
28 Oct 2012, 09:46 (Ref:3158914) | #3808 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,654
|
Quote:
It says it clearly that such devises to gain downforce is illegal, wether you call it wheel arch, cooling or whatever, it's illegal unless it's stated otherwise in the regulations. But yes, we now see the result of accepting rules breech. |
|||
__________________
Hvil i Fred Allan. (Rest in Peace Allan) |
28 Oct 2012, 10:39 (Ref:3158937) | #3809 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,926
|
Kinda stupid with the ACO's selective enforcement of their own rules, but then again, near full width wings will be back for the '14 cars...
|
||
|
28 Oct 2012, 14:04 (Ref:3158996) | #3810 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
Quote:
file a complaint , why , Its aero development , much like Hybrid and that weird wing Oak introduced last year with the bubbles on the upper trailing edge , shows people are thinking . That Toyota has the best looking wing for the last couple of years . Emmm ..... remember when the R8R overcame that issue with the rear wing side extensions , and a week later Martrin Short had them on his Dallara . Remember when the 2003 Bentley came up with full length side extensions , Oreca had them 3 weeks later for Le mans . So , no , I wouldnt think they would involve that much cost to be honest , especially when a team like Short , operating to a budget can have virtually the same mod as the works teams , and not moan about the cost . Last edited by The Badger; 28 Oct 2012 at 14:09. |
|||
|
28 Oct 2012, 17:27 (Ref:3159088) | #3811 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
No, it is not an aero development. It is loophole! The technical regulations state that the rear wing can only be 1.6 m wide and that 2 dive planes and a gurney are the only other aerodynamic devices that are allowed on the car.
Quote:
BTW Your comparison with hybrids does not make any sense. Hybrids are allowed and strictly regulated by rule book. |
||
|
28 Oct 2012, 18:49 (Ref:3159134) | #3812 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,654
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
Hvil i Fred Allan. (Rest in Peace Allan) |
28 Oct 2012, 19:03 (Ref:3159144) | #3813 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,677
|
No its solely there for design aspects, it creating down-force is a by product. That's how Toyota Argued it.
|
||
__________________
The race track and the human body, both born of the earth, drive to be one with the earth, and through the earth one with the car, drive to the undiminished dream, single moments of pleasure, an eternity of memories. |
28 Oct 2012, 19:10 (Ref:3159147) | #3814 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Indeed. Toyota argues that the winglet between the two end plates is part of the wheel arch, just raised ridiculously high. The fact that this winglet happened to add 25-30% additional downforce compared to the Le Mans spec rear wing is a mere coincidence
Quote:
Of course that explanation from Vasselon is just clever wording to say that they have found a loophole to make a full width rear wing. Last edited by gwyllion; 28 Oct 2012 at 19:15. |
||
|
28 Oct 2012, 23:07 (Ref:3159247) | #3815 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
It is an aero development , that the regs didnt forsee . A loophole , yes .
It is aero , and it is a development of the previous version ..... so its an aero development . Weather its legal or not , its there and its allowed by the regulating authority . Development is the ongoing research and modification of an item . If its not aero , what is it ? Last edited by The Badger; 28 Oct 2012 at 23:14. |
||
|
28 Oct 2012, 23:35 (Ref:3159257) | #3816 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,561
|
Who cares what it is? It looks good and works. It's allowed. If teams want to benefit from it, then copy it. And yes Audi has had this before with the R8, so there should be no complaints. If they 'missed' something, that's on them. If Oak Racing came up with it this season and it didn't get banned I don't think we'd see the same guys saying it's illegal Just because teams didn't do what Toyota did doesn't mean it should be banned. That's how F1 works, and many here criticize that series for it's clamp down on innovation.
|
|
|
29 Oct 2012, 02:49 (Ref:3159308) | #3817 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,926
|
The difference between this and the R8's 04 endplates is that the R8's was a hallow box that the air blew directly through. The Toyota solution is very similar to the Pescarolo solution where the outer endplate connected to the inner one by a diveplane shaped winglet, basically a single element wing section. It was allowed on the Pescarolo because there was no rule at the time banning or discouraging it.
With the Toyota deal, it's clearly a loophole due to the shoddy wording of the ACO's rules and the ACO's selective enforcement of said rules. And as I've said, it won't hurt Audi long term, because they have a solution ready to go for '13. But it does pressure the private teams, who don't have such huge R&D budgets. And as for thoughts on the AWD vs RWD hybrid stuff mentioned in the LM regs thread, I'm not sure if I'm in favor of doing away, at least entirely, with the 120kmh limit. I'm in favor or lowering it, or slapping RWD hybrids with a limit to help out not only Audi, but also the private teams who can't run hybrids. Based on Bahrain and Shanghai, Rebellion wouldn't be a ton slower than the TS030 if it was without the hybrid system. The big problem with the Audi R18 hybrid system is that it favors faster tracks, like Le Mans, Spa, and most ALMS-type tracks that are faster and have more flow to them than the F1 Tilkedromes like Shanghai and Bahrain. Even Interlogos, which isn't a stereotypical (not counting Sepang, COTA or India) Tilke design, has so many 1st and 2nd gear corners that it favors the Toyota hybrid system. Besides, there are rules being developed to give breaks to private teams, and I think that TMG might have the most to lose, especially if Audi can convince the ACO that they're at an unfair disadvantage with the hybrid or even diesel engine rules. This is a political game now, and Peugeot (who seemed to get the ACO to bend over backwards on the hybrid stuff) no longer have the ACO's or the FIA's ear, since they bailed out. |
||
|
29 Oct 2012, 07:37 (Ref:3159365) | #3818 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,561
|
The point is Toyota found a clever solution and used it. Instead of stifling something that was a a good concept and trying to change the rules, teams will just have to get on with it and make their own solution. It's a two way street. Just because someone's 'favorite team' (not being rude, just generalizing) didn't do their own interpretation I don't think it should be done away with. Like I said before, that's like F1 and it's stale.
|
|
|
29 Oct 2012, 12:20 (Ref:3159486) | #3819 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,831
|
Quote:
Why now? Are Toyota that "clever?" Of course not; it's not as though Toyota's execution isn't the most obvious one. Hence my cynicism about this. The Toyota execution isn't clever and the winglets have only one function and clearly fall under the provisions described in Art 3.6.2. That the ACO has decided to loosen that up just at the time they need to solidify at least one additional manufacturer to race against Audi is the one and only fact that needs observing. And if you're Toyota, you did the ACO a HUGE solid by racing earlier than you planned and the ACO owes you one. This is but one of many favors we'll see I'm sure...it's politics as usual. Ask teams up and down pitlane, I don't come to my conclusions in isolation... Last edited by MulsanneMike; 29 Oct 2012 at 12:28. |
||
|
29 Oct 2012, 19:19 (Ref:3159712) | #3820 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 575
|
Quote:
So, now that it's ruled legal for '13, how many more teams are we going to see adopt this? |
||
|
29 Oct 2012, 19:23 (Ref:3159716) | #3821 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
All of them .
|
||
|
30 Oct 2012, 01:15 (Ref:3159884) | #3822 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,884
|
It's probably going to be more significant to see who doesn't have it on the grid at Silverstone.
|
||
|
30 Oct 2012, 08:28 (Ref:3160002) | #3823 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,561
|
Quote:
|
||
|
30 Oct 2012, 08:51 (Ref:3160012) | #3824 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
I think that you misunderstood that comment from Creep89. He was referring to the rumor that Audi already tested the Toyota loophole in CFD and/or the windtunnel.
|
|
|
30 Oct 2012, 08:59 (Ref:3160017) | #3825 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,561
|
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[WEC] Porsche GTP / Hypercar: factory and customer | Simmi | North American Racing | 9284 | 18 Sep 2024 14:24 |
[WEC] Toyota LMP1 Discussion | Gingers4Justice | ACO Regulated Series | 6771 | 18 Aug 2020 09:37 |
Nissan LMP1 Discussion | Gingers4Justice | Sportscar & GT Racing | 5568 | 17 Feb 2016 23:22 |
How about a LMP1 Pro & LMP1 Privateer class | Holt | Sportscar & GT Racing | 35 | 6 Jun 2012 13:44 |
[LM24 Race] Audi LMP1 Poster all art deco'd. | blackohio | ACO Regulated Series | 2 | 27 Oct 2011 06:30 |