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

[ApexTurtle]

Originally Posted by canaglia

BR1 is based on the dallara lmp2

I don't think that's true.

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

That may be, but the R-One/05/07/R13 do share the same basic tub design. A lot of the differences is that the aero regs in LMP1 are a lot freer than in LMP2. Also, LMP1 privateers can develop things on that end pretty much to their heart's content. LMP2 is basically frozen without ACO approval for changes.

agree, chassis sometimes is a vague word.
To be more specific, 07 and R13 carbon monocoque is basically the same; speaking about oreca.

Of course R13 has a better and enhanced aero.

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by ApexTurtle

I don't think that's true.

think it as you wish....

[chernaudi]

From what I can tell, the BR1 is very different under the skin from the Dallara P217. They share some aero concepts as far as bodywork goes, but the BR1's front crash structure is very different from the P217/Cadillac DPI, and the tub also appears to be different and distinct.

[chernaudi]

Racecar Engineering weighs in on the LMP1 rules debacle. This article says just get rid of the rule mandating that factory teams have to run hybrids:

https://www.racecar-engineering.com/...ZkrSJtym9jWmhE

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

From what I can tell, the BR1 is very different under the skin from the Dallara P217. They share some aero concepts as far as bodywork goes, but the BR1's front crash structure is very different from the P217/Cadillac DPI, and the tub also appears to be different and distinct.

I had the chance to speak with some dallara engineers during a dallara stradale based trackday event at franciacorta late last year; one of them worked on lmp2 project and we had a brief chat.

He told me that BR1 carbon monocoque is basically a slightly evolution of the original lmp2 designed tub, made it to better adapt the whole car to the enhanced lmp1 underfloor aero and to the rear tubframe and suspensions system, both developed with AER drivetrain used as reference.

So, yes, to me BR1 is still based on dallara lmp2.


Of course I can't show any evidence to support this and don't pretend to be trusted on word...



so.... everyone may think as he wishes
it's not a problem for me.

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Racecar Engineering weighs in on the LMP1 rules debacle. This article says just get rid of the rule mandating that factory teams have to run hybrids:

https://www.racecar-engineering.com/...ZkrSJtym9jWmhE

quoting from the article



"The difference in the choices are clear. If hypercar is adopted, the regulations have to allow the Valkyrie to enter the frame, and it generates its power differently to the proposed regulations. It is understood that Toyota has been asked to increase the power of its ICE to 850bhp, and reduce its hybrid impact in order to make balancing the two concepts easier."


lol mercedes and ferrari f1 ICE barely can reach 800hp

[deggis]

Originally Posted by canaglia

lol mercedes and ferrari f1 ICE barely can reach 800hp

There are some restrictions in place in F1 incase you have not noticed...

And similarly in LMP, 800+ hp under the the current fuel flow based limitations would be impossible but clearly those are not part of the plan anymore.

That RCE story has pretty weird stuff in it. Like it was written while drunk or not proof-read at all.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Mike E

Meanwhile, in the world of hydrogen power, https://www.theengineer.co.uk/hydrogen-kubas-binding/

Sounds good. Hopefully it is practical. How long from concept to reality?

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by deggis

There are some restrictions in place in F1 incase you have not noticed...

And similarly in LMP, 800+ hp under the the current fuel flow based limitations would be impossible but clearly those are not part of the plan anymore.

That RCE story has pretty weird stuff in it. Like it was written while drunk or not proof-read at all.

F1 engines are limited to 100kg/h fuel flow but are however able to consume more burning lubricant oil. Even if mercedes is able to do 7 gp with a single ICE, so 7 x about 600km (considering FP and Q) = roughly 4000km lifespan; is useless to say that ICE can't endure all 4000km in a row....

considering also that 800hp are reached only in qualifying and that a single f1 ICE may cost like 3 or 4 whole lmp1's... to me is quite clear that basically it doesn't exist a 850hp engine suitable for endurance so far (aside 2010 peugeot 5.5L V12 turbodiesel perhaps).


Not to mention the real question..... why?

why toyota asks for that insane power?

are they going to set LM pole under 3 minutes?

[Mike E]

Originally Posted by canaglia

why toyota asks for that insane power?

are they going to set LM pole under 3 minutes?

Other way around. The story says Toyota has been asked to increase ICE power and reduce hybrid boost.

[canaglia]

yeah, I've read that, but 850hp always available is however a huge performance improvement than 600hp + about 400hp for a short period.

850hp is simply insane and unrealistic IMHO.


With current chassis/aero development and confidential tires, 600hp + 2MJ are quite enough to run in about 3.20 or even faster.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by canaglia

why toyota asks for that insane power?

are they going to set LM pole under 3 minutes?

If they are, I want to be there to see it......!

[Mike E]

Originally Posted by canaglia

yeah, I've read that, but 850hp always available is however a huge performance improvement than 600hp + about 400hp for a short period.

850hp is simply insane and unrealistic IMHO.


With current chassis/aero development and confidential tires, 600hp + 2MJ are quite enough to run in about 3.20 or even faster.

Agreed, 350bhp/litre is bonkers. Anyway, we should hear some more definite news soon...

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by Mike E

Agreed, 350bhp/litre is bonkers. Anyway, we should hear some more definite news soon...

well... AER should already be in the range of about 300hp/liter actually.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by canaglia

yeah, I've read that, but 850hp always available is however a huge performance improvement than 600hp + about 400hp for a short period.

850hp is simply insane and unrealistic IMHO.


With current chassis/aero development and confidential tires, 600hp + 2MJ are quite enough to run in about 3.20 or even faster.

It says "Toyota has been asked", not "Toyota asked". ACO asked Toyota, if this was still unclear.

And it is like you're still assuming everything else in the regs would stay the same. That same sentence says this would then reduce the hybrid power. Fuel flow metering is in the original regs but hasn't seem likely since. The original published hypercar regs outlawed both current style aero development and confidential tyres (single supplier instead). What was the latest rumored target lap time some weeks ago, 3:30-3:35s? Something like that.

However that 850 is still obviously more than the original ICE power cap which was already reduced once.

[canaglia]

doesn't matter who asked who, a 850hp engine for endurance is simply out of reality.... and even if it isn't; well, it's something thath barely only three or four manufacturers in the world could handle.... maybe.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by canaglia

doesn't matter who asked who, a 850hp engine for endurance is simply out of reality.... and even if it isn't; well, it's something thath barely only three or four manufacturers in the world could handle.... maybe.

Group C engines were making around 800-900hp 30 years ago. Either a big displacement or a big turbo are in order. Maybe Toyota can move away from the 2.4L V6 and go with 4L+ TT V8 that was rumored to be in the works.

[carbsmith]

NASCAR engines used to push well over 850hp for north of 1000km at pretty extreme duty cycles with severe technology restrictions.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by TF110

Group C engines were making around 800-900hp 30 years ago. Either a big displacement or a big turbo are in order. Maybe Toyota can move away from the 2.4L V6 and go with 4L+ TT V8 that was rumored to be in the works.

Drinking through a stir stick vs Group C using a 4" hose.








L.P.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by carbsmith

NASCAR engines used to push well over 850hp for north of 1000km at pretty extreme duty cycles with severe technology restrictions.

Bit O difference in how the engines are worked (loaded) though. It's rather apples and oranges.






L.P.

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by TF110

Group C engines were making around 800-900hp 30 years ago. Either a big displacement or a big turbo are in order. Maybe Toyota can move away from the 2.4L V6 and go with 4L+ TT V8 that was rumored to be in the works.

even 1000hp sometimes actually, but that's just half of the truth. Group C cars had that power for just 3 or 4 laps in qualifying then the engine was gone; during the race engines were tuned down and for 50 starting cars, about 20-25 were able to see the checked flag.
Not to mention also that those were true endurance races, with laptimes dropping over 1-2 minutes slower during the night and in the last hours due engine power loss; nowadays is just a 24 hours sprint race long.


Comparable powers but totally incomparable race contest.


To me a 850hp petrol engine, resistant enough to endure 24 hours (actually it must endure over 30 hours considering FP and Q le mans sessions) could be designed and made just by these manufacturers:
mercedes, ferrari, toyota, porsche and (maybe) honda.





Of course would be needed years of R&D and hundred of millions of investments to make an engine more powerful than a current f1 ICE doubling lifespan too. If a single 800hp/about4000km f1 ICE may cost about 10 mlns, just think about how could cost this

is the perfect edge to make manufacturers run away and kill rebellion and smp will to live.



That's why IMHO an endurance 850hp motor is out of reality in present and next future.

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by carbsmith

NASCAR engines used to push well over 850hp for north of 1000km at pretty extreme duty cycles with severe technology restrictions.

the answer is in the question....
issue is not power output but the "endurance" part of the matter.



I could buy a small turbocharged car, tuning the turbo boost to >5bar and I'll get easily a >700hp car...... for about 2 minutes

[TF110]

Well if 800hp was possible 30 years ago, it's certainly possible now. It might need to be a less-stressed type of engine. It might need to be a big V8 or V10 or V12, but who of us wouldn't want that!? That's what the Cosworth V12 is in the Valkyrie. It's big, but still screams to 11,000+ rpm and makes huge power.

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by TF110

Well if 800hp was possible 30 years ago, it's certainly possible now. It might need to be a less-stressed type of engine. It might need to be a big V8 or V10 or V12, but who of us wouldn't want that!? That's what the Cosworth V12 is in the Valkyrie. It's big, but still screams to 11,000+ rpm and makes huge power.

it's not about mere power.... it's about economic sustainability and durability.


Can't get the point of valkyrie engine honestly also laferrari 6.2L V12 can revup at about 10000rpm.... can it be used for endurance racing? don't think so....





PS Forget about V10, is the most complicated layout to work on.