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

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by TF110

F1 is an example to use because the gaps are related to budget regardless of the year or regulations.

Gaps are also a function of how long a set of regulations have been around. If there are no major changes then gaps will narrow.
First to last is a poor measurement as it measures extremes. A measure of the distribution would be better.

Also comparing to the '80s would be fun the good old days when often F1 and Sportscar racing was not competetive.

[Artur]

Originally Posted by TF110

Why do you assume it's Toyota that are crying? From the story it sounded like this was a decision agreed on by all the manufacturers. If you don't reign in costs, you won't just lose Toyota. Remember the VW scandal? That just cut Porsche's and Audi's 3rd car. Were lucky they're still even entered. And who else will want to spend f1-level money on the WEC? Why not go to f1? Peugeot just laid it out for their return that costs cant be out of control. BMW have the same concern. Where's Mazda's or Subaru's interest gone to?

I'm assuming it's Toyota due to their usual endorsing comments with such "cost-saving" talks as well as the suggestion of things such as tokens.... If Toyota don't wanna throw more money into their car, that's fine. Just don't take away the others freedom to do so.

VAG uses their R&D money to finance a part of the WEC program, so it's not just for the marketing. In F1, you have no tech transfer, it's pure marketing.

Even if VAG spended almost the same as the top F1 teams, which I'm not sure, this money is useful to their road cars.

Dr Wolfgang Ullrich made it more clear than ever before that Audi Sport is not likely to enter Formula One in the foreseeable future:
“Every year we are asked why Audi Sport isn’t in Formula 1, I’m tired of it. We have made the decision to stay in LMP1 in the FIA WEC and it was obviously the right one. This is pure bred racing with direct relevance to the technology transfer that can help development and sales of Audi’s road car range.”
http://www.dailysportscar.com/2015/1...the-sword.html

As far as I understood, TMG is not getting a substantial(although they'll have an improved aero) raise in budget, right? It's Toyota that's putting more effort into R&D and developing a new ICE and ERS, battery based, system, isn't it? If that's the case, then Toyota is doing the right thing and putting money into good use unlike the expenditure in F1.

An off-topic comment regarding F1, I'm surprised with Renault's decision. Imho, another waste of money for them.

[Ephaeton]

Originally Posted by Artur

Even if VAG spended almost the same as the top F1 teams, which I'm not sure, this money is useful to their road cars.

VW is believed to spend an annual 450M Euro on their motorsport programmes (source, german -- I find this figure interesting, as obviously? it pertains to V.A.G as a whole (i.e., VW, Audi, Porsche, ...) with the mentioned programmes: Le Mans, WEC, Rallye, DTM).

That's about a front-running F1 budget

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by Ephaeton

VW is believed to spend an annual 450M Euro on their motorsport programmes (source, german).

Which is about the ballpark what Mercedes is supposed to be spending in F1.

Is that just VW or the whole group of companies i.e. VW, Audi, Skoda, Porsche etc.?

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

Is that just VW or the whole group of companies i.e. VW, Audi, Skoda, Porsche etc.?

It must be everyone as VW does not do WEC and Le Mans, whilst Porsche and Audi don't do Rally and only Audi does DTM.

[Spyderman]

My guess is the split would look something like this:
Porsche = 150M
Audi = 225M
VW = 75M

[Artur]

Originally Posted by Ephaeton

VW is believed to spend an annual 450M Euro on their motorsport programmes (source, german -- I find this figure interesting, as obviously? it pertains to V.A.G as a whole (i.e., VW, Audi, Porsche, ...) with the mentioned programmes: Le Mans, WEC, Rallye, DTM).

That's about a front-running F1 budget

Thanks for the info(even if speculated as we'll never have official values on such things)

So, wasn't Audi's and Porsche's LMP1 budget said to be over $200m each?

I always thought these figures(I guess from Marshal Pruett) were super exaggerated.

Nur die Zahl der eingesetzten Autos beim berühmten 24-Stunden-Rennen von Le Mans wird von sechs auf vier reduziert.

Demnach werden statt jeweils drei Audis und drei Porsche nur je zwei eingesetzt.
Experten stufen den Umfang der Einsparung als vergleichsweise gering ein, weil die Konzerntöchter ohnehin viele Chassis und Entwicklungsträger für das Rennen produzierten.

Only the number of cars used in the famous 24-hour race at Le Mans will be reduced from six to four. Thus, instead of three Audis and three Porsche only be used per two. Experts classify the extent of savings as relatively low, because the subsidiaries(Audi & Porsche) already produced many chassis and development support for the race

3 cars at LM was always one of the biggest reasons people used to say VAG cars had much bigger budget than Toyota.

They have 3 cars on WRC running several rounds, with lot's of personel per car, development and wages for star drivers like Ogier, Latvala. I can't see DTM being cheap either.

I think there is no way that DTM and WRC spends, together, $90m(dollars) whilst Porsche and Audi spends the remaining $400m(450m euro=490m dollars)

If I had to guess, I would imagine no more(of course it's a baseless guess) than 65% of that to the WEC program, which would mean $160m(dollars) for each team

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by tomerswayler

Well, if you define the fuel flow as a function of engine rpm, as F1 does with flow_max = 0.009*n + 5.5 below 10500rpm, you restrict the torque.

As power = torque*2Pi*n/60 and power = flow*caloric value*efficiency

(0.009n+5.5)*caloric value*efficiency = torque*2Pi*n/60

torque=efficiency*caloric value/(2Pi/60) * (0.009+5.5/n)

There is a clear upper limit of torque, as n cannot be lower than n_idle. If the flow would be set to a*n, the torque would be constant at efficiency*caloric value/(2Pi/60) * a.

That is why F1 is boring!... and is a dangerous idea, from there to all the engines the same is a much smaller step, no room for innovation. Besides the electric motors are another species and they tend to have more torque than the engine for the interval of time they function, and the higher the release energy allowed the greater the delta. And then there are tires, aeros, gearboxes/transmissions, suspension etc...

Motorsport is suffering from a restriction plague and uber complications(its very easy to get lost on always changing regulations)... centered on century old techs(engines)... if we must slow the cars down, just augment the weight accordingly, nothing more fair and simpler for all(it works).

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Artur

I'm assuming it's Toyota due to their usual endorsing comments with such "cost-saving" talks as well as the suggestion of things such as tokens.... If Toyota don't wanna throw more money into their car, that's fine. Just don't take away the others freedom to do so.

VAG uses their R&D money to finance a part of the WEC program, so it's not just for the marketing. In F1, you have no tech transfer, it's pure marketing.

Even if VAG spended almost the same as the top F1 teams, which I'm not sure, this money is useful to their road cars.



As far as I understood, TMG is not getting a substantial(although they'll have an improved aero) raise in budget, right? It's Toyota that's putting more effort into R&D and developing a new ICE and ERS, battery based, system, isn't it? If that's the case, then Toyota is doing the right thing and putting money into good use unlike the expenditure in F1.

An off-topic comment regarding F1, I'm surprised with Renault's decision. Imho, another waste of money for them.

Audi is not the only team with cross promotion from wec to road cars. What's silly is there are no diesel hybrids in Audi's lineup. They dont need the hybrid on top of a diesel. But with the scandal on vw's diesel as a whole, I think they'll move away from it in the near future. Toyota has always done the hybrid powertrain in Japan. The battery system and turbo engine has been in the works for two years. Seems they were waiting on the right time to introduce it, which is now. On the cost savings talk, Audi don't want windtunnel restrictions. That's all the article said. Nothing about disagreeing with two bodykits. Proposing things to cut costs is not the same as being cheap. That's what it seems like you're insinuating.

[Deleted]

Well it's not like Audi can choose whether or not to have hybrid in their diesel LMP1 or not. FIA-ACO is forcing it.

Though I suppose if they we're to rent R18 to privateer team (which obviously won't happen) they could run a hybridless diesel Audi.

Audi has already done "we were first" history with both diesel and hybrid wins at Le Mans, so technically they need neither really though. But yes, hybrid has now more value for them than diesel, might as well go petrol already

[ederss7]

I remember Ferrari president saying that the money they can't spend on testing on track is spent on simulators... You limit something, then they find another area to develop and spend money. If there's a solution for costs, I believe everybody would already be using it?

[Adam43]

The aim of cost cutting measures aren't to limit spending, as you rightly say that is not possible by these types of rule. They try to reduce the effectiveness of spending.

[cokata]

Originally Posted by Adam43

The aim of cost cutting measures aren't to limit spending, as you rightly say that is not possible by these types of rule. They try to reduce the effectiveness of spending.

Yeah that is the only positive coming from the rules, because in the end everyone will spend as much money as they want. For example if someone fails massively like Toyota did this they won't finish 3 laps behind, instead "just" 1 lap. Not that would make a massive difference, but it would be slightly less embarrassing.

My thinking is that the rules should be made so that the automakers get the maximum R&D relevant to production cars possible from the development of the P1 cars. They all spend massive amounts on R&D for their road cars if a portion of that can get funneled for a racing car it would be a win-win for everyone.

[TF110]

Wec shouldn't be F1-lite in terms of budget. No reason to me is logical for a manufacturer to enter if you need $150million + each season just to be in the same area as the lead lmp1's. Thats probably the biggest thing in the ACO's mind concerning future entries.

[Deleted]

I wonder what were Audi's and Pug's budgets for 2009 when both did only 3-4 races.

And whether or not Pug had been inclined to stay had there not been any championship entering pressure in 2012, but rather just some big cherry picking events like in 09. Maybe it'd been easier to justify to the board. You know the spending. And the flexibility.

Did Pug made actual money for leasing chassis to Pesca and Oreca? What about Audi selling the old ex R10s to Kolles?

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by TF110

Audi is not the only team with cross promotion from wec to road cars. What's silly is there are no diesel hybrids in Audi's lineup. They dont need the hybrid on top of a diesel. But with the scandal on vw's diesel as a whole, I think they'll move away from it in the near future. Toyota has always done the hybrid powertrain in Japan. The battery system and turbo engine has been in the works for two years. Seems they were waiting on the right time to introduce it, which is now. On the cost savings talk, Audi don't want windtunnel restrictions. That's all the article said. Nothing about disagreeing with two bodykits. Proposing things to cut costs is not the same as being cheap. That's what it seems like you're insinuating.

I think the contrary... if not VAG some else will... launch pretty large lineups of diesel hybrids.

The so called scandal which is no scandal, was instigated precisely to prevent that trend... and i just wonder, just wonder, how many of the supposed affected cars if were put a probe into the tail pipe (measure the REALthing not some stinking software ruse) would pass their respective national regulations... A WHOLE LOT i think (not every country is as draconian as the *petrodollar* country concerning the superior diesel techs)

And there is a smear/slander associated with the techs... the hardware... presented as if no other choice or as pervasive the pollution associated with it... when petrol engines have even more when measured pollution concentration per m³ of air, because they function almost double the RPM generally speaking (generally more air passes trough a petrol engine per unit of time), truth that current probe tests try to avoid by conducting tests mostly at idle... petrol engines are spewing much more pollution most of the time than diesels on normal run conditions(not tests), even if RPM equal, they could have less NOx (which they have most if not all of the time) but they have more CO and much more unburned hydrocarbons all the time...
[ don't know which is worst, one acidic rains problems because highly reactive the others highly canceringenous an toxic and much more lasting in the atmosphere) ( i think the particulate matter is settled now with filters... and some petrols could use it to... which is a very low tech for the problem, combustion chamber coatings and injection of tiny quantities of hydrogen from on demand water electrolyses apparatus would be the high tech with incredibly better results)]

But what is stupidly about the diesel tech is the origin of the fuel itself. I suppose ( almost ceirtain) that Audi in WEC is using the *ultra* low sulfer brand of Shell (probably even more clean for other contaminants) derived from petrol crude, and if they where using normal blend 2 probably smoke would be still be present in ceirtain conditions and power would be a little lower... but if otherwise they were using a blend with at least 50% synthetic ( as they used in the last couple of years of the R10, diesel fuel just imagine almost as transparent as pure gasoline) power would be greater and would be even cleaner...

Sure Shell could make a E50 or a E60, not with biodiesel(which could never replace fossil origin in any extent) but with synthetic routes, of which Audi has good patents on it and demonstrated it... strategy this that has a tremendous impact in the geostrategic and geopolitical petrodollar uber dominion, dominion of which Germany (and many many other countries) could very well do without, embracing the synthetic alternative sources, without being stuck because they have no natural oil sources or dollars to buy it (which apart from Russia, Iran and Venezuela, i think no other countries accepts other currencies-> the why the problems with them !) ... but it wont please the Empire for sure!..

So WEC could very well promote a CLEAN DIESEL paradigm, which i think would have to be a diesel fuel for usage close to 80% synthetic and bio routes(-> this always much less)... which problem is exactly in the fuel itself not the techs or hardware... but they wont dare for now, even if there is no Darth Vader visible -> and even if many inside want it and see it as a very valid campaign...

[cokata]

Yeah, like the current hybrid cars aren't expensive or heavy enough already. A diesel engine is exactly what they need.

[chernaudi]

There's the Audi Q7 e-tron quattro, but that's a full size SUV. VAG overall, outside of Porsche, were never big on hybrids until recently, and that's more to increase market share especially for Audi since Mercedes-Benz and BMW are also on the hybrid bandwagon as well.

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Well it's not like Audi can choose whether or not to have hybrid in their diesel LMP1 or not. FIA-ACO is forcing it.

Though I suppose if they we're to rent R18 to privateer team (which obviously won't happen) they could run a hybridless diesel Audi.

Audi has already done "we were first" history with both diesel and hybrid wins at Le Mans, so technically they need neither really though. But yes, hybrid has now more value for them than diesel, might as well go petrol already

I think results have prove it that a hybrid system is very advantageous from the POV of performance, specially the higher classes(6 and 8MJ)... the mantra of *saving fuel* didn't last even the 1th year of introduction, even then was more than clear teams or using the hybrid systems most above all to enhance performances(Toyota notoriously).

So even if FIA/ACO wouldn't enforce anything i think any serious contender would adopt a good hybrid system ... is more than clear, not even the big V12 diesels would be a match for the likes of Porsche electric motor(and not only Porsche), and the speech is also clear, they have been talking pass the 1000hp figure in this last couple of years... figure never talked (neither reached) when upon the best years of the big V12 diesels.

So a hybridless Diesel doesn’t make much sense... unless is to win a championship class, but since there isn't any Hybridless LMP1 championship ( its all LMP1) it doesn't make sense at all.

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by cokata

Yeah, like the current hybrid cars aren't expensive or heavy enough already. A diesel engine is exactly what they need.

The least of concerns is weight (believe much you like in urban myths, long long past the time when to have 100hp you had to have a truck diesel engine... now a 1200cc can do it)...

The problem is *costs*, and diesels are selling like hot cakes in Europe and picking up in the rest of the world( perhaps not USA)... fuel consumption and robustness to last without many garage visits are what ppl are looking for. Petrol hybrids are not yet perceived as a competitor for this (probably never will, since the very low fuel consumption figures are a legalized scam, easily uncovered by anyone that does frequently more than ~100Km trips).

So the pressure to introduce hybrid diesels is low, and the less the technical problems and costs associated with it the merrier... but some have them and good, as is the case of Volvo Diesel Hybrids(PHEV)(not saying very good exactly because of problems that can creep in with the battery pack control)

[one five five]

Originally Posted by Chiana

And whether or not Pug had been inclined to stay had there not been any championship entering pressure in 2012, but rather just some big cherry picking events like in 09. Maybe it'd been easier to justify to the board. You know the spending. And the flexibility.

Pug were the one's pushing hardest for the WEC to be created!

[chernaudi]

Actually, Audi were if you count the fact that they wanted a World Championship for sportscar racing since at least Le Mans in 2000.

Peugeot may've pushed for it, but that was until the bean counters sited how financially unstable the company was back then.

[cokata]

There are very good reasons why hybrids are almost exclusively made with petrol engines. I'm not going into detail, but many of the petrol disadvantages are mitigated with a hybrid system.

[hcl123]

Hybrid as WEC proves, is kind of orthogonal to petrol or diesel... sure, each will have different release strategies based on the torque/power envelops that motor controls now provide very easily(and different electric motor characteristics).

Search Volvo (there are more, not to talk about passenger buses) and you see hybrid is not exclusive of petrol techs. Market conditions, low pressure for it, is to blame for not wide spread(and some agendas).

Yet a possible advantage of petrol in this respect would be a capacity to 'harvest' a little more energy than diesels... simply because they waste more (but hardly that compelling)...

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by hcl123

So a hybridless Diesel doesn’t make much sense... unless is to win a championship class, but since there isn't any Hybridless LMP1 championship ( its all LMP1) it doesn't make sense at all.

Technically there is... it's just masqueraded under the P1 Privateer Trophy Thing