|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
28 Jun 2016, 21:16 (Ref:3655675) | #4676 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,560
|
Short video on the ZF clutch used in the TS050 and look at some of the TMG facilities.
|
|
|
29 Jun 2016, 13:47 (Ref:3655760) | #4677 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,406
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
29 Jun 2016, 17:15 (Ref:3655797) | #4678 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
Blaming a driver for the failure of a $5 dollar part on a probably $2 million dollar (if not more?) race car was IMO stretching things and reaching for straws. But there's no denying that Toyota screwed up with the TS040 and not being more aggressive with developing it from the TS030 as far as distance between the concepts. IMO, Toyota were a bit lucky in 2014 in that they were in the right place at the right time with a car that was fast and mostly reliable. Audi messed up big time on getting caught out on the EOT stuff, and the Porsche was too new and too fragile until the end of the season in '14.
TMG certainly didn't help themselves too much with what was ultimately a fairly conservative updating of the car last year. Though in fairness, almost any other season, TMG's upgrades would've kept them in the game beyond Silverstone. But Audi and Porsche introduced so many rapid developments (even Audi, who've been known to sort of slack off on in-season developments of their cars post LM, certainly after the next couple of sprint races to focus on next season's car and developments, continually worked on the 2015 R18 almost until season's end last year) that Toyota got left behind after Silverstone and started focusing much earlier on the TS050 than they initially planned. And yes, Toyota had success with forced induction in the JSPC, IMSA GTP and with the GT-One. But I'm not about to blame TMG for something that they had little direct control over. The blame there lies with the corporate bean counters in Japan for stiffing TMG by one, not giving their program the funding and support it deserved, and two, sticking them with, for what/all I know, was an upgraded Formula Nippon engine that was similar to, and an enhanced development of, the engine that Toyota were already renting out to Rebellion. |
||
|
29 Jun 2016, 23:27 (Ref:3655838) | #4679 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,560
|
Bs. The '14 TS040 was the best car of the field by a long shot. It wasn't luck. I remember quite clearly the talk about the TS030 in late 2013 matching Audi because they gave up development then to concentrate on 2014's R18. And that car was going to be the best of the field. They won LM but the car was no match for the TS040. So how did it take Toyota "3 years" to get a more powerful engine? They took 1 year, actually less. They realized the engine and hybrid had to be upgraded only two races in during last year's season. They responded by bring out this year's car which again showed top pace at LM. Now I wonder what the rest of the season will look like. And 2017 should be just as good.
|
|
|
29 Jun 2016, 23:37 (Ref:3655840) | #4680 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
If the '14 car was so good, why were Porsche faster the last couple of races of the season? And why were they so off the pace aside from one last in '15?
Face it, Toyota were in the right place at the right time in '14 as much as anything. And that's the thing with technology; by the time it enters use, it's already on the verge of being obsolescent because of what someone else is developing, or what the entrant themselves are developing. |
||
|
30 Jun 2016, 00:15 (Ref:3655848) | #4681 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 612
|
Quote:
Bahrain: The #8 was walking away from the rest of the field until an alternator problem curtailed their dominance. The #7 inherited the lead and won with a decent margin, despite Sarrazin putting in an embarrassing performance (roughly a second a lap slower than Conway, nevermind Buemi or Davidson). Interlagos: The altitude favoured the turbo Porsche over the atmospheric Toyota, yet the #8 was still right there. The difference was Buemi and Davidson both spinning and the winning Porsche gaining time through pitting during the FCY. |
||
|
30 Jun 2016, 05:41 (Ref:3655881) | #4682 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,560
|
Quote:
|
||
|
30 Jun 2016, 10:16 (Ref:3655906) | #4683 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,884
|
Quote:
The reason why people say you have an axe to grind is how you've linked it with Honda's struggles in F1, which are of an entirely different nature. The only link is that both companies are Japanese. And you've STILL not responded to your Nakajima comment. How on earth was Toyota's retirement his fault? Other than the fact he was in the car at the time and happens to be Japanese. The only possible explanation I can think of for saying that his "reputation proceeded him" from F1 was that you were getting confused with Kobayashi in the other car, who DID make a mistake. All your comments about the powertrain are fine, and you've been proved right there, so well done. It's when you start throwing Honda and Japanese drivers into the mix as well that people start to throw accusations at you, and you've not explained those comments very well. |
|||
|
30 Jun 2016, 12:45 (Ref:3655924) | #4684 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,642
|
Quote:
The # 14 Porsche did 137 Laps (out of the 249 for the entire race) under or equal to 1:20.0 with an average time of 1:18.8. The fastest Toyota #8 did 136 laps under or equal to 1:20.0 with an average time of 1:19.3. Yes, they were faster that the Porsche #20, but not faster than the #14. |
|||
|
30 Jun 2016, 15:24 (Ref:3655954) | #4685 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,470
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
“We’re trying to close the doors without embarrassing ourselves, the France family and embarrassing (the) Grand American Series,” he said in the deposition. “There is no money. There is no purse. There’s nothing.” |
30 Jun 2016, 15:39 (Ref:3655960) | #4686 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,406
|
Quote:
The other contributing factor has been well highlighted by MoMedic......testing at Sebring rattles the hell out of the car.......Toyota didnt test there, probably due to budget limitations......the Toyota failure at LeMans is a combination of multiple factors ranging from drivers, poor design and budgetary limitations, and I'm sorry to say - cultural differences. Regarding Hondas F1 plight, Honda have publicly said they dont like hiring external consultants, jesus if we had that attitude in my line of work we would be dead in the water.......I'm sure this went down like a turd in a punch-bowl at McLaren.......just look what Renault and Ferrari have done by poaching some top Mercedes engine people......all of a sudden they are back up the front......McLaren can hardly break into the top 10 or finish a race.......Honda and their approach are just an embarrassment, I wouldnt be surprised if Alonso walks. |
|||
|
30 Jun 2016, 15:56 (Ref:3655963) | #4687 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
Quote:
And other than Dec. last year, Audi haven't tested at Sebring. They did have a test planned in late Jan/early Feb but it got cancelled due to car updates. IMO, that does also maybe explain some of the Audi issues this season. |
|||
|
30 Jun 2016, 16:04 (Ref:3655964) | #4688 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
Also, TMG have plenty of people from other organizations (or at least worked for other organizations) who work for them. Vasselon for example worked for Michelin in F1 before TMG hired him. He also had a stint at Renault in F1 in the 1980s.
Toyota's big problem in F1 was corporate meddling and basically keeping TMG from doing their job. Their WEC program has less corporate meddling, but that also seems to mean less funding. Though it was corporate meddling from the home office in Japan (though funding issues) that left TMG stuck with the NA V8. It was fine in the TS030 when the engine rules were based on displacement limits and air restrictor BOP, but once we went to unlimited displacement and fuel flow being the main BOP instrument, that made the V8 obsolete basically within a season. Also, I don't know why the angst against Nakajima, other than the fact that when he didn't put up undistinguished drives in F1 he usually crashed. He's been no more a liability in the WEC than Kamui has been, who people have gushed over (rightfully so IMO) and is known for his take no prisoners overtaking style. |
||
|
30 Jun 2016, 16:16 (Ref:3655966) | #4689 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,270
|
Quote:
EDIT: Damn me for not reading two posts above. As for the reasons you gave about Nakajima there, sorry, still not good enough and I don't see it applying any longer. And a question: had that connector popped with Davidson or Buemi or Conway in the other car driving, would you have cast the same aspersions on them? |
|||
__________________
When in doubt? C4. |
30 Jun 2016, 16:32 (Ref:3655969) | #4690 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,470
|
Quote:
Toyota needs to go and break their car. I understand budgets are tough, but, if you want to win, you have to break your car. |
|||
__________________
“We’re trying to close the doors without embarrassing ourselves, the France family and embarrassing (the) Grand American Series,” he said in the deposition. “There is no money. There is no purse. There’s nothing.” |
30 Jun 2016, 17:15 (Ref:3655979) | #4691 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,270
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
When in doubt? C4. |
30 Jun 2016, 18:33 (Ref:3655993) | #4692 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,470
|
While this may be true, if you want to win at Le Mans, you need to find all of your faults. The only way to do it, is to break the car. That's not going to happen at Ricard, or Monza, or anywhere in Europe.
|
||
__________________
“We’re trying to close the doors without embarrassing ourselves, the France family and embarrassing (the) Grand American Series,” he said in the deposition. “There is no money. There is no purse. There’s nothing.” |
1 Jul 2016, 07:19 (Ref:3656073) | #4693 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,560
|
TMG has shakers and all, so there's no need for a bumpy Sebring test. It could have been a bad installation. The best get it wrong at times. Look at Mercedes' F1 team and the silly mistakes that cause engine failures. Didn't affect the #6 car. They lost the race when they had contact with a GTE-AM Aston in the night.
|
|
|
1 Jul 2016, 11:24 (Ref:3656103) | #4694 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,600
|
||
|
1 Jul 2016, 13:52 (Ref:3656124) | #4695 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,308
|
Quote:
Quote:
Honda uses F1 to improve its internal R&D and train its engineers, the other F1 manufacturers use F1 to advertise. Mercedes engines aren't built by anything identifiable as Mercedes, they're built by a company Mercedes bought. Red Bull's engines are put together by Mechachrome. Ferrari may hire F1 people directly but Ferrari has a very different road car division from a major manufacturer. Of course that's a faulty premise anyways, as McLaren Honda is about as competitive as the McLaren side of things is anyways. I'm sure Honda was really impressed with that bizarre engine denigrating Monaco hype campaign that led to both cars qualifying in exactly the same positions as in Barcelona and Montreal. (which also happen to be about the same positions they qualified last time they had a Mercedes engine either) |
|||
|
1 Jul 2016, 13:52 (Ref:3656125) | #4696 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,470
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
“We’re trying to close the doors without embarrassing ourselves, the France family and embarrassing (the) Grand American Series,” he said in the deposition. “There is no money. There is no purse. There’s nothing.” |
2 Jul 2016, 05:26 (Ref:3656204) | #4697 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,560
|
True, so I wonder if they have an ability to test engine stresses. I'd bet on it and them using it or trying to simulate it since the issues at Spa. The specific LM issue I don't even know the cause of. Not so much the explanation, but what could cause it.
|
|
|
2 Jul 2016, 15:45 (Ref:3656271) | #4698 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,148
|
Quote:
In order to model eau-rouge on an shaker rig, it would have to be unfeasibly large. The point being that to sustain 2-3g (or whatever the actual value is in Eau-Rouge) in whatever direction the loading is during Eau rouge, for the length of time spent in Eau-rouge, you have a resultingly large path length of any hydraulic pistons that need to retract or extend to generate the acceleration over the approriate amount of time. |
||
|
3 Jul 2016, 06:48 (Ref:3656416) | #4699 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,560
|
I wasn't insinuating a shaker rig would be used to test the engine stresses experienced at Spa, I made that comment on the fact they don't test at Sebring to break their car. If they can't simulate it somehow, then best bet would be to test at Spa again like they did after the race this year.
|
|
|
9 Jul 2016, 03:25 (Ref:3657734) | #4700 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,600
|
Motor Fan Illustrated is out. Preview is here.
http://www.as-books.jp/books/preview.php?no=4217 |
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Audi LMP1 Discussion | gwyllion | ACO Regulated Series | 11685 | 16 Feb 2017 10:42 |
Nissan LMP1 Discussion | Gingers4Justice | Sportscar & GT Racing | 5568 | 17 Feb 2016 23:22 |
Strakka LMP1 discussion | Pontlieue | Sportscar & GT Racing | 56 | 12 Jul 2015 19:12 |
The never ending Toyota return to Le Mans (LMP1) Saga | The Badger | ACO Regulated Series | 6844 | 8 Jan 2014 02:19 |
How about a LMP1 Pro & LMP1 Privateer class | Holt | Sportscar & GT Racing | 35 | 6 Jun 2012 13:44 |