|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
25 Jul 2017, 06:34 (Ref:3754166) | #5026 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,067
|
If we're going to use safety as the get out, and say traffic is an issue, then we can use the same argument for doing away with multi-class racing.
I do agree that I'm not a huge fan of the 1km on electric power rule. But I'm not going to say it's bad based on safety (because it really isn't), I just don't like it. It is road relevant though, which is what the ACO Are aiming for. I don't like the rule, because as much as I love the LMP1-H cars, I also love noise and think it's part of the show. But it isn't unsafe. The same argument was made with LMP1-H regen braking, and LMP2 speeding up etc. Yet we're seeing less major traffic accidents than we used to. I don't see this causing more. It's also why the ACO has extensive simulator work now. |
|
|
25 Jul 2017, 09:02 (Ref:3754192) | #5027 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,600
|
Chunichi shimbun (local newspaper of Nagoya, HQ of Toyota) reports that Toyota to sell new gen all-solid-state battery EV in Japan in 2022.
It takes only few minutes to charge full. http://www.chunichi.co.jp/s/article/...590085647.html |
|
|
25 Jul 2017, 11:51 (Ref:3754223) | #5028 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
I don't see the 1km EV mode rule as a safety issue. If the cars are intended to be at least as fast as LMP2s, then they'd, by proxy, would be at least as fast as LMP900s would probably be on newer tires.
We have to remember that the ACO almost crapped a brick when the Toyota GT-One did under 3:30 at LM in qualifying, as did the Audi R8 a couple of years later. And we know that the R8, just on modern tires alone, probably would be doing well under 3:25s at LM, as could the GT-One. We do have to remember that the ACO have changed rules often out of the sake of keeping cars at or below a laptime at LM (used to be 3:30, now approx 3:20), and most of the changes that have been made by the cars by the teams is to get around the ACO's attempts to slow the cars. Which leaves us with the fact that modern cars, in terms of laptime, aren't really much faster than an old Audi R8 or R10 put on modern tires with a factory driver in them. Which that says a lot just for advances in tire technology. But no, I don't like the 1km EV rule out of safety, I think it's a gimmick. Just as to a large degree right now Formula E is a gimmick. If the ACO want teams to save fuel on EV mode, why not make the cars do the whole length of pit road on EV mode, something that Toyota don't even do now (when leaving the pits, once it hits pit road speed, the engine cranks over and idles on all the Toyota LMP1s since 2012). |
||
|
25 Jul 2017, 12:50 (Ref:3754234) | #5029 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,067
|
Quote:
|
||
|
25 Jul 2017, 13:20 (Ref:3754247) | #5030 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
As I said, even Toyota don't really do it, because the engine refires basically as soon as the car comes out of the pit box. I don't consider that true EV mode. Even when idling, you're still burning fuel.
I see a lot of this EV stuff as a gimmick to try and fill in the time until someone makes a fully EV car, which I fear for LM is probably years away. FE are having issues with cars lasting a full race to the point where they have car swaps, and performance is restricted partly to increase the endurance of the cars. Granted it's not as contrived a gimmick as things like BOP/EOT or stuff like pay off races and things like that in other series, but it's still IMO a gimmick that probably won't add anything interesting. We already have plug in hybrids on the road that can travel at worthwhile speeds for worthwhile distances on the road. That was tech developed without the help of racing and will naturally get better on its own. |
||
|
25 Jul 2017, 13:27 (Ref:3754249) | #5031 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,067
|
No matter how they currently run the pit lane, that suggestion doesn't save any significant amount of fuel. The 1km rule will. And that's what the ACO is going for.
You have to define the word gimmick. A gimmick is fan boost and drs and hash tag racing. This is actually road relevant as this is how plugin hybrids operate. It isn't being done to artificially improve the show. Its being done to link it to road cars. Whether or not the tech was here first doesn't actually matter. We don't have to like the rule, but it is certainly relevant to Road vehicles and does provide a bigger saving over just pit lane electric mode. |
|
|
25 Jul 2017, 18:19 (Ref:3754333) | #5032 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 43,950
|
Toyota might not, but they and Porsche could easily run the length of the pit lane at pit lane speeds on EV if they wanted to. That is done, introducing that as a rule is nothing and pointless.
As an aside if they have to do something that is more of a challenge like 1km is it from pit out? Does that mean you want the pit boxes near pit out with less running before? Gimmick? Or harking back to the original days of Le Mans? This kind of rule was commonplace then. |
||
__________________
Brum brum |
25 Jul 2017, 18:29 (Ref:3754336) | #5033 | |
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 249
|
I really don't see much to complain about. People complaining about "safety" are just trying to find a scapegoat instead of just saying "I don't like it because that's what my gut says." Perfectly valid reason I would say but somehow people are reluctant to say what they really mean
|
|
|
25 Jul 2017, 18:39 (Ref:3754341) | #5034 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 12,017
|
Quote:
Try with actual complaints that have a basis in a non-agenda driven reality. |
||
|
25 Jul 2017, 18:44 (Ref:3754344) | #5035 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,067
|
Quote:
I personally don't like the 1km rule. It just doesn't seem fun to me. But it is most certainly not a safety issue, and it is not a gimmick - it's completely road relevant. Arguably it's the most relevant the powertrain of any racing car has been for quite a while. But that doesn't mean I have to like it, and I'm not going to try and justify that. And yeah Formula E has massive short comings, but that's new technology and it'll get there. It's road relevant. And guess what? I still don't like it. Even if they got rid of fan boost and car swaps, I just don't find it fun. I also don't find F1 fun anymore - but I won't sit and say it should be closed wheel for safety reasons just to justify the fact I don't like it. It's fine to not like things. It's also fine to like things for no real reason. |
||
|
25 Jul 2017, 18:45 (Ref:3754345) | #5036 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 12,017
|
Quote:
But then I think the most amazing thing I've ever seen on a track was the Audis taking turn 1 at Road Atlanta back on the throttle, faster than anyone had before, and only hearing the tires straining to keep the car on the black stuff. Would love to see what Toyota or Porsche could do now. |
||
|
25 Jul 2017, 19:01 (Ref:3754353) | #5037 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 249
|
Quote:
|
||
|
25 Jul 2017, 19:58 (Ref:3754372) | #5038 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
I don't like the fuel flow in LMP1 and F1. If someone wants to save fuel for strategic purposes, let them. But don't force it as a policy.
I don't like the narrower cars. F1 went back to the 2000mm wide cars this year, and the cars look and perform better than they have in quite a while. I appreciate when teams want to think outside the box or do or promote something that they think is a road relevant solution, or even just something to gain a competitive advantage if it's a new or obscure principal. I dare someone to get the balls to say "we can have a car that runs primarily on EV power that's as fast as a car that runs on gasoline or diesel, but we only need an internal combustion engine for generating electricity to keep the batteries charged". And that such engine can run so cleanly and is so small that any emissions it puts out is inconsequential. I want to see stuff like the Audi e-gas and e-diesel and other similar programs that make renewable low emissions fuel out of algae, pond scum, garbage and crap. Make stuff that's not useful, usable. I even still have a book copyrighted in 1972 about things like steam engines, Sterling engines, EVs, turbine engines and how ICEs were being advanced back then to clean up emissions, boost fuel mileage and boost performance. It's 2017 and a lot of that stuff you'd have thought would've become viable by now. What I don't like is when a racing series takes it upon themselves to push an agenda for self-servng reasons. The ACO pushed diesel to keep Audi Sport but mostly get Peugeot in. They pushed hybrids to keep Audi and Peugeot interested, and get Toyota and Porsche. They pushed for fuel flow because it was Todt's baby. There's enough of that stuff going around in politics and business. If the ACO want to grow the WEC and LMP1, that's fine. They can knock themselves out to their heart's content there. However, I feel that they can't do it and push their agenda, because only so many people will bite each time. We're in an era where purse strings are getting tighter, car makers want more return on their investments, and racing is becoming less and less of a proving ground. It's become more and more entertainment and marketing driven. Doing gimmicks of some kind isn't always going to bring in the fans or teams. People complain enough of contrived racing, be it NASCAR, F1, or BOP in GT classes or DPI in IMSA. But I also don't see having a revival of Can Am/Formula Libre as a cure all, either. In fact, that's probably the worst thing sanctioning bodies can do. It would rise costs and pose a genuine safety risk to competitors. I've freely stated why I don't like certain things, as well as why I like certain things. And I certainly don't like the path that certain things are on now. Just simply due to the old maxim of "if you don't learn from history, you're doomed to repeat it". Not heeding that lesson, especially willfully, is the thing that scares me the most about anything, especially in the context of racing. And anytime there's been insane spending in the top class of ACO endorsed racing with diminishing ROI, it just becomes a boom or bust cycle. I may be suffering from a case of rose-tinted glasses, but there needs to be more variety in racing, not less. No one solution should be the end all, be all. IMO, with the present rules package for LMP1, the ACO had a grand opportunity, but blew it. They don't need to repeat that same mistake with the 2020 rules. |
||
|
25 Jul 2017, 20:19 (Ref:3754376) | #5039 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7,175
|
man i thought you were quitting racing.
|
||
|
25 Jul 2017, 20:20 (Ref:3754377) | #5040 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 43,950
|
Let's keep it civil and also keep to posts that move the discussion on.
Thanks. |
||
__________________
Brum brum |
25 Jul 2017, 20:58 (Ref:3754386) | #5041 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
I wouldn't be opposed to someone trying to race a car powered by a nuclear reactor--if it can be done safely.
We have large ships and submarines powered by nuclear reactors, and the US Air Force tried to build a plane that was mostly powered by one. Unfortunately, we only need to look at Chernobyl and Fukushima to see what can happen when nuclear powers goes haywire for example. I also get why the ACO are tying for the 1km EV mode. But it doesn't mean I have to be in love with the idea, which I'm not. If we already have cars that can travel for a significant distance on EV power at highway speeds, how hard can it be for a car to do 1km on EV mode at a decent speed (at least when viewed in isolation)? 1km I believe is equal roughly from pit out at LM to the Esses. So for one lap at LM, it's not that big a distance, and it's mostly downhill. Only question for me is can current hybrids manage that, since the ACO are still sticking with a 8MJ max hybrid rating? If teams get it right, it shouldn't seem like much of a challenge. One mile on EV power is harder to manage, as 1km is about five-eights of a mile. |
||
|
25 Jul 2017, 21:39 (Ref:3754394) | #5042 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,559
|
Quote:
|
||
|
25 Jul 2017, 22:19 (Ref:3754402) | #5043 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,308
|
No different than cold tires.
|
|
|
25 Jul 2017, 23:24 (Ref:3754408) | #5044 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,559
|
||
|
26 Jul 2017, 06:29 (Ref:3754433) | #5045 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 43,950
|
If everyone could just repeat what they've said before that would be great.
To summarise. Some see it as a safety issue, others don't. |
||
__________________
Brum brum |
26 Jul 2017, 07:04 (Ref:3754436) | #5046 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,067
|
Quote:
I don't understand the train of thought. It's dangerous exiting the pits, but it'd be ok on a start finish straight? I'm also not sure why LMP2 speeds are dangerous. We have GTEs? I haven't seen a decent argument as to why it's dangerous at all. Maybe in a single class formula, but multi-class, no. |
||
|
26 Jul 2017, 15:24 (Ref:3754507) | #5047 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
And if they mean current LMP2s, we know that they're as fast in a straight line as LMP1s if given enough road. And with EV mode, acceleration should be virtually instant, basically like having a supercharger on an engine or a VTG turbo.
I don't think it's a big safety issue. LMP1 fuel flow cut vs LMP2 air restrictor is a bigger issue IMO, and we've not really seen very many problems with that so far, even at LM were if it was going to be a problem, it would've been there. |
||
|
26 Jul 2017, 15:28 (Ref:3754509) | #5048 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,920
|
maybe I'm wrong but are not used anymore restrictors on lmp2 cars
|
|
|
26 Jul 2017, 15:34 (Ref:3754513) | #5049 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
LMP2s run a spec air restrictor set up for the Gibson engine.
|
||
|
26 Jul 2017, 16:47 (Ref:3754526) | #5050 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 906
|
||
__________________
. . . but I'm not a traditionalist so maybe my opinion doesn't count! -TF110 |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[WEC] Glickenhaus Hypercar | Akrapovic | ACO Regulated Series | 1603 | 12 Apr 2024 21:24 |
[WEC] Aston Martin Hypercar Discussion | deggis | ACO Regulated Series | 175 | 23 Feb 2020 03:37 |
[WEC] SCG 007: Glickenhaus Le Mans LMP1 Hypercar | Bentley03 | ACO Regulated Series | 26 | 16 Nov 2018 02:35 |
ALMS Extends LMP Regulations | tblincoe | North American Racing | 33 | 26 Aug 2005 15:03 |
[LM24] Whats the future of LMP's at Le Mans?? | Garrett | 24 Heures du Mans | 59 | 8 Jul 2004 15:15 |