|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
2 May 2014, 15:28 (Ref:3400806) | #6301 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 4,154
|
|||
__________________
You live and learn. At any rate, you live. Douglas Adams |
2 May 2014, 19:35 (Ref:3400913) | #6302 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
Only way I can see Audi winning Spa right now is if their high downforce cars are better on their tires than Toyota and Porsche are. They need a more experienced hand in the #3 to get the best out of it.
The lap time is there, but nowadays, I'd rather be fast down the straights than in the corners, though to be fair, the LM spec Toyota last year struggled with it's tires and in traffic once the tires faded. But then again, tomorrow will be cold, and that could be a saving grace for the low downforce Toyota and Porsche packages. Audi are tons faster in sector 2, but it balances out in sectors 1&3. |
||
|
2 May 2014, 19:39 (Ref:3400916) | #6303 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2,132
|
Tomorrow is another day... but it indeed looks like it's going to be a tough day for Audi.
|
||
__________________
In order to finish first, first you have to finish |
2 May 2014, 20:59 (Ref:3400953) | #6304 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
Best hope for Audi is that they're car is more consistent over a run and easier on their tires. We saw at Spa last year that the LM spec Toyota ate up it's tires basically after one stint.
Could this be like the R15 where Audi gambled on a ALMS-type downforce package that doesn't suit European tracks? |
||
|
2 May 2014, 22:39 (Ref:3400981) | #6305 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
|
Quote:
Wait a minute !... the all front section is different, larger in front for the LM spec... don't know how much of it is only skin cover, of there is direct understructure exposure and usage ( painted). In the second case, they are clearly 2 different tubs (seems).. no matter if the red arrow fixage points, seems at the same distance. |
||
|
2 May 2014, 22:56 (Ref:3400983) | #6306 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
In the press release, Audi stated that they ran the #3 on wet and intermediate tires most of the session due to wanting to save the car for the race and taking into account Marco's and Fil's lack of experience in a LMP1 car, though Marco has done much of the testing for Audi in past years.
Also, drivers said that more improvements were possible, but the track dried out too late for it to be of much use to them. Tomorrow will be a tough race, though, unless Audi have a few cards up their sleeves. Being about 20km/h down on top speed due to running more downforce won't help, not unless Porsche and Toyota make big sacrifices in sector 2 where Audi are currently tons faster. But right now, they're making up for it in sectors 1 and 3 where top speed is a major help. |
||
|
2 May 2014, 23:01 (Ref:3400985) | #6307 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
|
me and my optimetrics! lol
Also the front panels ( Michelin doll) are not only retracted back, in average they are higher on the lowest point making the all front "entrance" above the front wing larger...and the front fenders are a tiny bit less wider too. So the nose tip, should be a (may be) a little retracted back, attending the relative positions of the front panels( Michelin doll). meaning the nose is not so long, but since the in front of wheel fender section, as seen in another image seems a tiny bit larger in the LM spec, it may be the front suspension has a relative position different anchorage... So the maybe the HDF front section spec in Spa could be different than in Silverstone... we'll be waiting lol No matter the prespectives... but doesn't seem that the LM spec has a shorter nose... and so the distance between axles ( rear front) can be a little different to, attending the proportional distances in all front section Last edited by hcl123; 2 May 2014 at 23:09. |
|
|
3 May 2014, 06:03 (Ref:3401038) | #6308 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2,132
|
|||
__________________
In order to finish first, first you have to finish |
3 May 2014, 07:42 (Ref:3401049) | #6309 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,923
|
I've been thinking looking at some videos of last year, and I'm wondering if Audi went for more downforce this year to try and milk more life out of their tires during a race.
We have to remember that post LM that there's a ton of tracks that are very abrasive on tires, and the last track last year where Audi or Toyota had much success with double stinting tires was COTA. Shanghai is hard on tires, Bahrain is hard on tires, and Interlagos is hard on tires. High downforce cars tend to make better use of their tires and have better tire durability. For Spa, the track is more abasive than Silverstone, and unlike the past day, the sun should be out. And that means higher track temps and slicker race track. It could be then that if Toyota or Porsche sacrifice any tire durability by running less downforce, it'll show then. But that's just a theory on why Audi opted for more downforce than their competitors this year, to try and get an edge in cornering and also maybe tire wear. |
||
|
3 May 2014, 10:03 (Ref:3401079) | #6310 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,642
|
Jani has confirmed that the Porsche struggles once the tires are no longer fresh. Audi fans take cheer.
|
||
|
3 May 2014, 11:06 (Ref:3401089) | #6311 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 734
|
|||
__________________
Eat, sleep, race, repeat. |
3 May 2014, 11:24 (Ref:3401092) | #6312 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,642
|
Quote:
Hear for yourself:http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/a...ce-soundbites/ Last edited by Spyderman; 3 May 2014 at 11:30. |
|||
|
3 May 2014, 15:19 (Ref:3401295) | #6313 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,887
|
Audi are doing OK at the moment they are not dropping back any further
|
||
|
3 May 2014, 20:35 (Ref:3401562) | #6314 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
|
Quote:
Also the rear brakes colling air intakes seem really gone from anywhere near their previous position... can't be on top because the mandatory openings are smaller and much less exposed to air pressure coming from front, due to their format.... leaves in the sides, perhaps close to red background number indication ( this case white number 3 on red background) Correction: its the contrary(oh! my)... the the top fenders openings of the LM spec are almost the same size, but are more exposed to front air pressure, so the rear brakes air colling intakes could be this opening (some air steering format inside fender). |
||
|
3 May 2014, 20:57 (Ref:3401571) | #6315 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
|
Quote:
Hard to take any conclusion of improvements... yet even if it did appeared (nº3 max speed results on fiawec), would be not conclusive, because the nº3 run all time like in a test, with not a single top driver... matter of fact in race they managed to make 1 less pit stop with only 2 laps behind... very very promising, i think about fuel efficiency Audi got it, which is remarkable for ~11% less fuel tank with ~25% less fuel flow compared to same Audi in 2013... now takes translate some less of that, for much higher speed. In any case Audi seems not have dropped the ball yet... give up or complain... what scientifically in numbers are quite a challenge and unfair to them... wonder what they are cooking !! (from the outside, at least to me, the odds seems like a wall to climb with what they (Audi) are forced to have, free flows and fuel tanks, they would be kicking arse left and right, even in dreams, like in the time until 2011... and attending the HUGE HUGE improvement of the legacy motorized direct competition, and the big difference in Hybrid power... its amazing how much that diesel engine has evolved) Last edited by hcl123; 3 May 2014 at 21:10. |
||
|
3 May 2014, 21:25 (Ref:3401579) | #6316 | |
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 365
|
Perfectly executed "phase 2" of Audi's master plan for LeMans victory!
Let Toyota win again (they would have let them win in Silverstone if they did not crash!), so they start thinking they got a really good car this year - sort of the "benchmark". Run two cars with much higher DF (and make sure the low DF car never does anything noticeable/suspicious!). The high DF translates into unnecessary drag, which translates into very high rate fuel burn, which then will lead to "Phase 3" - in the next few days/weeks lobbying for more fuel, because as Dr. Ulrich said carefully yesterday ""Nous avons utilisé notre joker"..... ACO is going to give them extra fuel, because Toyota is so drunk by their success, they are not even going to protest, and that is going to be the biggest mistake they are going to make this year! Audi is going to bring the low drag skins in 5 weeks on all 3 cars, armed with even more fuel, and for the first time this year everyone is painfully going to witness what the mighty diesel can really do! And before everyone realizes what is going on, they are going to wipe the competition and win LeMans, again! You can protest all you want on Monday, the game is done |
|
|
3 May 2014, 22:28 (Ref:3401593) | #6317 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2,132
|
|||
__________________
In order to finish first, first you have to finish |
3 May 2014, 22:53 (Ref:3401599) | #6318 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 92
|
Quote:
http://arcturus415.files.wordpress.c...b-2stealth.jpg Last edited by FxL; 3 May 2014 at 23:04. |
||
|
3 May 2014, 23:36 (Ref:3401608) | #6319 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
|
oops!
Quote:
And "free" is not exactly correct, we wouldn't want whacky races with V(W)16s and much more than 1000hp in any motorization, LOL... i meant *EQUAL* flows and tanks independent of fuel , exactly how road cars are-> free flows & tank sizes at the wimp of the constructor... but ( there are ways to directly balance this) ... petrol will always have much more RPM no matter what, diesel will always have more torque per displacement no matter what... So a better look at Fairness 10K RPM petrol (SI) 5K RPM diesel max (CI )... counterpointing... Petrol 3L displacement Diesel 6 L displacement max ("equal" total *max* amount of piston up and down displacement per RPM) Can't think of better more **natural** equalization... turbo and hybrid "free", part of the "efficiency" package, or with caution 4 bar turbo max, hybrid release should be *free* but only in 1 MGU single motor per axle max -> i.e., as much MGUs you like, only 2 are traction . In the end you could even have a single super precise main tank fuel pump with static ( no need monitoring) ~7% more max flow in favor of petrol due to specific energies of fuel... but fuel tank up to 90 L, and mandatory equal distance (nº laps) for refueling stops for everyone-> simulating what we encounter in the open road... if 90 L can give you 2 stints in a row go for it if you want... More fuels could be allowed and respective pumps, like CNG or LPG ( if pass safety crash tests -> could have more specific energies than either petrol or diesel if properly engineered (liquefied methane is a rocket), either in compression ignition (CI) or spark ignition (SI) formats )... No need a single penalty, all "equalization" is guarantied a priori, its kind of static not physically possible to overcome ( only the RPM and turbo pressure is needed to be monitored, but FIA once delivered the proper wastegates, the same could be for RPM, try to abuse, an automatic "cut" ensues.. cut not penalty..) ... can't think of anything more free, simple, FAIR, natural, equal... and i've repeated (uf !) this several times, so i think the picture is clear. |
||
|
3 May 2014, 23:54 (Ref:3401615) | #6320 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
|
||
|
3 May 2014, 23:57 (Ref:3401616) | #6321 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,559
|
Quote:
|
||
|
4 May 2014, 00:18 (Ref:3401622) | #6322 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
|
Quote:
And more fuel ? ... only if FIA/ACO steps back a little on their *arbitrary* distorted fuel flows and tank capacity rules for diesel, a step for more fairness... which case Toyota has nothing to complain about, and nothing has to be secret. Cold rationally, i also think diesel has clear advantage if "fair" is applied ( as in previous post)... but diesel tech can't make miracles or be a super hero that defeats everybody under any circumstances, that is a story for a cartoon ... "Nous avons utilisé notre joker" ... can mean a lot of things, like the Nº 3 having 1 less pit stop than the others... about ACO giving them more fuel, do you have any confirmation ? |
||
|
4 May 2014, 00:30 (Ref:3401628) | #6323 | |
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 365
|
Confirmation? Of course not! What I write is pure fruit of my thoughts and imagination no one has to agree with it.
|
|
|
4 May 2014, 01:09 (Ref:3401640) | #6324 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 362
|
Quote:
I know your pumped with Toyota's result so far and they deserve it, but if the R18 was allowed to go at its full potential, i'm sure the field would be in a lot of trouble... |
|||
|
4 May 2014, 01:19 (Ref:3401653) | #6325 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
|
About previous post about fairness...
Quote:
As example Toyota wants to keep the 3.7L engine... 30000/3.7 = 8108 RPM max limit (but any relation of RPM x displacement applies for the same 30K), turbo or not is up to them Yet fuel flows have to be more ( F1 is 100kg/hour as is perfect)... less is diesel hanadicapping, that 6L diesel if a V12 (~1500Nm) at 5K RPM will be doing >1000hp lol... actual fuel flow don't allow anything near 1000 hp ... but if we cut the RPM x displacement for 25K, pretty much invalidates NA engines, by being totally fair, because the RPM would have to come sensibly lower (who said motorsport has a search for fairness above all anyway LOL ) Quote:
To run at the front is needed more RPM, so more fuel... or more displacement with just a little less RPM... The 1th option is a sure ruin of this Spa nº 3 strategy, can be very fuel wasting even if matching Toyota or Porsche for top speeds is possible ( and it is)... the later they can't have it unless there is an engine overhaul playing with leaner regimes... I don't think there will be a new engine... so is the 1th... depending on how much fast the competition is, if 10 or 11 laps per stint, but then Audi can match or surpass the speed, then for the first time this year Audi can be on their toes if not in front from the beginning... if Audi can't match the top speeds (very important in LM), then they will opt for the Spa nº 3 strategy ( can change during race, usually at night with colder air has shown to have an effect on Audi's diesel engines power -> 2013 was won at night). Could this be the joker ? ... hardly anything magic !.. Last edited by hcl123; 4 May 2014 at 01:35. |
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[WEC] Porsche Prototype Discussion | 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 |