The Porsche vs Ferrari (or Badger vs brielga) thread

[Dario911]

I apologize to the forum members.

[zanfo zanfagni]

being a forum member i finally accept your apologize.

[Dario911]

Originally Posted by zanfo zanfagni

being a forum member i finally accept your apologize.

Being a member of the forum, I finally accept your apologies.

[zanfo zanfagni]

Sorry but to receive you need to ask before. I don't remember you asked my apologizes... I apologized my self to the forum administrators not to the members.
Just to explain.

[MitchZ06]

Are you both serious?

[Stephen Green]

Last chance. I have the banning stick firmly in my grasp!

[Dario911]

Any polemic is over for me.

[Stephen Green]

For goodness sake, how many more times do I have to tell you two to stop it. The next post like this and you are both going on a long holiday!

[Breitling24]

The thread title says "Badger vs brielga" Sheesh

[dxk1]

Originally Posted by Breitling24

The thread title says "Badger vs brielga" Sheesh

That was so long ago it seems like ancient history now!

DK

[Hazard]

Originally Posted by zanfo zanfagni

Sorry but to receive you need to ask before. I don't remember you asked my apologizes... I apologized my self to the forum administrators not to the members.
Just to explain.

I shall presume then to speak on behalf of all the other forum members who have had to wade through yours and dario911's pointless bickering for pages of this thread, that I think you should.

Yes, I know dario911 apologised to all and you decided to wind him up by pretending that apology was for you.

And then you misunderstood his response when he decided to pick on your English when you made your mocking post and misunderstood what he was trying to do.

To see this behaviour on the forum is very sad.

If you want to debate, debate your points, but personal attacks and insults are for the playground, or Facebook.

If ANY OF THIS continues for as much as one more post, "There Will Be Bans"

[arakis]

Originally Posted by dxk1

That was so long ago it seems like ancient history now!

DK

Here from the start, brielga is missed

[zanfo zanfagni]

Hoping to come back in topic, I tried to analyze the real consumes of gt cars, and i noticed some surprising revelation.

We all know that 2012 458 was 1245kg x 90L and 2013 458 is 1235kg x 85L (speaking only about GT-PRO)
Watching various .pdf reports at http://fiawec.alkamelsystems.com, i see that during dry and green flag hours; vantage, 991, 458 and C6R had all more or less an average autonomy of 57 minutes. Making some easy calculation (remaining in a very theorical contest) if we use a 4.00m as averaga lap sample, we can have 57mx60 (3420s) / 4mx60 (240s) = 14.25 (theorical) laps per stint for each different car (viper excluded).
If we considier different fuel tank size, we have

vantage: 95 / 14.25 = 6.67L required per lap
991: 90 / 14.25 = 6.31L required per lap
458: 85 / 14.25 = 5.96L required per lap
C6R: 90 / 14.25 = 6.31L required per lap

As expected because of DI, 458 is still the car that consumes less, while the aston is once again the car that consumes more.
Well, the thing that surprised me is that in 2012 458 because of larger tank was able to run something like 62-65 minutes per stint. If we do the same calculation:
62m + 65m / 2 = 63.5 minutes average stint
63.5mx60 (3810s) / 4mx60 (240s) = 15.87 theorical laps per stint
2012 458: 90 / 15.87 = 5.67L required per lap!

Really strange! it seems that in 2013 with a 10kg lighter car, 458 has a worse fuel consumaption than previous year.
This makes me think that the 458 2013 engine even using the same restrictors size of last year is considerably more powerfull than the one used last year, so it consumes more. Of course we are not talking about of the same power output of the vantage V8, but the highest top speeds in my opinion have been reachead also because of this. I should say that despite what an article posted by an user here said, AF corse and michelotto didn't detune at all the engine power to save more fuel, and also a not so low DF setting may have influenced the fuel consumaption.
Interesting to see also that despite the difference of engines, weight and dimensions between porsche and corvette (1210kg/4000cc 8000rpm rev vs 1260kg/5500cc 5800rpm rev) the two cars have more or less basicly the same fuel consumaption. Hard to say if is the porsche that consumes more than expected or the corvette that consumes less. If the aim of the fuel tank bop was the one to make the cars have the same autonomy, I should say that the aim has been fulfilled.

SRT Viper because of 8000cc engine consumes more. 53 minutes the average stint (like the vantage, viper was equipped with a 95L fuel tank)
53mx60 / 4mx60 = 13.25 theorical laps
viper: 95 / 13.25 = 7.16L required per lap
Poor performances and insanely high consumes! the worst possible combo.

These calculations are very theorical, so if someone is better than me, feel free to correct if something is wrong. Don't forget that this is only about 2013 gt-pro cars.

[Velociraptor]

do not forget that atmospheric conditions influence engine power, and therefore fuel consumption. I believe, last year was warmer than this year. That could explain the difference for the 458 last year vs this year. do you have the numbers for C6R for the last year, so that we see how it relates to the 458.

[zanfo zanfagni]

I'll check and as soon i can i'll make calculation of 2012 gt-pro cars.

[zanfo zanfagni]

ok first let's compare values of the other 2012 gt-pro

average stint lenght of vantage v8 55min

55min / 4min = 13.75 theorical laps
95L / 13.75 = 6.90L x lap

average stint lenght of 997 GT3RSR 58min

58min / 4min = 14.5 theorical laps
90 / 14.5 = 6.20L x lap

average stint lenght of C6R 57min

57min / 4min = 14.25 theorical laps
90 / 14.25 = 6.31L x lap


Vantage consumed more last year, and in 2012 vantage because of bop ran 20kg lighter than 2013. Prodrive guys have been able to reduce fuel consumaption of vantage engine keeping at least the same power of last year. Not a miracle, but at least the fuel consumaption is not higher.

997 GT3 RSR and 991 RSR basicly use the same engine, but being different cars is not much usefull this comparation.

2013 and 2012 C6R are at 99% the same car. Same bop so same fuel consumaption.

[zanfo zanfagni]

I calculated also gt-am theorical consumes, but using 4.05 as average sample time, consumes are suspiciously too much high. So need to do better calculation

[Dario911]

Originally Posted by zanfo zanfagni

Hoping to come back in topic, I tried to analyze the real consumes of gt cars, and i noticed some surprising revelation.

We all know that 2012 458 was 1245kg x 90L and 2013 458 is 1235kg x 85L (speaking only about GT-PRO)
Watching various .pdf reports at http://fiawec.alkamelsystems.com, i see that during dry and green flag hours; vantage, 991, 458 and C6R had all more or less an average autonomy of 57 minutes. Making some easy calculation (remaining in a very theorical contest) if we use a 4.00m as averaga lap sample, we can have 57mx60 (3420s) / 4mx60 (240s) = 14.25 (theorical) laps per stint for each different car (viper excluded).
If we considier different fuel tank size, we have

vantage: 95 / 14.25 = 6.67L required per lap
991: 90 / 14.25 = 6.31L required per lap
458: 85 / 14.25 = 5.96L required per lap
C6R: 90 / 14.25 = 6.31L required per lap

As expected because of DI, 458 is still the car that consumes less, while the aston is once again the car that consumes more.
Well, the thing that surprised me is that in 2012 458 because of larger tank was able to run something like 62-65 minutes per stint. If we do the same calculation:
62m + 65m / 2 = 63.5 minutes average stint
63.5mx60 (3810s) / 4mx60 (240s) = 15.87 theorical laps per stint
2012 458: 90 / 15.87 = 5.67L required per lap!

Really strange! it seems that in 2013 with a 10kg lighter car, 458 has a worse fuel consumaption than previous year.
This makes me think that the 458 2013 engine even using the same restrictors size of last year is considerably more powerfull than the one used last year, so it consumes more. Of course we are not talking about of the same power output of the vantage V8, but the highest top speeds in my opinion have been reachead also because of this. I should say that despite what an article posted by an user here said, AF corse and michelotto didn't detune at all the engine power to save more fuel, and also a not so low DF setting may have influenced the fuel consumaption.
Interesting to see also that despite the difference of engines, weight and dimensions between porsche and corvette (1210kg/4000cc 8000rpm rev vs 1260kg/5500cc 5800rpm rev) the two cars have more or less basicly the same fuel consumaption. Hard to say if is the porsche that consumes more than expected or the corvette that consumes less. If the aim of the fuel tank bop was the one to make the cars have the same autonomy, I should say that the aim has been fulfilled.

SRT Viper because of 8000cc engine consumes more. 53 minutes the average stint (like the vantage, viper was equipped with a 95L fuel tank)
53mx60 / 4mx60 = 13.25 theorical laps
viper: 95 / 13.25 = 7.16L required per lap
Poor performances and insanely high consumes! the worst possible combo.

These calculations are very theorical, so if someone is better than me, feel free to correct if something is wrong. Don't forget that this is only about 2013 gt-pro cars.

There's a big evidence in all this: never trust in manufacturers datas about real output power... When the first 997 GT3 RSR came out, an engineer of the Autorlando Sport said to me real output power was around 500 cv, against 485 claimed by Porsche.
Tenchini, Ferrari F430 GT driver in italian GT (friend of mine), said to me Ferrari was widely more powerful than how claimed by manufacturer, in 2007.
This makes more difficult to find a right BoP, because manufacturer usually provides conservative numbers.
The same Autorlando engineer told me teams can improve the car using some devices to make the car slightly more powerful than how it comes from assembly lines.
Usually, the largest part of the work is dedicated to electronic management software, as well as exhaust system.
IMHO, more than restrictors it would be necessary the electronic power control on the engine. It was successfully tested on Ferrari 550 GT1 several years ago, but it was never used in racing.
About fuel consumption, there are a lot of cheats can be done. Corvette C6 R1 GT1 had some extra-canalizations in petrol feeding system that allowed a bit more fuel than how much could be contained in the tank.
It was a great advantage in confront of the Astons, in the Corvette Vs. Aston era in Le Mans.

[gaaaazFR]

In this Ferrari vs Porsche discussion you seem to have forgotten the most important thing at LeMans 24... The team & drivers performance

Ferrari's guys made an impressive amount of mistakes, and I mean Pro guys racing for a legendary factory :

I saw 2 ferrari's going straight at Arnage, One car stricking a LMP2 in the pits, the other on touching a Porsche in the pitlane (1st pitstop of a 24H race... is that smart??) one car leaving the pit with the fuel system and I can't remember the rest. (didn't sleep much this w.e.)

In front of that the Factory Porsche drivers provided a zero mistakes race, and the team a brilliant strategy... that gave them a 1-2 finish!

Concerning the pace they were totally able to do an high 54 (as Mako) at least for some of them (mainly Pilet & Lieb).

BoP or not when you go twice in the gravel in that category, with this high level you cannot win... ask Aston Martin, they had the quickest car but Mako mistake and the team error (last pit) cost them a possible 1-2

[FstrthnU]

I know the Badger still comes on here, but whatever happened to Brielga? His last activity was in 2009

[zanfo zanfagni]

who spoke about cars power? it's just a speculation that may explain why 2013 458 consumes more than last year, but who knows the truth. Always considering that my calculation are just theorical using a sample average time, so for sure those are not absolute values but just indicatives. Who knows, maybe maths tells that 458 consumes more, but in the reality may also have consumed less.

I did some calculation about LMP1 consumes and here too, results are a bit strange again.

2013 R18 etron quattro average stint lenght 36 minutes in a sample average time of 3.27 (i used the fastest lotterer stint as reference)

36m x60s / 207s = 10.43 theorical laps
58L / 10.43 = 5.56L required per lap

2012 R18 etron quattro average stint lenght 44 minutes in a sample average time of 3.30

44m x 60s / 210s = 12.57 theorical laps
58L / 12.57 = 4.61L required per lap

Because of 2013 "aggressive power" strategy of audi, fuel consumaption has been increased around of 21%. But this just in theory because we should consider that 2013 car is 15kg heavier and has double plates that increase drag and downforce. Usefull to see that during the race #2 did 34 pit stops, while #3 did just 30. Apparently #1 and #2 used a more powerfull strategy while #3 a more conservative one consuming less.


2013 TS030 hybrid average stint lenght 44 minutes in a sample average lap of 3.30

44m x 60s / 210s = 12.57 theorical laps
76L / 12.57 = 6.04L required per lap

2012 TS030 hybrid average stint lenght 40 minutes in a sample average lap of 3.30

40m x 60s / 210s = 11.42 theorical laps
73L / 11.42 = 6.39L required per lap

As seen during the last part of 2012 WEC season, toyota optimized fuel consumaption, but I think that TMG team once realized they won't never be able to have the same audi pace, decided to use a sort of group C strategy detuning power engine and maximizing their autonomy advantage and bopped fuel tank to finish the race with less pit stops than audi's (30 for the #8, 29 for the #7). Result: 5.5% fuel consumaption decreased but how much performance has been sacrified to achieve this?

[Dario911]

Originally Posted by zanfo zanfagni

who spoke about cars power?

It's not a critics to your words... it was to say that manufacturers cheat so much about cars datas, so to make a comparison between power and fuel consumption is not very easy.

[Dario911]

Afterall, fuel consumption and output power goes together...

[zanfo zanfagni]

fuel consumaption is influenced by
drag efficency
N of downforce
ride height setting
suspension setting
quality of tyres
driving style
variable engine map
additional ballast
kg of fuel inside fuel tank
exhausts efficency
devices like DI or FSI
% of O2 (during the night at le mans engines are a bit more powerfull because of the amount of O2 released by the trees around the track, in tracks like interlagos engines are less powerfull because thin air)
cooling system
and a lot of other factors

only in a superficial way we can compare directly the fuel consumaption to only power output. According to some speculations and rumors 997/991 and vantage have a similiar ultimate power of 500hp, but porsche saves more fuel even revving higher. GTE cars use NA gasoline engines with restrictors plate. The amount of O2 is limited, so, is really hard to make rev higher (to achieve more power) an engine than the revlimit range that litterally is imposed by the restrictors. Only diesel engines can "cheat" restrictors burning more diesel and achieve more power until black smoke occurs. Engineers prefer to work on valves and fuel injection to increase low-mid rev torque, more fuel burnt in this rpm range and more the car gain torque consuming more but the ultimate power remains more or less the same. Usefull remember that power output during the race lenght doesn't remain always the same. In the second part of 12H of sebring, mysteriously the corvette #4 became one of the most fuel efficent car in the grid. How did they do? who knows, in my opinion drivers used a more conservative engine map in slow spots and back again to full power on fast spots. I did those calculations to fulfill some curiosities of mine, but as i said, they way i did it all remains very theorical, don't know how much close to the reality.

[Dario911]

Mine was obviously a simplification. I was not considering there things like the driving style and so. It was just a "mechanical" consideration. Power output, drag, weight and gear ratio are all the main factors determining fuel consumption. But in a fast track like Le Mans, were cars adopt quite the same gear ratios, very close weight and a low downforce set-up, power output is a bit more relevant (together with drag), more than in other track, because in Le Mans you're full-throttle for the largest part of the lap.
Anyway, I think it's stupid to limit the only thing you don't pay in competitions: O2.
To limit fuel consumption and power, it would be better introduce an electronic system capable to manage the final power output (like an old 550 GT1 several years ago), introducing a limited quantity of fuel each car.
In this way you don't kill the engine: if you design and build an engine, then you have to limit it with restrictors, it is necessary to change it deeply, due to a different inner fluidodynamics. So you have to waste money twice: the first time to desing and build your engine, the second to adapt it to restrictors.
With electronic management, fluidodynamics would never change, and engine would not be deeply revised!
The same final result, but following two different ways. The second one is most efficient and less mortifying for engineers and cars.
Then, adopting a limited fuel quantity, there would be an higher aerodynamics research, as well as a lot of innovations in DFI systems.
I still don't explain how they can use restrictors, so invasive and expensive!
Then, cars like Corvette (due to their low revs engine and their old OHV system), are less affected by restrictors (on the contrary of Aston, Ferrari and Porsche).
With electronic management of the output power, this would never happen.

P.S.
Output differences during the race are obviously related to different electronic engine map. There are a lot of maps drivers can choose (rain, safety car, normal, etc.).