|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
10 Jun 2012, 13:05 (Ref:3088463) | #1376 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 152
|
Quote:
....What we really need is a class for 500kg/300bhp/ground effects cars which allows Delta and rectangular cars to compete on even terms... What can't be denied is that the Deltawing is a really aerodynamic shape:-as this chart shows.... (data derived from Deltawing data in May issue of Racecar Engineering, Group c data and LMP1 data from www.mulsannescorner.com). The qustion is; do we believe that the Delta shape has no mechanical grip disadvantages as we are being told? I think it does have a disadvantage... but enough to counteract the aerodynamic advantage the Deltawing seems to have....? ....I think that all depends on the track... at Le Mans I think overall it actually might well be better than a 500kg/300bhp rectangular car.... but at a tight twisty track like Brands Hatch? I don't think it'll be quite so clear.... I've done some simulations to look at various different car configurations:- Virtual Stopwatch -Deltawing Virtual Stopwatch -Small Sports Racer & XJR-9 |
||
|
10 Jun 2012, 13:12 (Ref:3088466) | #1377 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 128
|
It will be interesting to see how rigid the ACO are going to be about the DeltaWing's performance. It now looks as though achieving a 3.45 lap time might not be too challenging and it was already exceeding 300kph on test day. Will they be given drive-through penalties if they go too fast?....Perhaps they would be disqualified!! Hopefully it is all a bit arbitrary and stipulating a set of performance figures was just to give the developers an incentive to make sure it performs and ensure it wouldn't become a mobile chicane.... Is anyone better informed?
|
||
|
10 Jun 2012, 15:48 (Ref:3088501) | #1378 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 152
|
Quote:
.... if you do the sums you'll find that 300kph (or there abouts) is simply the physical limit for a car with 300bhp and having a drag of 550lbs at 90m/s as reported in Racecar Engineering Vol 22 No3.... there's no conspiracy or sandbagging here. |
||
|
10 Jun 2012, 15:59 (Ref:3088504) | #1379 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 575
|
I'm pretty sure the ACO were very particular about the the lap time, Hindy was making a bit of a play when he was talking to Marino in the afternoon (at least I think it was the afternoon), everyone in the DW garage seemed to be pulling faces when Hindy suggested pushing harder... Take from it what you will but the guys on MWM have repeatedly said that the speed was limited at that they had to run to a set pace
|
|
|
10 Jun 2012, 17:12 (Ref:3088517) | #1380 | |
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 152
|
"MWM"?
|
|
|
10 Jun 2012, 17:36 (Ref:3088524) | #1381 | ||||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 15,875
|
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/racing/m...nt-and-testing |
||||
|
10 Jun 2012, 17:38 (Ref:3088526) | #1382 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,203
|
Quote:
http://radiolemans.0157.org/content/midweek-motorsport |
|||
|
10 Jun 2012, 18:17 (Ref:3088538) | #1383 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,938
|
I suspect this is the usual misunderstanding over target lap times. Like the GT1 times in past years.
|
||
|
10 Jun 2012, 19:22 (Ref:3088554) | #1384 | |||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,363
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
10 Jun 2012, 20:03 (Ref:3088591) | #1385 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,769
|
ACO also wanted the LMPs to stay above 3:30
|
|
|
10 Jun 2012, 20:16 (Ref:3088608) | #1386 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,938
|
So they will black flag the DW like they did they LMP1s in previous years.
|
||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
10 Jun 2012, 20:18 (Ref:3088612) | #1387 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,769
|
|
|
|
10 Jun 2012, 20:21 (Ref:3088621) | #1388 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,229
|
Quote:
Still, this is a very different concept that has a minuscule amount of development and refinement relative to conventional solutions, and they have achieved a lot with it. In a sense, they have refuted the old CanAm saying, because with a 450 HP engine, it would be mopping the floor with the other P2 cars. It's just at this point very early days for this concept with plenty of room for development, if allowed. I would love to see ACO have a fuel consumption class with safety regulations and maximum dimensions, but no minimum weights. If the fuel economy were put where the DW is (or restricted a little more given the fuel restrictions coming under the new rules), initially cars in that class would be mucking around among the P2's, but at some point a large manufacturer (probably Audi would go first) would project they could win overall from that class and they would build a car to it. It would be very exciting to see a rivalry between the P1's and the fuel economy cars as the fuel economy cars became more refined and eventually the new triumphed over the old. |
|||
|
10 Jun 2012, 21:31 (Ref:3088683) | #1389 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 152
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
10 Jun 2012, 21:39 (Ref:3088687) | #1390 | |
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 152
|
||
|
10 Jun 2012, 21:56 (Ref:3088705) | #1391 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
An interesting fact regarding the DeltaWing in the RCE Le Mans preview:
Quote:
|
||
|
10 Jun 2012, 23:02 (Ref:3088746) | #1392 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 626
|
Not sure about that Cd, .31 is a decent figure for a long sedan with a windsheild and all that.
|
|
|
10 Jun 2012, 23:36 (Ref:3088757) | #1393 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,229
|
Quote:
http://www.seriouswheels.com/cars/20...ar-Concept.htm So could they have reduced the power from the original concept? I would say Highcroft's response would be the reason: http://twitter.com/highcroftracing/s...01171364937729 If that's what the ACO wants, with time and money being very limited commodities, why not just stick to the original power level and bring it in right on the requested lap time? It was kind of a miracle to get all this done in a year. |
|||
|
10 Jun 2012, 23:37 (Ref:3088758) | #1394 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,831
|
Quote:
But for a contemporary race car, sure. In the 3.5 mile long Mulsanne day's the mid .3s were achievable with L/D in the 3:1 range. Pretty confident if so motivated you could achieve absolute drag figures close to that for perhaps not as high L/D as DW. DW's big "cheat" is the 20% lower frontal area. Other than that, give me free regulations regarding the underfloor and all bets are off. For what it's worth, my own calculations show DW's .cd between .34 & .35. |
||
|
10 Jun 2012, 23:39 (Ref:3088760) | #1395 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,831
|
Quote:
|
||
|
11 Jun 2012, 00:34 (Ref:3088766) | #1396 | |
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 152
|
Just for completeness I've added LMP1 data to my table:-
(Deltawing and LMP2 Figures taken from May and June issues of Racecar Engineering, and LMP1 aero figures based on Dome S102i data from www.mulsannescorner.com, except LMP frontal area which is estimated) As someone else has pointed out previously; the one performance differentiator not shown here is the relative tyre coefficients..... ....Maybe they are running ultra hard tyres... and that's why they are 'slow' compared to what those numbers above suggest it should be capable of... to be honest if that means stopping for tyres half as often that can only be a good thing - I think tyre usage in top level motorsport is boarding on the criminal -how many sets get used in a current F1 weekend? Last edited by Machin; 11 Jun 2012 at 00:43. |
|
|
11 Jun 2012, 01:07 (Ref:3088772) | #1397 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,831
|
Quote:
|
||
|
11 Jun 2012, 03:50 (Ref:3088793) | #1398 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 626
|
Quote:
As for the Delta Wing, certainly it's packing a decent amount more horsepower than 1/2 of LMP2 horsepower. The engine displacements are quite close too. Would be interesting if it does get double the mpg of an LMP1 as the hype/hope is. Of course Audi would likely up their mpg somewhat simply by taking it easy and running a 30 second slower lap. Last edited by chewymonster; 11 Jun 2012 at 03:58. |
||
|
11 Jun 2012, 06:14 (Ref:3088818) | #1399 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,648
|
Quote:
|
||
|
11 Jun 2012, 06:45 (Ref:3088824) | #1400 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Your power number for LMP1 is a bit low.
According to OAK Racing the Judd LMP1 produces 540 bhp. Mike's sources say that the Toyota TS030 engine produces 560-570 hp. The Audi R18 engine probably has in the direction of 600 hp. |
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Wide Front Wing / Narrow rear wing | browney | Formula One | 30 | 21 Nov 2011 12:13 |
Delta S4's that were in Rallycross | M.Lowe | Rallying & Rallycross | 23 | 30 Aug 2007 11:47 |
Delta wing , inverted delta wing | effuno | Racing Technology | 3 | 8 Apr 2007 13:45 |