What is Aston Martin up to?

[Lola T70]

Originally Posted by JAG

In terms of pace let's not forget Acura, by the time Le Mans comes around I think they could have the quickest petrol car given they are developing a proven package and may even challenge for pole.

I think you could be right there.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

But the old AER four cylinders in the past have claimed well over 500 bhp and over 400 ft/lbs of torque. So the Aston solution might not be a bad package.

In 2006 the LMP2 restrictor size and boost pressure were identical to the current LMP1 rules. Back then AER claimed 550+ bhp and 620 Nm for their P07 I4 engine. That was without direct injection.

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Speaking of which, does the AMR-One use a hydraulic or pnumatic actulator for the gear shift?

See http://www.astonmartinracing.com/eng...b-bd2ac4bd0e6b

Gearbox – Bespoke 6 speed, transverse, semi automatic pneumatic shift, Xtrac racing gearbox
Steering – Rack and Pinion with electrical power assistance

[Joe Taylor]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

If so, why not mount it the sidepod, as there seems be a lot of room in there and all the venting/slats in front of the rear wheels?

They're obliged by the rules to place the areodynamic brick that is the honking great fin in the centre of the rear bodywork, so they may as well stick a cooling feed on it as well, rather than upsetting the airflow elsewhere.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

In 2006 the LMP2 restrictor size and boost pressure were identical to the current LMP1 rules. Back then AER claimed 550+ bhp and 620 Nm for their P07 I4 engine. That was without direct injection.
See http://www.astonmartinracing.com/eng...b-bd2ac4bd0e6b

Was the Aston engine announced as featuring Direct Injection?

[gwyllion]

Follow the link to the AMR website I posted. The answer is there.

Engine – In line 6 cylinder, direct injected, turbocharged and intercooled DOHC Petrol engine, 4 valves per cylinder. Approx 540bhp

[JAG]

Autosport say Aston's budget is 50% the size of it's major rivals at £15m.

The cars were sold for £1.5m apiece with Aston contributing £1.5m.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by JAG

Autosport say Aston's budget is 50% the size of it's major rivals at £15m.

The cars were sold for £1.5m apiece with Aston contributing £1.5m.

This isn't surprising, the car seems very budget.

[rich07]

Originally Posted by JAG

Autosport say Aston's budget is 50% the size of it's major rivals at £15m.

The cars were sold for £1.5m apiece with Aston contributing £1.5m.

What is surprising is that they say its major rivals spend 30m a year, I thought it was closer to double that.

[TF110]

I feel kinda bad for AMR. They should have just stuck with the pretty coupe from Lola and maybe did some development work on it. I guess they found something beneficial with this open car though, don't know what. Maybe they'll have the highest top speed? I hope they're at least competitive.

[Javi]

Miracles happen sometimes, but in these times neither Audi nor Peugeot are going to let them happen so easily (3-4 cars each to cover most most of troubles...). Even with parity of performance between diesel and petrol, a team like Aston with a budget a half of their major rivals is going to aim for being the best of the rest, like last year, and I think they´ll be quite happy with it. If anything different than Peugeot or Audi get a podium place at Le Mans it´s going to be a very BIG suprise.
In shorter races, with 2 car teams, Aston can have more opportunities...

[chernaudi]

That's probably the best thing that AMR have going for them right now--a serious desire to have a good customer car program. If nothing else, it increases their numbers and can make them a little money.

[SebringMG]

Personally I think that AMR were not impressed with the Lola derived chassis and decided to build their own chassis to attempt to close the gap to the factory programmes. At the end of the day the Lola is a customer chassis and will not have had the level of development that a factory can generate as they have to sell to a price.

Consider that RML had a Lola coupe with the Acura engine and were frequently seconds slower than the Acura P2 with the same engine. My conclusion (possibly simplistic) is that the Lola chassis was holding RML back......hence this year they have gone fully to the Acura engine/chassis package.

IMO the Lola is indeed pretty but cannot hack it against top flight competion....

[vyselegend]

Originally Posted by SebringMG

Personally I think that AMR were not impressed with the Lola derived chassis and decided to build their own chassis to attempt to close the gap to the factory programmes. At the end of the day the Lola is a customer chassis and will not have had the level of development that a factory can generate as they have to sell to a price.

Consider that RML had a Lola coupe with the Acura engine and were frequently seconds slower than the Acura P2 with the same engine. My conclusion (possibly simplistic) is that the Lola chassis was holding RML back......hence this year they have gone fully to the Acura engine/chassis package.

IMO the Lola is indeed pretty but cannot hack it against top flight competion....

Pirro looked serious against the Pugs last year though...

Most of the time in endurance, a gap worth several seconds between two cars supposed to be close is down to the drivers, and/or the team's limited knowlege of the car comparatively to their opponents (remember Penske vs Dyson in the RS Spyder, or AMR vs Signature in the Lola-Aston last year, etc).

I'm not saying you're wrong with the RML exemple though. But IMO with the full Acura package they will still be slower than teams with more experience (and manufacturer's involvment) with top notch drivers like Brabham.

[gustavobamba]

This is a quick transformation of the new LMP1 from Aston Martin.

This is a coupé version with transformation on the front nose. I hope the coupe fans like my interpretation.

See the car on this link:

http://gustavobamba.deviantart.com/#/d3avm2d


pic credits: Aston Martin racing

[vyselegend]

Originally Posted by gustavobamba

This is a quick transformation of the new LMP1 from Aston Martin.

This is a coupé version with transformation on the front nose. I hope the coupe fans like my interpretation.

See the car on this link:

http://gustavobamba.deviantart.com/#/d3avm2d


pic credits: Aston Martin racing

Even with that blurry rendering it immediatly looks better!

Yet I'm happy they did it as an open car because it helps for diversity now that Audi have gone coupe...

Nice job.

[gustavobamba]

Originally Posted by vyselegend

Even with that blurry rendering it immediatly looks better!

Yet I'm happy they did it as an open car because it helps for diversity now that Audi have gone coupe...

Nice job.

I´m just an amateur

[joeb]

Originally Posted by gustavobamba

This is a quick transformation of the new LMP1 from Aston Martin.

This is a coupé version with transformation on the front nose. I hope the coupe fans like my interpretation.

See the car on this link:

http://gustavobamba.deviantart.com/#/d3avm2d


pic credits: Aston Martin racing

That was pretty good. I had tried to picture this thing with a roof when it was revealed. Thanks for the work!

[chernaudi]

Originally Posted by SebringMG

Personally I think that AMR were not impressed with the Lola derived chassis and decided to build their own chassis to attempt to close the gap to the factory programmes. At the end of the day the Lola is a customer chassis and will not have had the level of development that a factory can generate as they have to sell to a price.

Consider that RML had a Lola coupe with the Acura engine and were frequently seconds slower than the Acura P2 with the same engine. My conclusion (possibly simplistic) is that the Lola chassis was holding RML back......hence this year they have gone fully to the Acura engine/chassis package.

IMO the Lola is indeed pretty but cannot hack it against top flight competion....

You also have to remember that the ARX-01 began it's life as a customer car--the Oreca/Courage LC-75. The car's potential was only fully realized when Wirth/HPD and Oreca got their hands on it.

Of course, money and resources can't always buy speed, but Audi and Peugeot aren't Toyota or Honda in F1. They may have smaller budgets than TRD or Honda Racing did, but it was all in how Toyota and Honda ran things by commission, while in sportscars Audi and Peugeot had a top man in charge at all times to make the final call. In F1, Brawn had a small budget in '09, but Ross spent and used it properly and called the shots. Ironically, Brawn GP (now Mercedes-Benz GP) was a spin off of the old Honda Racing F1 team.

Back on the AMR subject, the issue that AMR have is that Audi and Peugeot not only have more resources, but generally use them wisely and prudently.

[Mal]

It seems silly to write a car off before it has turned a wheel

[Graham Goodwin]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Back on the AMR subject, the issue that AMR have is that Audi and Peugeot not only have more resources, but generally use them wisely and prudently.

So you're saying that AMR waste their budget?

[Graham Goodwin]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

In F1, Brawn had a small budget in '09, but Ross spent and used it properly and called the shots. Ironically, Brawn GP (now Mercedes-Benz GP) was a spin off of the old Honda Racing F1 team.

I'm afraid that statement shows how little you know or understand about the Honda/ Brawn/ Mercedes F1 progression.

Brawn GP profitted masively from the enormous amount of work done by Honda on their proposed 09 car (the vast majority of which was carried over as the Brawn) - it was certainly not under-resourced. It seems the Honda GP team spent wisely on development but then had the carpet pulled from under them

The relative drop off of competitiveness during the season can be traced directly to the lack of 09 budget as other better resourced teams caught up.

The relative lack of competitiveness by Mercedes in '10 can be directly traced to a lack of budget for Brawn during 09 and a lack of a fully funded development programme for '10.

In brief the lower 09 budget became a major issue late in the season and into the following season - They did not have an issue at the start of the year because the important spend had already been made - By Honda.

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by vyselegend

I'm not saying you're wrong with the RML exemple though. But IMO with the full Acura package they will still be slower than teams with more experience (and manufacturer's involvment) with top notch drivers like Brabham.

However Strakka were pretty much immediately on the pace and dominated LMP2 at Le Mans being more reliable AND on par with Highcroft if not faster.

Originally Posted by gustavobamba

This is a quick transformation of the new LMP1 from Aston Martin..............

http://gustavobamba.deviantart.com/#/d3avm2d

Lower nose looks a lot better, with the roof or without it.

[chernaudi]

Originally Posted by Graham Goodwin

So you're saying that AMR waste their budget?

Uhm, sorry, that's a big N-O!

Audi and Peugeot aren't known for wasting money, and they have more money and resources. AMR probably doesn't have any money to waste, especially now.

Brawn only benefited from the Honda money the first half of the season, and Ross had to be wise with that budget, because it wasn't going to last forever. Hence, they ran for most of '09 with patchwork sponsor packages (and probably some under the table money from Mercedes-Benz, as engine supplier and sponsor) to supplement that Honda severance money.

The problem that AMR has is that Prodrive is a big company, and David Richards and his backers have a lot of money. Problem is that Audi and Peugeot have more money to spend, and, unlike often has been sterio-typed of Honda and Toyota (especially Toyota), won't waste it.

Just be glad that AMR is Prodrive's baby, and not a committie run deal like Toyota was. At least then what little money the have (realtively speaking) will go where it should.

[TF110]

You still say things you don't know. Toyota weren't the 'big spenders' in F1 like it's rumored to be. They built their own facilities, built their own windtunnels and benches, their own car, their own engine. No team had started from scratch like that in recent years. Toyota did everything from the ground up which is why the costs were so high. They had the huge facilities in Cologne to thank for that. What the key was for their not winning races was the drivers and management.

This is all off-topic, but the efficiency that AMR is showing is great. With half the money spent and still as competitive as any non-diesel car speaks volumes. The only question is why not spend a little more and make a car that will be up there with the diesels? But, the season hasn't started yet so they may be challenging for Podiums, we'll just have to wait and see.

[Lola T70]

Originally Posted by TF110

This is all off-topic, but the efficiency that AMR is showing is great. With half the money spent and still as competitive as any non-diesel car speaks volumes. The only question is why not spend a little more and make a car that will be up there with the diesels? But, the season hasn't started yet so they may be challenging for Podiums, we'll just have to wait and see.

You only have Dave Richards saying the spend 50% of the other factory teams so personally I am not sure we can start treating it as fact,