Audi LMP1 Discussion

[The Badger]

Driving on the edge , sometimes brings accidents like you mentioned . Possibily the Pug is a more balanced car , which is why the aero didnt change that much from the 908 HDi to the 908 , and the Audi changed dramatically .

[henk4]

Originally Posted by vyselegend

What they need the most IMO is more and more racing miles. It took several years to the Peugeot drivers to get their crashing statistics going down. This year they "only" crashed twice (Gene at Sebring and Montagny at Petit) in 6 races , which is a lot less than other years.

Point is: The R18 is a good car, quick and reliable.

Montagny went off at Silverstone...somebody behind Montagny went off at Petit....and Lamy had a big off in Spa during practice, encountering Mike Newton.

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by vyselegend

They have no reason to panic. Certainly not about of the car at least. The R18 was the most competitive Audi since they're fighting Peugeot.

Outside of Le Mans, Audi hasn't won a single race (!) against Peugeot since Sebring 2009, do you think their board is happy with that? It gets even worse when we acknowledge that LM 2010 was gifted to them by Peugeot's inability, there's no way they would have won that race under their own power.

If Peugeot wins Zhuhai then Audi won't have won a single race outside of Le Mans for a full three years... an absolute disaster for a squad that was used to win every race it entered for years.

Winning Le Mans is the most important thing, yes, but it's being tainted by the fact that they're Peugeot's b*tch everywhere else. All the overly-agressive driving and mistakes show that it takes a toll on them and building a new car after one year is another sign that there's indeed some panic going on since they obviously don't trust the current R18 to be able to beat the Peugeots.

[AGD]

Audi won the Paul Ricard LMS race in 2010, but the only Peugeot in that race was the Oreca car. But, yeah, Peugeot has had a small but clear advantage over Audi elsewhere. We heard speculation prior to the Porsche announcement that maybe Audi was under pressure to get results or else face replacement by Porsche or something along those lines. I guess that is off the table now, but who knows.

[DeutschRenn]

Originally Posted by Acid09

Outside of Le Mans, Audi hasn't won a single race (!) against Peugeot since Sebring 2009, do you think their board is happy with that? It gets even worse when we acknowledge that LM 2010 was gifted to them by Peugeot's inability, there's no way they would have won that race under their own power.

The mere fact that every single Peugeot Turbodiesel Engine failed when not a single one of the Audi engines did makes it not a gift. but an achievment in itself..Don't take engine reliablity for granted. running flatout on full throttle for 24 hours is a big deal. And its two years now that we;ve seen puegeot engines either fail or have to be turned down(they're debut).

Audi is more than pleased.....If the peugeot had crashed in accidents then maybe the win in 2010 was gifted to them...But it wasnt the case. The peugeot engines failed. Thats a technical victory and a pretty big deal. No one at Peugeot was smiling.

[vyselegend]

Originally Posted by henk4

Montagny went off at Silverstone...somebody behind Montagny went off at Petit....and Lamy had a big off in Spa during practice, encountering Mike Newton.

Yes thanks for the correction, the Montagny off was Silverstone and not Petit. But the point still stands. 2 offs in six races (with only one 908 failing to reach checkered flag in 14 starts, and this was not an accident). If you go back to 2008, I don't have the time to dig statistics right now but I can safely state they had at least one serious off per race week ends, with memeorable crashes in Catalunya, Spa, Le Mans, Silverstone...

So it's not perfect but they've increased their ability to keep their car out of troubles since then.

Originally Posted by Acid09

Outside of Le Mans, Audi hasn't won a single race (!) against Peugeot since Sebring 2009, do you think their board is happy with that? It gets even worse when we acknowledge that LM 2010 was gifted to them by Peugeot's inability, there's no way they would have won that race under their own power.

If Peugeot wins Zhuhai then Audi won't have won a single race outside of Le Mans for a full three years... an absolute disaster for a squad that was used to win every race it entered for years.

Winning Le Mans is the most important thing, yes, but it's being tainted by the fact that they're Peugeot's b*tch everywhere else. All the overly-agressive driving and mistakes show that it takes a toll on them and building a new car after one year is another sign that there's indeed some panic going on since they obviously don't trust the current R18 to be able to beat the Peugeots.

I'm not denying their lack of result, but I disagree with that last sentence. Their car has shown it has the ability to fight on par with the 908. When the R18s were not actually ahead the 908, then they were blowing right on their necks. Appart from Le Mans where the R18 had a decent advantage, Spa and Imola were it was the 908, both cars were running at similar pace, often in the same tenth!

In those battles it was impossible to say who was going to win, until unvariably Audi drivers did wrong and/or ran out of luck...

As DeutschRenn said, we don't know what they really mean by "new car", Remember they called the R15+ a new car too. Maybe he's right and they'll just change the name of the R18 because they add an hybrid system...

But the R18 design is good enough to run similar top speeds as the "very low DF trim" 908 while carrying more downforce, and with a suspected power deficit...

I insist this car is a solid concept, and is not the cause of the repeated failures. Drivers are. Although I agree with Badger that close racing situation is responsible for most of those errors.

[DeutschRenn]

Pedro Spun at Sebring
Montagny off at Silverstone
Wurz Crash at Lemans
Plus the two testing accidents.

Peugeots has had their share.

[DeutschRenn]

Originally Posted by Tim the Grey

I would suspect there's a couple of new R18s being built anyway, after the travails of 2011!

hahaha

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by DeutschRenn

The mere fact that every single Peugeot Turbodiesel Engine failed when not a single one of the Audi engines did makes it not a gift. but an achievment in itself..Don't take engine reliablity for granted. running flatout on full throttle for 24 hours is a big deal. And its two years now that we;ve seen puegeot engines either fail or have to be turned down(they're debut).

Audi is more than pleased.....If the peugeot had crashed in accidents then maybe the win in 2010 was gifted to them...But it wasnt the case. The peugeot engines failed. Thats a technical victory and a pretty big deal. No one at Peugeot was smiling.

How is your competitor's inability to build a lasting engine your achievement? In no shape or form, it's just luck... they had absolutely no way to influence what Peugeot was doing.

Of course no one at Peugeot was smiling, because they lost a race they should have never lost just because of the stupid con rods. In terms of speed, Audi was no match for Peugeot all weekend, they just sat there waiting for something to happen.. it did... but you can't deny that it's a gift.

I know that finishing is part of racing and endurance racing in particular but you still can't deny that this race was more about Peugeot losing this race than Audi winning it. Don't tell me that this was in any shape or form Audi's strategy, they planned to be competitive on the track and they weren't...luckily Peugeot gave them a break and handed them the win.

[DeutschRenn]

So Audi was gifted the win in 2005 against Pescarolo? Since the pesca was faster right? I think not.

[MihokS5]

Originally Posted by Acid09

How is your competitor's inability to build a lasting engine your achievement? In no shape or form, it's just luck... they had absolutely no way to influence what Peugeot was doing.

Of course no one at Peugeot was smiling, because they lost a race they should have never lost just because of the stupid con rods. In terms of speed, Audi was no match for Peugeot all weekend, they just sat there waiting for something to happen.. it did... but you can't deny that it's a gift.

I know that finishing is part of racing and endurance racing in particular but you still can't deny that this race was more about Peugeot losing this race than Audi winning it. Don't tell me that this was in any shape or form Audi's strategy, they planned to be competitive on the track and they weren't...luckily Peugeot gave them a break and handed them the win.

Acid-stop hating for once, geez.
The bottom line is Peugeot pushed too hard and payed dearly for it. It seemed to a lot of people that Peugeot was pushing too hard because of the R15 closing the gap from the previous year. Which is why they dominated with their speed, but couldn't finish.
All 3 R15's ran with no technical problems and set the new distance record-that says something.

[MihokS5]

Originally Posted by DeutschRenn

The mere fact that every single Peugeot Turbodiesel Engine failed when not a single one of the Audi engines did makes it not a gift. but an achievment in itself..Don't take engine reliablity for granted. running flatout on full throttle for 24 hours is a big deal. And its two years now that we;ve seen puegeot engines either fail or have to be turned down(they're debut).

Audi is more than pleased.....If the peugeot had crashed in accidents then maybe the win in 2010 was gifted to them...But it wasnt the case. The peugeot engines failed. Thats a technical victory and a pretty big deal. No one at Peugeot was smiling.

Well said

[MihokS5]

Originally Posted by vyselegend

Yes thanks for the correction, the Montagny off was Silverstone and not Petit. But the point still stands. 2 offs in six races (with only one 908 failing to reach checkered flag in 14 starts, and this was not an accident). If you go back to 2008, I don't have the time to dig statistics right now but I can safely state they had at least one serious off per race week ends, with memeorable crashes in Catalunya, Spa, Le Mans, Silverstone...

So it's not perfect but they've increased their ability to keep their car out of troubles since then.



I'm not denying their lack of result, but I disagree with that last sentence. Their car has shown it has the ability to fight on par with the 908. When the R18s were not actually ahead the 908, then they were blowing right on their necks. Appart from Le Mans where the R18 had a decent advantage, Spa and Imola were it was the 908, both cars were running at similar pace, often in the same tenth!

In those battles it was impossible to say who was going to win, until unvariably Audi drivers did wrong and/or ran out of luck...

As DeutschRenn said, we don't know what they really mean by "new car", Remember they called the R15+ a new car too. Maybe he's right and they'll just change the name of the R18 because they add an hybrid system...

But the R18 design is good enough to run similar top speeds as the "very low DF trim" 908 while carrying more downforce, and with a suspected power deficit...

I insist this car is a solid concept, and is not the cause of the repeated failures. Drivers are. Although I agree with Badger that close racing situation is responsible for most of those errors.

This sums up the entire ILMC 2011 season except for LM and
Imola.

And I've said it before too-The R18 has less power and more downforce AND STILL stays on pace with the 908

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by MihokS5

Acid-stop hating for once, geez.
The bottom line is Peugeot pushed too hard and payed dearly for it. It seemed to a lot of people that Peugeot was pushing too hard because of the R15 closing the gap from the previous year. Which is why they dominated with their speed, but couldn't finish.
All 3 R15's ran with no technical problems and set the new distance record-that says something.

It has nothing to do with hating, it's just wrong to label your opponents failure as your own accomplishment.

The R15 didn't push anything, they couldn't even stay on the same lap for christs sake! If you´re unable to match the pace of your opponents on track and you win just because they retire it's luck, plain and simple. Audi was completely helpless out on track, they couldn't match Peugeot's pace.

And this has nothing to do with hate, the same applies to BMW's victory at the 2010 Nürburgring 24h. They couldn't match the pace of the Audis or the hybrid Porsche and only won because all those cars hit trouble... the difference is that they acknowledged that.

Yes, they did their part by building a lasting car, but it wasn't quick enough to win under it's own power. BMW was generous enough to admit that while Audi of course had to try and spin it to make it sound like it was somehow part of their strategy that all four Pugs would retire.

Gimme a break, they won the lottery that day and they very well know it.

[MihokS5]

Originally Posted by Acid09

It has nothing to do with hating, it's just wrong to label your opponents failure as your own accomplishment.

The R15 didn't push anything, they couldn't even stay on the same lap for christs sake! If you´re unable to match the pace of your opponents on track and you win just because they retire it's luck, plain and simple. Audi was completely helpless out on track, they couldn't match Peugeot's pace.

And this has nothing to do with hate, the same applies to BMW's victory at the 2010 Nürburgring 24h. They couldn't match the pace of the Audis or the hybrid Porsche and only won because all those cars hit trouble... the difference is that they acknowledged that.

Yes, they did their part by building a lasting car, but it wasn't quick enough to win under it's own power. BMW was generous enough to admit that while Audi of course had to try and spin it to make it sound like it was somehow part of their strategy that all four Pugs would retire.

Gimme a break, they won the lottery that day and they very well know it.

Your right-they picked a good lottery ticket the nite before.

But you're still ignoring the fact that the Peugeots broke because they were pushing to hard. Just like Audi can spin their victory-Peugoet spun their excuse for the engines failing

Enough of this mthough-why don't you weigh in on vyselegend's
last post?

[seanyb505]

The reliability of Peugeot has always been a target or part of the Audi plan. Even in the Truth in 24 documentary an Audi engineer actually says, "We had reason to believe that our car was more reliable than their car, so the harder we could push them the closer they would be to having problems with their car." It does seem like you're relying on luck at that point, and it would be more honorable to have an outright quicker car, but in the 24 it has paid off 3 out of 5 races.

[DeutschRenn]

Did Audi luck into the win in 2005?

[DeutschRenn]

Originally Posted by Acid09

How is your competitor's inability to build a lasting engine your achievement?

Because it means that you built a lasting engine(a new V10) and your competitor failed to build a(3 year old V12) lasting engine. simple. Thats seems like a pretty big statmenet about the technical work going on behind the scenes. Audi raced a new engine. Peugeot raced an old engine. Peugeot engines failed. Audi engines won. Its not hard to understand. Its a victory.

When Dan Wheldon (R.I.P) won the Indy 500 it was a victory. The rookie crashed and the man with experience won. That wasn't luck. It was a victory.

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by DeutschRenn

Because it means that you built a lasting engine(a new V10) and your competitor failed to build a(3 year old V12) lasting engine. simple. Thats seems like a pretty big statmenet about the technical work going on behind the scenes. Audi raced a new engine. Peugeot raced an old engine. Peugeot engines failed. Audi engines won. Its not hard to understand. Its a victory.

You don't seem to have all the information, Peugeot's engine failed because they used new titanium con rods to save a few hundred grams of weight. It was the new parts on the otherwise proven engine that failed, with the aluminum rods they could have pushed the engine to the brim and nothing would have happened.

It was a mistake on their end and Audi capitalized on it. But that's not their accomplishment, it's called luck.

[DeutschRenn]

A failed engine is a failed engine, no exscuses. they pushed the envelope to save wait and look what happened. i do not what happened with the conrods. Peugeot pushed the limit and payed the price.

Audi's accomplishment is that they built a reliable car that lasted 24 hours. that has nothing to do with peugeot. And then Audi won the race. It wasn't quote luck. Peugeot was respinsible for their own downfall not. ( Luck would be if gt cars hit the peugeots and Audi won). thats not the case. Audi built a more reliable car and therefore won the race. To finish first first you must finish.

people seem to take reliablity for granted nowadays.

Was Audi's win in 2005 luck Acid?

and if your logic is correct. puegeot lucked into wins at all the ILMC rounds because the Audi's had accidents. i doubt you agree with that. but im pointing out why you cant deny that Audi won in their own right. They built a reliable car. Its really that simple. take speed out of the picture.


If the Deltawing goes faster than any other car and they lose the race because of reliablity are you going to say that Audi or Puegeot lucked into the win?

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by DeutschRenn

Was Audi's win in 2005 luck Acid?

No, that was a completely different situation, the cars were slowed down by the current regs. Peugeot had no regulatory advantage over Audi like Pescarolo did back then, nobody forbid Audi to make the R15 as quick as the 908... they just didn't manage to.

Edit: No, Peugeot didn't, they had accidents while catching up to Peugeot who had the quicker cars. This is what gives their wins credibility, my main point. If Peugeot had broken the cars in 2010 while chasing down the faster Audis it would be a different story. But like I said, Audi was helpless and passive, they had no chance to challenge for the win under their own power... which makes it luck.

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by vyselegend

I insist this car is a solid concept, and is not the cause of the repeated failures. Drivers are. Although I agree with Badger that close racing situation is responsible for most of those errors.

I agree. A lot of people tend to blame all the crashes on the visibility (which is bad, true), but 908's is equally bad. Visibility doesn't explain risky diving into corners and kinks under GTE cars. Visibility doesn't explain why Dumas moved over having barely got side-by-side with the Porsche, R15++ had no problems with visibility, yet TK crashed into GTE cars twice at Sebring.
IMO, it's the pressure and perhaps the fact that Audi drivers and the team have forgotten how to race flatout (both technically and especially mentally), having taken too many trophies 'cruising' round while their opponents were bound to be either too slow or unreliable and inexperienced etc.

[mackteck]

Originally Posted by Acid09

nobody forbid Audi to make the R15 as quick as the 908... they just didn't manage to.

.

the point is in endurance racing, it doesn't always have to be as quick - but it does have to finish the race

[MihokS5]

Originally Posted by Acid09

No, that was a completely different situation, the cars were slowed down by the current regs. Peugeot had no regulatory advantage over Audi like Pescarolo did back then, nobody forbid Audi to make the R15 as quick as the 908... they just didn't manage to.

Edit: No, Peugeot didn't, they had accidents while catching up to Peugeot who had the quicker cars. This is what gives their wins credibility, my main point. If Peugeot had broken the cars in 2010 while chasing down the faster Audis it would be a different story. But like I said, Audi was helpless and passive, they had no chance to challenge for the win under their own power... which makes it luck.

Acid we all know you hate Audi so go troll on the 908 thread.

DeutschRenn was right about your logic here and how it pertains to the other ILMC races. I guess Peugeot got lucky the Audi's ran into trouble!

And congrats to Peugeot for having the fastest car at LM last year....


and then failing before it finished 24 hours.

If the Peugeot was that much more superior it should have had no problem finishing even with new rods. (that were most likely tested before they went to LM because why would they show up with unproven engine parts???)

That was 2 embarrassing years of Le Mans for Peugeot especially this year when none of the 908's were able to beat the "lone Audi" driven by the young squad

[DeutschRenn]

Originally Posted by Acid09

Edit: No, Peugeot didn't, they had accidents while catching up to Peugeot who had the quicker cars. This is what gives their wins credibility, my main point. If Peugeot had broken the cars in 2010 while chasing down the faster Audis it would be a different story. But like I said, Audi was helpless and passive, they had no chance to challenge for the win under their own power... which makes it luck.

Since when was it mandated that the quickest car had to win and that if it didnt any other team that picked up the win did it on pure luck? This is news to me.