[LM24] Top Speeds: Le Mans

[The Badger]

I completely disagree that track of the stature and history like Le Mans should be modified because some computer geek in a design office got it wrong !!!

Then the rules should be changed , and not the track . And shame on anybody that doesnt have the balls to stand up and take blame for their design .

SO the next that will happen , if the rules get changed and then we find out something new , we change the track again . The drivers want more power , let them have it but modify the aero rules . These guys are the ones that drive the cars and I feel its very arrogant of any governing body to try and tell them the rules .

[JAG]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

ah but remeber the cars in a straight line despite their large amount of power are barely quicker than the LMP2's now which in my opinion is wrong because the LMP2 cars are basically quicker at a lot of tracks than the LMP1's which is a bit worrying, i think really they should make the cars a bit quicker in a straight to the point were the fastest they will get is 210-212mph which is not really that much to ask since these new hybrid cars should do those speeds without much hassle not barely doing 200mph and with these gruney things speeds will nor probably go below 200mph which is going a bit too far now since lemans is probably the fasest race track in europe and the only cars that race on them are becoming slower and slower and slower and now that the LMP2's are just as fast as the LMP1's it should be a wake up call to the ACO that they should reduce the drag on the cars to bring speeds up to the point were the LMP2 cars are not as fast and faster on many tracks than the LMP1's but i do agree that speeds should be kept in check but not going too far, fastest in my opinion with lower downforce is 210mph to basically avoid another mercedes CLR incident from 1999, i would love a return to the 3.5L group C formula of the early 1990's but this form of racing would die because those cars cost so much to run and only the big teams could have a chance of winning while with the current rules smaller teams have a genuine chance of winning but i say "NON" to slowing down the cars this much and "OUI" to top speeds of over 205mph atleast its really only my opinion but i feel this safety and speed kills thing is going a bit too far now, it shouldnt be ignored but it should not go this far were lower category cars are as fast as the fastest and most expensive cars

I think you'll find the new LMP1's will be at least as quick as previous years (other than 1999), gurney flap or not. The gurney etc. will simply keep speeds in the same ball park as previous years, compensating for the huge chassis/aero/engine development the new cars have undergone.
Remember the Audi R8 is 6 years old, the R10, despite similar looks, is light years ahead of the R8 tech wise.

Personally I couldn't really care less about 5-10mph, as long as overall times are quick?

In fact the 3.5l Group C cars are a perfect example of this, they were much slower than the turbo Group C machines (600-700bhp vs 800-1000bhp) , but quicker over a single lap.

As for comparisons between LMP1/LMP2, well the only pukka LMP1's that have been well developed, are quick and reliable, the Audi R10 and Pescarolo, don't seem to have any problems pulling away from LMP2s with ease.

Comparing a factory P2 with an undeveloped P1 Dyson Lola, for example, is pointless. A very new factory R10 easily outpaced a well developed factory Porsche P2 at Sebring.

At Le Mans I'm guessing most P2's will be closer to the pacesetting GT1's than pacesetting LMP1's.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by The Badger

I completely disagree that track of the stature and history like Le Mans should be modified because some computer geek in a design office got it wrong !!!

Then the rules should be changed , and not the track . And shame on anybody that doesnt have the balls to stand up and take blame for their design .

SO the next that will happen , if the rules get changed and then we find out something new , we change the track again . The drivers want more power , let them have it but modify the aero rules . These guys are the ones that drive the cars and I feel its very arrogant of any governing body to try and tell them the rules .

Sometimes you have to protect drivers from themselves.

These days, driver/spectator deaths are unacceptable. Drivers/fans etc. may understand the risks, in the outside world circuits are being closed for noise issues, nevermind deaths.

Your sport adapts or dies, then theres only one loser.

[thebear]

If you click HERE you can see Jan Lammers '05 telemetry. Save the link beacuse it will be "real-time (live)" for this year's test days and race.

Top speed at the 1st chicaine was 309k/h, 2nd 302k/h and Indianapolis 306k/h.

Also, changes have been made at Tertre Rouge which will affect entry speeds onto Mulsanne.

[Bentley03]

Originally Posted by thebear

Also, changes have been made at Tertre Rouge which will affect entry speeds onto Mulsanne.

The reprofiling of Tertre Rouge has been delayed until 2007........

[canam]

Originally Posted by prototype

I definately agree with you, but that doesn't mean it can't happen. I am pretty sure JJ Lehto brought the front end of the Champion R8 up in the air at Laguna Seca last year (6 inches). It was right over the hill on the front strait. The Speed broadcast said that JJ did an excellent job of keeping the car on the ground. I think he was trailing a GT2 car, and going much slower than the Porsche and Mercedes incidents.

Anyone else remember this?

I remember Johnny Herbert's Audi R8 going airborne at Petit Le Mans in 2004 in practice.

But the R8 is an 'old rules' car. The floor splitter, floor and rear structure are completely different than what is on the LMP1 or Hyrid LMP1 cars. These new cars are supposedly much less pitch sensitive

[jhansen]

I saw in the Audi release that Kristensen has admitted that they are not the fastest in a straight line, but that their handling is good along with their fuel economy.

[bernard b]

Originally Posted by jhansen

I saw in the Audi release that Kristensen has admitted that they are not the fastest in a straight line, but that their handling is good along with their fuel economy.

they may not be the fastest, but this Audi is very impressive when accelerating (and you know I'm not talking of the sound ...)

[dj4monie]

All that torque makes up for the lack of top end power, otherwise Audi wouldn't be a running an Oil Burner.

When your push yourself to terminal velocity faster than the next guy, he won't be able to catch you on top end until its too late. In the case of Le Mans, the layout of the track now plays into the hands of Audi more so than Pesca, simple really - Chiances, more shifting.

Just like the difference between the Aston and Corvette is hp and high rpm vs torque production and low rpm and the lap times are pretty darn close aren't they?

The Corvette does in the corners and coming out of the chiances and the Muslanne hairpin, etc.

The Aston screams to the run down to Indy and any section of track that's LONG. It handles well enough that they don't loose too much time to the Vettes and that allows them to produce the excellent lap times they get here.

Insert Problem, and this is how OEM's solve it.

[broadrun96]

remember the point of LMP2s was to decrease the cost of entering prototype racing, see Porsche, Radical and Acura. The P2s maybe be as fast with the lower power but alot less durable since alot of parts have to be alot more fragile to meet weight restrictions. Lets check the quali speeds/times and then see how well the faster P2s last in the race, remember the Penske Porsches have had a ***** of a time making it to then end on anything but glass smooth tracks, and the intersport lola has had its own problems (sorry cant comment on the LMS cars since I live in the dumbass country of nascar and its takeover of all things car-related.)

[dj4monie]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

remember the point of LMP2s was to decrease the cost of entering prototype racing, see Porsche, Radical and Acura. The P2s maybe be as fast with the lower power but alot less durable since alot of parts have to be alot more fragile to meet weight restrictions. Lets check the quali speeds/times and then see how well the faster P2s last in the race, remember the Penske Porsches have had a ***** of a time making it to then end on anything but glass smooth tracks, and the intersport lola has had its own problems (sorry cant comment on the LMS cars since I live in the dumbass country of nascar and its takeover of all things car-related.)

Agreed -

I really don't have a problem with LMP2 running with LMP1 cars on given tracks because I feel the true intentions of this class were to give the customer a fair shot at a factory supported team at places where their cubic dollar advantage is minimized. In America because of our tracks that are bumpy and twisty, the chance to beat the factory does come up QUITE a bit.

Lola has done an outstanding job considering the resources they pull from and if they could pull the coup of supplying chassis to Acura initially, then I believe the car will finally have the "oats" under the hood to challange the RS Spyders on a regular basis if the driver and crew talent you would need to compete with Team Penske and Porsche's factory driver program.

[Karsten Krogh]

I miss the old Mulsanne straigt, with speeds over 400 km/h.
That was one of the things that make the Le mans uniq.

I know it was changed for safety resons. But watching a car roar by at +400 km/h was something uniq (how do you spell roar ??)

Karsten.

[dj choc ice]

i would love to have been spectating on the mulsanne when the cars would blast past at 240+mph but the ACO's safety fears were that a car travelling 240mph braking into mulsanne were either the throttle got stuck or the brakes would not work were many spectators would have been killed and the driver killed instantly would have spelled an imminent end for lemans, it was one of the main reasons that motivated the chicanes in the mulsanne and the nature of mulsanne crashe's is that usually you smash into one wall, smash into the other and then the other and you would be very likely to be hit by another car so those were the main reasons why they put the chicanes in the mulsanne straight and also why the cars have been slowing down so much since then and 1999 due to these fears of a high speed crash when the chances are really 1 in a million and even when these cars do have high speed crashes the driver is very often unhurt because these cars have become so safe which in a way is a testament to modern engineering and as well with so many ways to slow cars down now like gurney flaps, smaller and smaller air restrictors and weight penalty's we will never see a return of all out fast cars which will hit 220/230 mph without many problems.

[Karsten Krogh]

I read an interview with John Nielsen (winner 1990 Jaguar) where he talks about his exit from Le-Mans 1985. He was driving for Sauber-mercedes and with full speed on the Mulsanne straight his car did a backwords flip.
He says he remember it as if it was in Slowmotion (upside Down seeing the headlights of the cars behind him) When the car finally stopped all the wheels where gone but the engine still running.

P.S He is driving Zytek 06 this year.

[Karsten Krogh]

Fastest car ever on the mulsanne straight WM P87 (Turbocharged) 1988 405 km/h / 251,7 mph. (the engine didnt last long)

Fastest car without turbo Sauber mercedes C9 (1989) 400 km/h / 248,5 mph without any special tuning during the race.

Fisa felt it had grown unsafe. So in 1990 the 2 chicanes where introduced.

[Splendid Cat]

Originally Posted by Karsten Krogh

Fastest car ever on the mulsanne straight WM P87 (Turbocharged) 1988 405 km/h / 251,7 mph. (the engine didnt last long)

Fastest car without turbo Sauber mercedes C9 (1989) 400 km/h / 248,5 mph without any special tuning during the race.

Fisa felt it had grown unsafe. So in 1990 the 2 chicanes where introduced.

Sauber was turbocharged, 5.0. IIRc 1989 XJR9s were fastest ever normally aspirated.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by Karsten Krogh

Fastest car without turbo Sauber mercedes C9 (1989) 400 km/h / 248,5 mph without any special tuning during the race.

According to http://www.mulsannescorner.com/maxspeed.htm this was only during practice, not during the race.

[Karsten Krogh]

Originally Posted by Splendid Cat

Sauber was turbocharged, 5.0. IIRc 1989 XJR9s were fastest ever normally aspirated.

Ups what can say. You are right of course.

[GTfour]

Jan Lammers in one of the factory Jag's put down an unofficial topspeed of 403 km/h on slicks in a beginning drizzle! Can't remember wether this was '88 or '89 though.

[littleman]

If the throttle stuck open or the brakes failed at Mulsanne Corner the driver could just go straight on.It's just a dead straight piece of road all the way to Tours!

[GTfour]

Im afraid that the ACO will add another chicane as soon as there's another "flipover" incident....
They allready covered up one such incident I believe. In 2004 that was. According to Norman Simon who was driving the Spyker that year,one of the privatly entered R8's(the silver/white team Goh car) did a complete flipover in the morning warm up,right in front of him.
It seems the ACO is thinking that you can ban such accidents by ever reducing topspeeds and adding more slowing curves to the track...

It's cutting the balls of a once great racetrack in my opinion.

[JAG]

No, you stop it by changing the flat bottom cars to the current regs, cutting out the aeroplane wing effect the old reg cars suffered from, incluing the R8.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by GTfour

According to Norman Simon who was driving the Spyker that year,one of the privatly entered R8's(the silver/white team Goh car) did a complete flipover in the morning warm up,right in front of him.

This is at best hearsay. You are saying that the winning car flipped over in morning warm-up! Did this car get back to the pits under its own steam. I do not believe this.

It seems the ACO is thinking that you can ban such accidents by ever reducing topspeeds and adding more slowing curves to the track...

Apart from the flattening of the humps (which I agree is a bad thing) the main tact the ACO have had is by changing the cars underfloor aero.

[Adam43]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think there a Spyker there in 2004?

There was one there in 2003 and so was the Goh car.

The third customer Audi, belonging to Team Goh Audi Sport Japan, claimed the sixth fastest time, with the Riley & Scott team placing its eponymous chassis seventh.

There is no mention of anyproblem at all. http://www.autosport-atlas.com/article.asp?id=23389

[John Turner]

Just to add a bit more history to this, and before the chicanes were put in:-

1) During practice for the 1963 race, Phil Hill was clocked at 319.6 kph (198.6 mph) in the Aston Martin Project 215, and that was with less than 350bhp
2) During the 1970 event, Vic Elford in the Langheck version of the Porsche 917 recorded 383 kph (238 mph) with about 600bhp.