Home Mobile Forum News Cookbook FaceBook Us T-Shirts etc.: Europe/Worldwide. eBay Motorsport Links Advertising  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Saloon & Sportscar Racing > Sportscar & GT Racing > ACO Regulated Series


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 18 Jun 2018, 04:22 (Ref:3831535)   #1681
TF110
Veteran
 
TF110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United States
Posts: 14,181
TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!
There was a few times where Toyota only went 10 laps in a stint. If the fuel is set, and the refueling is set, the only way to increase the lap time is to be more efficient. No one should believe that these engines are nearly as good at that as Toyota's. They were even faster than the Porsche last year. There's no way the ACO didn't know about Toyota's capability rather it seems they expected more from the privateers. I did, that's for sure. They were able to get close to the 3:18's during the test day and practice sessions. I thought for certain they would up their pace even more. I don't know if 110kg/hr rather than 108kg/hr is really going to give them the pace to match Toyota. I doubt it. These cars are still pretty new, so maybe with a little more time they will challenge. We'll see what happens at Silverstone with their high downforce kits. But honestly Toyota's HD car is a record setter too. And if, like their LM-kit, it's even better this year then the non-hybrids might need more than just more fuel allowance.
TF110 is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jun 2018, 11:01 (Ref:3831596)   #1682
Akrapovic
Veteran
 
Akrapovic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Scotland
Posts: 7,160
Akrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Quote:
Originally Posted by carbsmith View Post
Not exactly. I don't think they would have received a stint length penalty if they weren't getting a fuel usage penalty. Cars were going over the lap number during stints with extended amounts of yellow all day, but Toyota went over the car's definite mileage capability when they burned extra fuel to get it back to the pits. What was noted on RLM was how odd it is that the max fuel per stint is different than the fuel tank size but that is a bit better for the teams since they don't have to optimize fuel pickup just to use full power or worry about changing tank capacity for every EoT change, as well as having that extra reserve capability to avoid a stranded car.

If you imagine you could in theory go over the stint fuel limit without necessarily overextending your fuel range, so that's why they're separate penalties.
But that doesn't make much sense - they got two penalties. One was for stint length. If the stint length is too long, then it's too long. It doesn't become too long when you use too much fuel. They got separate penalties for separate infractions.

There is too many "I think" and "I imagine" when it comes to this rule. I posted the exact wording of it and what it means and was told I was wrong because others interpreted it differently. But that isn't how rules work - you have to look at exactly what the rule says. The rule says they shouldn't go over 10 laps, and when they did (outside of a SC situation) they were punished. That is exactly what the rules say would happen, and exactly what happened.

I don't think anyone is impressed with the current fuel regulation setup. We all understand why it's there, but we now have 3 rules governing the same thing (fuel tank size, fuel allocation per stint, and stint length), which all overlap and make it extremely complicated. And there's fuel flow as well, which breaks things further. I think we'd all agree that the rules setup needs to be simplified, and things like maximum stint lengths need to go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TF110 View Post
There was a few times where Toyota only went 10 laps in a stint. If the fuel is set, and the refueling is set, the only way to increase the lap time is to be more efficient. No one should believe that these engines are nearly as good at that as Toyota's. They were even faster than the Porsche last year. There's no way the ACO didn't know about Toyota's capability rather it seems they expected more from the privateers. I did, that's for sure. They were able to get close to the 3:18's during the test day and practice sessions. I thought for certain they would up their pace even more. I don't know if 110kg/hr rather than 108kg/hr is really going to give them the pace to match Toyota. I doubt it. These cars are still pretty new, so maybe with a little more time they will challenge. We'll see what happens at Silverstone with their high downforce kits. But honestly Toyota's HD car is a record setter too. And if, like their LM-kit, it's even better this year then the non-hybrids might need more than just more fuel allowance.
I don't understand why people expected more from the privateers. They showed their pace at Spa, they showed their pace at the test. If we're thinking that the private cars could run 3:18s all day just because they managed a qualifying lap at the test, then that's just being silly. Toyota were 3-4 seconds off of the qualifying laps, and that's about normal for Le Mans. Of course the privateers would have the same drop-off - if not more than a factory team.

Another thing not taken into account is the Toyotas incredible ability to deal with the traffic. The way it can slice through cars on short straights is mind-blowing, even 4 years after the introduction of the hybrids. It's maybe my favourite thing about the LMP1s - that savage torque from the hybrid that lets it deal with packs of cars in an instant and short space. We saw a toned down but similar balancing problem in IMSA when they balanced the DPs and LMP2s. The lap times were identical, but the DPs dominated because they had so much torque that they could deal with traffic easier. So balancing cars on a lap time doesn't work out when you introduce traffic. And of course we seen the Toyotas leaving the pit stops on electrical power, saving 2 seconds each stop - they let the cat out of the bag on that one with the wheels spinning in the air - the hybrid is engaged before the cars on the ground - something the private teams aren't allowed to do.

I'm not arguing that the teams should be balanced. That's a different discussion altogether. There are perfectly good reasons why Toyota are winning, and without the EoT the gap would be larger. However, if we're going to sit and say "right the cars are being balanced", then it has to be done properly - because Le Mans was absolutely miles off. Everyone seen it coming, it was very predictable and it happened anyway. The gap at Spa was big, the private cars were then pegged back further, which negated any gain from the reduction in hybrid power per km, and the gap was the same as Spa. Add in the hard limit on stints and you get exactly what we saw.

Not taking anything away from Toyota - they still had to win, and they didn't cruise. Not saying private teams should be able to beat (or even challenge) a factory car. But I am saying that if they are going to balance it and sell the class to privateers based on the promise of balance, then it needs to be done properly.

The positive side is, that not one single LMP1 team was sandbagging. Everybody has been honest from the prologue onward, and we know 100% what the car's performances are now. So moving forward we should be able to see any improvement that the LMP1 teams make, and we have a unique situation of having two Le Mans in one season - so the next one there really is no excuse of missing that half a second target.

And we'll now get to see the Manors at Silverstone. They have 2 months to work on the car, with a downforce kit they already have. So I'm hoping it can at least start to challenge the ByKolles. I'm sure they've learnt a lot (especially about things that didn't work!), so I have high hopes for Silverstone now. REALLY looking forward to the LMP1 battle at Silverstone, even if Toyota do drive off.
Akrapovic is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jun 2018, 11:27 (Ref:3831600)   #1683
GasperG
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Slovenia
Posts: 585
GasperG has a lot of promise if they can keep it on the circuit!
Can you point me to the regulations where it says that stint length can not be exceeded and that this is measured in the number of laps?

For the general people to know why the penalty it's easier to name this "stint length" penalty, but I'm 100% certain that this is based on fuel allowance per stint and not km driven in "race mode".

Fuel usage penalty are actually two types, fuel per stint and energy (fuel) per lap, maybe just maybe "fuel usage penalty" is measured per lap fuel energy allowance and "stint length penalty" is stint fuel allowance. As @carbsmith noted per regulation there is min amount of fuel that must always be present in the car, so even if the car uses all the fuel that is alowed per stint it still has a litre or two of fuel so it doesn't get stranded.

Last edited by GasperG; 18 Jun 2018 at 11:34.
GasperG is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jun 2018, 11:34 (Ref:3831601)   #1684
Akrapovic
Veteran
 
Akrapovic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Scotland
Posts: 7,160
Akrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Quote:
Originally Posted by GasperG View Post
Can you point me to the regulations where it says that stint length can not be exceeded and that this is measured in the number of laps?

For the general people to know why the penalty it's easier to name this "stint length" penalty, but I'm 100% certain that this is based on fuel allowance per stint and not km driven in "race mode".

Fuel usage penalty are actually two types, fuel per stint and energy (fuel) per lap, maybe just maybe "fuel usage penalty" is measured per lap fuel energy allowance and "stint length penalty" is stint fuel allowance. As @carbsmith noted per regulation there is min amount of fuel that must always be present in the car.
This was discussed on air during the race. What you are describing is what people (including Radio Le Mans) assumed it was. However, when the penalty was dished out, RLM were quick to point out this doesn't fit that understanding. People made assumptions on what the rule meant, rather than just actually reading the rule.

https://www.fia.com/file/67509/download?token=Qpm5Yckh

In terms of stint length, in any case, the maximum number of ‘green’ laps (without safety car, slow zone(s) and not
depending on track conditions) should not exceed 11 laps for LMP1H and 10 laps for LMP1NH in Le Mans 2018 race and
19 laps for LMP1H and 17 laps for LMP1NH in Spa 2018 race.


http://www.dailysportscar.com/2018/0...ictorious.html

Of note, the #7 Toyota served a 10 second stop and hold penalty for exceeding the allowable fuel on a previous stint. They received an additional 10 second stop and hold penalty for exceeding the maximum laps in a stint, the one where Kobayashi missed the pitlane and toured around the circuit saving fuel. The penalties did not affect the result.

Neel Jani in the #1 also received a 10 second stop and hold for exceeding the allowable fuel on a stint. The #7, Rebellion received an additional penalty for exceeding the maximum amount of laps per stint. Again, it didn’t affect the results.


They have issued penalties for both the fuel usage per stint and for the additional lap. These were different penalties for different rules.
Akrapovic is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jun 2018, 11:41 (Ref:3831602)   #1685
GasperG
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Slovenia
Posts: 585
GasperG has a lot of promise if they can keep it on the circuit!
Thank you for clarifying, but I still don't understand why such a rule if you have regulated tank sizes.
GasperG is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jun 2018, 13:43 (Ref:3831626)   #1686
Akrapovic
Veteran
 
Akrapovic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Scotland
Posts: 7,160
Akrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
I believe (but don't know), that it's the same reasons as SRO does it - it's an easy to balance the cars without having to work out all the fuel tank sizes for each engine.

Spa 24 has a mandated maximum stint length of 65 minutes and they also have minimum pit stop times. This means they don't need to bother adjusting fuel tank sizes for each car and don't need to bother with fuel fill rates during refuelling. They only have to adjust the air restrictor or turbo boost to mess with engine power, and not then have to readjust fuel tanks and fuel fill rates to get that back in line.

This being the problem with balancing things - when you adjust one thing (in this case, engine power via fuel flow), you then knock out the amount of distance the car can go on a tank of fuel (and it's different for every car because they all have different engines), and the the time it takes to refuel said car. So then you have to spend a lot of time adjusting the tank size correctly, and then off of that you then need to adjust the fuel fill time for each tank size. And then you have the Manor issue - they ran in high drag, so use more fuel. So is the rate that the Manor used fuel at a good number to work off of? The amount of room for error is massive - any mistake at any point could knock one car quite far off. So the easiest way is just set a maximum stint length and that way you don't bother with fuel tank sizes and fuel refill rates. It's easy but it takes a lot away from the racing as you're essentially mandating the strategy everyone has to run.

Hopefully, it's just a temporary measure until they work it out, because it was a complete mess. Same with the new pit stop regulations - it took a lot away from the two races. Changing that back would be a huge help and allow strategy to become important again.
Akrapovic is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jun 2018, 15:34 (Ref:3831657)   #1687
MaskedRacer
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,426
MaskedRacer should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridMaskedRacer should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
I am always a GT fan first and foremost, but WEC LMP did keep my interest pretty darn good in 2017. Even so far in 2018 to see if Toyota would break down and we could see a genuine privateer win a race overall. After seeing Toyota run flawlessly for 24 hours. I doubt 2 cars will run into major issues in any of the 3 remaining 6 hour races this year.

So yeah, GT is the only category of interest for the rest of this year in WEC I think. LMP is an after thought now at least until Sebring 2019.
MaskedRacer is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jun 2018, 19:34 (Ref:3831713)   #1688
TzeiTzei
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Finland
Posts: 1,136
TzeiTzei should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridTzeiTzei should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridTzeiTzei should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Now that we've got Le Mans out of the way, I'm hoping for a big change in the EoT. They've got to do something to make the racing in their top class more interesting. A Toyota 1-2 is already old news.
TzeiTzei is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jun 2018, 21:05 (Ref:3831747)   #1689
TF110
Veteran
 
TF110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United States
Posts: 14,181
TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akrapovic View Post
But that doesn't make much sense - they got two penalties. One was for stint length. If the stint length is too long, then it's too long. It doesn't become too long when you use too much fuel. They got separate penalties for separate infractions.

There is too many "I think" and "I imagine" when it comes to this rule. I posted the exact wording of it and what it means and was told I was wrong because others interpreted it differently. But that isn't how rules work - you have to look at exactly what the rule says. The rule says they shouldn't go over 10 laps, and when they did (outside of a SC situation) they were punished. That is exactly what the rules say would happen, and exactly what happened.

I don't think anyone is impressed with the current fuel regulation setup. We all understand why it's there, but we now have 3 rules governing the same thing (fuel tank size, fuel allocation per stint, and stint length), which all overlap and make it extremely complicated. And there's fuel flow as well, which breaks things further. I think we'd all agree that the rules setup needs to be simplified, and things like maximum stint lengths need to go.



I don't understand why people expected more from the privateers. They showed their pace at Spa, they showed their pace at the test. If we're thinking that the private cars could run 3:18s all day just because they managed a qualifying lap at the test, then that's just being silly. Toyota were 3-4 seconds off of the qualifying laps, and that's about normal for Le Mans. Of course the privateers would have the same drop-off - if not more than a factory team.

Another thing not taken into account is the Toyotas incredible ability to deal with the traffic. The way it can slice through cars on short straights is mind-blowing, even 4 years after the introduction of the hybrids. It's maybe my favourite thing about the LMP1s - that savage torque from the hybrid that lets it deal with packs of cars in an instant and short space. We saw a toned down but similar balancing problem in IMSA when they balanced the DPs and LMP2s. The lap times were identical, but the DPs dominated because they had so much torque that they could deal with traffic easier. So balancing cars on a lap time doesn't work out when you introduce traffic. And of course we seen the Toyotas leaving the pit stops on electrical power, saving 2 seconds each stop - they let the cat out of the bag on that one with the wheels spinning in the air - the hybrid is engaged before the cars on the ground - something the private teams aren't allowed to do.

I'm not arguing that the teams should be balanced. That's a different discussion altogether. There are perfectly good reasons why Toyota are winning, and without the EoT the gap would be larger. However, if we're going to sit and say "right the cars are being balanced", then it has to be done properly - because Le Mans was absolutely miles off. Everyone seen it coming, it was very predictable and it happened anyway. The gap at Spa was big, the private cars were then pegged back further, which negated any gain from the reduction in hybrid power per km, and the gap was the same as Spa. Add in the hard limit on stints and you get exactly what we saw.

Not taking anything away from Toyota - they still had to win, and they didn't cruise. Not saying private teams should be able to beat (or even challenge) a factory car. But I am saying that if they are going to balance it and sell the class to privateers based on the promise of balance, then it needs to be done properly.

The positive side is, that not one single LMP1 team was sandbagging. Everybody has been honest from the prologue onward, and we know 100% what the car's performances are now. So moving forward we should be able to see any improvement that the LMP1 teams make, and we have a unique situation of having two Le Mans in one season - so the next one there really is no excuse of missing that half a second target.

And we'll now get to see the Manors at Silverstone. They have 2 months to work on the car, with a downforce kit they already have. So I'm hoping it can at least start to challenge the ByKolles. I'm sure they've learnt a lot (especially about things that didn't work!), so I have high hopes for Silverstone now. REALLY looking forward to the LMP1 battle at Silverstone, even if Toyota do drive off.
I don't see how you're suggesting that. You don't have to look far to see it wasn't just me that thought they would be faster. Motorsport.com article Jenson Button said he expects to be in the teens during the race. Rebellion was expecting to be there based on going faster than the test day. When two teams expect to be in the teens and are not, I think that's reason enough for 'people to expect' them to be faster than what the were. They didn't even reach the times they did in the test day which was 3:19.6 and the track clearly got better. I don't know why but I was disappointed they couldn't even get that pace. Maybe they went backwards in terms of setup. We did hear some complaints in the race from the Rebellion drivers. There was multiple 3:20 laps but none broke that barrier.
TF110 is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jun 2018, 23:03 (Ref:3831767)   #1690
carbsmith
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,062
carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!carbsmith has a real shot at the podium!
#17 probably would have been in the 19s in the morning if it hadn't crashed out, anyways. I was under the impression Rebellion was cruising once the other privateers disappeared. With Toyotas laying down 17s that doesn't do much good though.

In earlier years the hybrid cars used to come back to the non-hybrids a bit from qualifying to race pace but that doesn't seem to much exist with the changes to energy deployment rates over the years.
carbsmith is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Jun 2018, 10:05 (Ref:3831837)   #1691
Akrapovic
Veteran
 
Akrapovic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Scotland
Posts: 7,160
Akrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameAkrapovic will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Quote:
Originally Posted by TF110 View Post
I don't see how you're suggesting that. You don't have to look far to see it wasn't just me that thought they would be faster. Motorsport.com article Jenson Button said he expects to be in the teens during the race. Rebellion was expecting to be there based on going faster than the test day. When two teams expect to be in the teens and are not, I think that's reason enough for 'people to expect' them to be faster than what the were. They didn't even reach the times they did in the test day which was 3:19.6 and the track clearly got better. I don't know why but I was disappointed they couldn't even get that pace. Maybe they went backwards in terms of setup. We did hear some complaints in the race from the Rebellion drivers. There was multiple 3:20 laps but none broke that barrier.
I suggest it because it's completely unrealistic. They can say they'll be in the teens, but that'd require a step in performance that'd be hard for a manufacturer to accomplish, nevermind privateer, and with no testing in between.

The test day is almost ideal conditions. Similar to qualifying you've got a half-empty track as half the grid is in the pits at any one time. You get nice clear runs. That's where these qualifying times come from. Then add in a qualifying simulation and that's where you're getting the 3:18s from.

Come race day, you're not on qualifying runs, you spend the time on new tyres with a full tank, and you've got an entire grid of 60 cars to deal with as traffic. As said, the traffic is a bigger killer for the non-hybrids because they don't have the incredible torque to help them. You're not going to get qualifying style times in that situation, no matter what.

The Toyota dropped off 2-3 seconds from its qualifying time, which is about normal. The LMP1 non-hybrids did too. Why would we expect anything different?

Whilst I understand being disappointed that they weren't closer, it shouldn't be surprising. Any hope of them being closer required a massive jump in performance from Spa - not only to gain back 2 laps over 6 hours, but to also make up the extra from the pegging back they got after Spa. That's not going to happen for any private team. You're basically asking them to close the gap to a factory team, by several seconds, whilst being given less fuel to work with than they had previously. I don't know why anyone expected the gap to come down?

Again I'm not saying Rebellion and SMP should be nagging the back of the Toyotas. That's a totally different discussion. But they said they'd get them within half a second and made changes contrary to achieving this. The result was very very predictable. So unless there is a huge swing for Silverstone, then this is what we'll have again.

But again, the plus side is nobody sand bagged. ACO said anyone faster than Toyota would get a penalty and that's just an anti-sand rule really. Nobody hid anything and we knew what everyone had. It's a refreshing change from GTE really. So now if they really want to balance it, we have a perfect baseline to use.
Akrapovic is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Jun 2018, 10:54 (Ref:3831843)   #1692
EffectiveSprinkles
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
EffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsedEffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsed
I understand the criticism that the cars were not perfectly where they were supposed to be according to the stated EoT goals. But certain context should not be ignored (new cars, new procedure etcetera). Really the biggest 'problem' is that Toyota has run flawlessly for two races now with no mechanical trouble. As long as they keep doing that, any discussion about EoT is kind of moot.
EffectiveSprinkles is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Jun 2018, 11:25 (Ref:3831849)   #1693
XtC24
Racer
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 150
XtC24 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridXtC24 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I understand people complainig about privateers pace but I feel they were far less disapointed themselfves than the people on internet.
From the beginning the deal was that they get a unique chance to win just because there is only one manufacturer present and "wait there is more " it was Toyota. A big, big chance.
So it was to be the fight between the privateers to be the best to capitalise.
But Toyotas were amazing and ran flawlessly for 24 hours with zero technical problems. I think it was not often the case, even for Audi.
So Toyota got their reward. Also they really went fast, quicker than last year.
I think that it maybe helped that it was colder than last year. And with Porsche they would probably have more pressure, for drivers, cars and the whole team, more stress. Maybe a mistake would be more likely.
Still I think, they would manage it this time. They were really better prepared.

There was big pressure not to lose this time with only privateer opposition however.
XtC24 is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Jun 2018, 16:39 (Ref:3831908)   #1694
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,882
chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!chernaudi has a real shot at the podium!
Borrowing from another site, here's a quote talking about the advantage that Audi Sport with the Audi R8 and in '03 the Bentley Speed 8 had over the nearest true full-on privateer effort:

"Audi/Bentley beat the top opposition car gaps of 24, 23, 16, 17 and 18 laps for the first 5 years. It didn't get close until Audi was using an outdated car that was further hampered by penalties for being outside the latest regulation."

So it can be argued that Audi Sport had at least as big an advantage over the privateers as Toyota this year. It also happened in the Porsche days, too. Like 1981 when the Porsche 936 beat the 2nd place Rondeau by nearly 15 laps. So it happens when you have 1, maybe 2, factory teams vs the privateers.

So in this instance, I'd argue that Toyota were right on the money, especially given that they had no major issues and the Rebellions also lost some time with issues.
chernaudi is online now  
Quote
Old 19 Jun 2018, 19:09 (Ref:3831935)   #1695
TF110
Veteran
 
TF110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
United States
Posts: 14,181
TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!TF110 is going for a new lap record!
Lots of teams improved their pace from the test day. The only lmp1's that did any real gains in lap time were Toyota and Ginetta. The SMP's gained a little bit, near a second but Toyota and Ginetta gained about 2 seconds. I guess you can say dragonspeed did too, but it's mostly because the car was a rebuild at the test day. We'll hopefully see closer pace at Silverstone. Maybe the aco will be generous with the eot.
TF110 is offline  
Quote
Reply

Bookmarks




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2018 Silly Season (with POLL) GTRMagic Australasian Touring Cars. 2074 19 Oct 2018 06:49
[Driver] 2018 F1 silly season. F1Guy Formula One 1204 17 Sep 2018 00:44
WEC round 8: Six Hours of Bahrain---WEC season finale. chernaudi ACO Regulated Series 212 23 Nov 2015 22:17
Hockenheim secures new deal until 2018 jab Formula One 13 2 Oct 2009 01:25


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT. The time now is 21:49.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2018 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.