LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules)

[ss_collins]

Peugeot just invieled the first running LMP hybrid. Full story to follow but pics on racecar engineering now.
http://www.racecar-engineering.com/n...-for-2009.html

[deggis]

[CTD]

Love that car!.
The 908Hy is so pretty!

[AU N EGL]

English Version:

http://www.lemans.org/24heuresdumans..._regl09_gb.pdf


( did not see this posted )

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Only 2 mechanics during tyre changes and tyre warmers are banned

I do not know if I agree with the new pit stop rule or not, yet. It seems pretty clear to me that this is a Peugeot based rule, or more rightly, a coupe based rules equalizer. And there does seem to be an influx of coupes on the horizon so it may very well be a good rule.(?) They equalize fuel time, so why not driver change-over time, by manipulating the tire changing time to afford more time to accomplish the driver change-over?

The warmers???

L.P.

[Flat12-Aircool]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

And another thing, if LMP1 are targetted for 3.42 laptimes in 2011, how slow do they want LMP2 and the GT's? LMP2 were 13.8s slower then LMP1 so they'll end up 3.55-4.00. That's pretty close to the fastest GT2 car of this year (4.00min).

I'm not sure that's exactly what they mean.

I think that on their own a 2011 car would indeed be around 3.42, but with added introduction of energy recovery systems that would bring the cars back upto closer 3:30.

[TRuss]

They say it's to discourage tire changes. Requiring the tire manufacturers to make longer lasting tires. This is supposed to save money because the teams won't need to buy as many tires. That's what I read. Who know's the true motivation?

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by TRuss

They say it's to discourage tire changes. Requiring the tire manufacturers to make longer lasting tires. This is supposed to save money because the teams won't need to buy as many tires. That's what I read. Who know's the true motivation?

I think that is mostly a smoke screen. Tires on a semi-regular basis have been double and triple stinted already! So the tires can already do the distances.


L.P.

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by Flat12-Aircool

I'm not sure that's exactly what they mean.

I think that on their own a 2011 car would indeed be around 3.42, but with added introduction of energy recovery systems that would bring the cars back upto closer 3:30.

That could indeed be the case, but if so then they really need to state it more clearly. Guess their is plenty of time till 2011, so I guess all will become clear in due time.

[Flat12-Aircool]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

The rear wing is significantly reduced:

Compared to current rules:

40 cm smaller in width and 5 cm in depth.

I'm really against this particular change, it's going to alter the whole look of the cars.

I probably would have settled for the depth reduction, but I really do like the full width aspect of the wings.

[TRuss]

We'll get used to it. I absolutely hated the champhered sides when they first came about. Now I don't even notice them anymore.

[cmk]

My first impression of these rules, without much time spent contemplating them, is that they are almost uniformly nested somewhere between bland and stupid. I can only hope that all this effort on the part of the rulemakers to slow things down will be counterbalanced by technological development to the point where the pace is about equivalent to where it was, if not this year, in 2006. I recognize that ACO-rules prototypes are getting scarily fast, particularly apparent in person at Mosport this year, but I don't want to see a snail parade either.

The hybrid thing really really surprised me. With both Peugeot and Zytek having cars in the late stages of development, I was sure the equivalency work would be done over the winter to allow them to be classified next year. Seriously, no points I could understand, but pretending they are invisible is a slap in the face. I can only hope there is an IMSA exemption to this for Corsa next year. Peugeot can afford to run a technology demonstrator around - privateers can't. Their sponsors and investors need results.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by cmk

My first impression of these rules, without much time spent contemplating them, is that they are almost uniformly nested somewhere between bland and stupid. I can only hope that all this effort on the part of the rulemakers to slow things down will be counterbalanced by technological development to the point where the pace is about equivalent to where it was, if not this year, in 2006. I recognize that ACO-rules prototypes are getting scarily fast, particularly apparent in person at Mosport this year, but I don't want to see a snail parade either.

The hybrid thing really really surprised me. With both Peugeot and Zytek having cars in the late stages of development, I was sure the equivalency work would be done over the winter to allow them to be classified next year. Seriously, no points I could understand, but pretending they are invisible is a slap in the face. I can only hope there is an IMSA exemption to this for Corsa next year. Peugeot can afford to run a technology demonstrator around - privateers can't. Their sponsors and investors need results.

Regarding hybrids, would seem the ACO learned their lesson from the diesels. They blew the equivalency with those now they are simply being super cautious.

[CTD]

Hmm, the new rear wing, wouldn't that improve the top speed, because of the lower down force it produce!?.
And will the mountings change to then?, perhaps the same style as this:

Found on:
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by cmk

M

The hybrid thing really really surprised me.

Why should it surprise you? No one really knows what this kind of engine / motor or power plant can really do?