[WEC] LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules - now hypercar rules)

[Mike E]

I guess it's going smell a bit different trackside.

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2021/0...-wec-elms.html

[Aysedasi]

I guess 'raising a glass' to the victors will have that little bit more relevance......

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

The comparison with LMP2 is not really fair. If you tweak the rules you can make a faster car than LMP1-H for even less money than LMP2. But if you allow unlimited constructor competition within those same rules budgets may escalate from sub-LMP2 to sub-F1 levels. Ultimately the pace is dictated by the rules. We're way past the ultimate speeds era. Cars go and look exactly like the rules say they should. Whereas a spec class with a cost cap is naturally cheaper than one with any kind of design freedom.

I think the rules is what possible complaining will arise from. But I'm hopeful that hypercar will improve in pace and the separation between lmp2 wont be a big talking point.

[Pandamasque]

The solution is simple and obvious. A spec LMP2 class is as much out of place in World Endurance Championship as Formula 2 would be. Nix it.

[Sodemo]

I think the Hypercar class is fast enough in a straight line. I would (personally) suggest that they be allowed to lower the car(s) by say 10mm and lose 20-50kg of weight in order to further distinguish them from the LMP2 class. Both of these measures surely wouldn't cost the teams much to carry out, assuming it wouldn't require a suspension re-design.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

The solution is simple and obvious. A spec LMP2 class is as much out of place in World Endurance Championship as Formula 2 would be. Nix it.

Not for me, I couldn't disagree more. Right now, anyway. But then I'm an LMP2 fan because they just provide great racing.

[J Jay]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I think the Hypercar class is fast enough in a straight line. I would (personally) suggest that they be allowed to lower the car(s) by say 10mm and lose 20-50kg of weight in order to further distinguish them from the LMP2 class. Both of these measures surely wouldn't cost the teams much to carry out, assuming it wouldn't require a suspension re-design.

Lowering weight seems to be a point of contention for the hypercar teams - both Toyota & Glickenhaus have firmly stated that losing any significant amount of weight would require significant redesigns, to the point that is isn't viable during a regulation cycle.

They've been suspiciously quiet on power though, so personally I'd bump power up to 550kW and leave it there. ~740hp is hardly a massive leap from where the cars are currently, and it will help with accelerating past traffic.

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by J Jay

Lowering weight seems to be a point of contention for the hypercar teams - both Toyota & Glickenhaus have firmly stated that losing any significant amount of weight would require significant redesigns, to the point that is isn't viable during a regulation cycle.

They've been suspiciously quiet on power though, so personally I'd bump power up to 550kW and leave it there. ~740hp is hardly a massive leap from where the cars are currently, and it will help with accelerating past traffic.

I guess a power increase could help, potentially easy enough for turbo teams, although if anyone had developed a NA engine (is anyone?), I imagine would be tough to increase, unless we are talking air restrictors (are they even used? - no idea).

I understand what you are saying about the weight issue, although knowing what the ACO have proposed (a BOP system) surely you would design a car that allows a weight increase and reduction with relative ease? Everyone by now knows how BOP formulas work, so why design a car that can't adhere? Increasing and losing weight is part and parcel of a lot of series now, so i'm surprised if this can't be achieved.

[canaglia]

drop off 50kg from the night to the next day may be quite unrealistic but if ACO will decide a 50kg cut after last race to bring min. weight to about 1000kg for 2022 season, toyota and glickenhaus will have about 4 months to find a new suspensions setting and ballast reposition. I'm not a TMG or podium engineer but I don't find that so unlikely to achieve.

[J Jay]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I guess a power increase could help, potentially easy enough for turbo teams, although if anyone had developed a NA engine (is anyone?), I imagine would be tough to increase, unless we are talking air restrictors (are they even used? - no idea).

Only Alpine currently run an NA engine, all the details we have to far on hypercar programs indicate turbocharged engines. Assuming Alpine go ahead with their own hypercar design, I would expect them to follow suit.

I understand what you are saying about the weight issue, although knowing what the ACO have proposed (a BOP system) surely you would design a car that allows a weight increase and reduction with relative ease? Everyone by now knows how BOP formulas work, so why design a car that can't adhere? Increasing and losing weight is part and parcel of a lot of series now, so i'm surprised if this can't be achieved.

This one's on the ACO. According to their regulations (Article 4.3), they have mandated up to 50kg of ballast above the base weight of 1030kg. It seems there was never an intention for weight to be lowered below that as part of the BoP process.

Originally Posted by canaglia

drop off 50kg from the night to the next day may be quite unrealistic but if ACO will decide a 50kg cut after last race to bring min. weight to about 1000kg for 2022 season, toyota and glickenhaus will have about 4 months to find a new suspensions setting and ballast reposition. I'm not a TMG or podium engineer but I don't find that so unlikely to achieve.

As always, it's a question of cost. For manufacturers, they could probably be leaned upon and expected to make up the difference. Privateers, less so. It also wouldn't be the best look for the much-vaunted "locked in" designs to require a significant change mid-season.

[Sodemo]

If any change were to take place you would surely need to give teams 6+ months notice etc, or do it at the end of the season.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

If any change were to take place you would surely need to give teams 6+ months notice etc, or do it at the end of the season.

It's probably all going to depend on what Peugeot want. In the past, Peugeot have generally got what they wanted.....

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I guess a power increase could help, potentially easy enough for turbo teams, although if anyone had developed a NA engine (is anyone?), I imagine would be tough to increase, unless we are talking air restrictors (are they even used? - no idea).

Toyota - big turbo V6, Peugeot - small turbo V6, Ferrari - turbo V6 (unconfirmed yet), Glickenhaus turbo V8.

I have feeling a small power bump from ACO would not only be possible, but also welcomed by the LMH teams.
But then there's the LMDh part of the equation...

[Sodemo]

The thing is, if the ACO want teams or car makers to invest in LMH machinery, there needs to be a distinction between LMP2 and LMH. The likes of BMW, Audi, Ferrari aren’t going to be happy if their new LMH car which has undoubtedly cost thousands to produce is then beaten by a LMP2 car. Granted I actually liked the fact that an LMP2 car almost won lemans a few years back but that was a result of the leaders having trouble, I think on pure pace a LMH car should be at least 5-6 seconds faster over an average lap and maybe 10 seconds faster at lemans.

If I were controlling the regs I would make LMH;

- 30kg lighter
- 10mm lower ride height
- +50bhp

[J Jay]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

The thing is, if the ACO want teams or car makers to invest in LMH machinery, there needs to be a distinction between LMP2 and LMH. The likes of BMW, Audi, Ferrari aren’t going to be happy if their new LMH car which has undoubtedly cost thousands to produce is then beaten by a LMP2 car. Granted I actually liked the fact that an LMP2 car almost won lemans a few years back but that was a result of the leaders having trouble, I think on pure pace a LMH car should be at least 5-6 seconds faster over an average lap and maybe 10 seconds faster at lemans.

If I were controlling the regs I would make LMH;

- 30kg lighter
- 10mm lower ride height
- +50bhp

The difference between the fastest race laps in LMH & LMP2 was already ~3.5 seconds. You'd expect LMH to find at least a couple of seconds year-on-year with development, whereas (barring significant changes), LMP2 won't be more than a few tenths quicker. The 5-6 second gap is almost here already, albeit on pure pace. We'll have to see what the average lap times look like for a better picture.

I agree with the changes though, particularly more power. I still have my doubts about lowering weight, unfortunately.

[Sodemo]

What do the LMH cars have under the floor, is it just a flat bottom or do they have some kind of aero tunnel system?

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

What do the LMH cars have under the floor, is it just a flat bottom or do they have some kind of aero tunnel system?

Unlike with LMP cars, in LMH it can wildly vary from car to car. LMDh will probably have a flat floor.

[broadrun96]

And keep in mind the LMDh cars will be developing the new LMP2 cars and know they have to be slower. It will be interesting to see what they add to the LMDh base chassis to make them LMP2 in a few years

[deggis]

The next-gen LMP2 that is slower should solve the inter-class speed difference issue.

And making LMH faster means LMDh needs to match it.

[chernaudi]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

Unlike with LMP cars, in LMH it can wildly vary from car to car. LMDh will probably have a flat floor.

The Cadillac render released with their LMDH announcement this morning (though far from a final, completed car) shows that the LMH aero regs will apply to LMDH, which means that aside from the 2 inch tall/1000mm wide lip in the splitter of the front diffuser, underbody aero is largely free, as on the Toyota and the Glickenhaus.


LMP2 may just be like the current cars with the bodywork having to fit in a 2000mm wide x4750 or 4900mm long box, with the same basic current aero package evolved to fit (ie, quasi spec underfloor with some freedom in the design of the front diffuser).

[joeb]

Originally Posted by deggis

The next-gen LMP2 that is slower should solve the inter-class speed difference issue.

And making LMH faster means LMDh needs to match it.

The slower, next-gen, LMP2 cars already exist. They were racing at Le Mans last week as chassis by Adess, Ligier and Duqueine.

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

The Cadillac render released with their LMDH announcement this morning (though far from a final, completed car) shows that the LMH aero regs will apply to LMDH, which means that aside from the 2 inch tall/1000mm wide lip in the splitter of the front diffuser, underbody aero is largely free, as on the Toyota and the Glickenhaus.

This "render" has zero bearing on reality. I'm not even sure it's a render. It seems like a hastily rehashed drawing of a Peugeot 9X8. The asymmetrical bodywork looks like someone literally copy pasted the rear fin from left to right. This fin protrudes outside the width of the car and seems to be aimed at killing the Le Mans chequered flag guy



The name at the bottom of the image is Chris Mikalauskas, who is a road car designer at Cadillac.

Just to remind, this is what the Peugeot Hypercar looked like when they were at the same stage Cadillac is now. Yes, that's a rear wing.


Basically don't read to much into this, other than that GM needed a picture to go with the press release and had literally nothing of any substance to share.

[veeten]

Hmmmm...
I'm more interested in the engine/fuel equation of LMH/LMDh, than anything else. The new mandate of 100% E-based fuels for endurance racing could be quite an interesting one. The only motorsport that has been down this road is one that has done so for more than 70+ years: Indycar.
A good number of those running teams in IMSA are also running Indycar teams, with vast experience in handling and utilizing ethanol-based engines, including Ganassi racing.
Don't be surprised if you see a few wins by GM(Cadillac) and Honda(Acura), just as IMSA changes over to Ethanol-based fuel.

[Pandamasque]

GM ran on 85% ethanol at Le Mans back in C6.R GT1 and GT2 days.



And they weren't even the first to use biofuels at Le Mans.

[carbsmith]

I'm reasonably sure those fins are supposed to be angled along the length of the car and not the width and it looks wrong because the leading edge of where they kink back back is misplaced on one side and the shading is weird. Strange tail lights though.