 |
|
30 Dec 2020, 17:32 (Ref:4025864)
|
#7771
|
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 349
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamasque
Maybe I didn't makes myself clear. I meant <why token HY?> as opposed to none at all. Your answer only supports the argument that hybrid system is a pointless and unnecessary burden for what's a budget-minded customer racing class.
|
I agree. That said there is HUGE PC Pressure to become green. We are looking into several things to address the future and trying to keep ICE possible.
|
|
|
30 Dec 2020, 17:59 (Ref:4025867)
|
#7772
|
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,588
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamasque
Maybe I didn't makes myself clear. I meant <why token HY?> as opposed to none at all. Your answer only supports the argument that hybrid system is a pointless and unnecessary burden for what's a budget-minded customer racing class.
|
Token HY because its woke. Need to pay homage to the narrative.
|
|
|
30 Dec 2020, 18:44 (Ref:4025877)
|
#7773
|
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,670
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyderman
Token HY because its woke. Need to pay homage to the narrative.
|
Good term there. It's a "Homage Hybrid". Perhaps homage is what the little "h" stands for in LMDh. Not "husky" after all.
|
|
|
5 Jan 2021, 18:34 (Ref:4027037)
|
#7774
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,607
|
I'm also wondering if too many "good" ideas have been thought up. Just look at the stuff that Audi Sport did--they brought modern electronic DFI to auto racing, turbo diesels, helped bring in hybrids. Doesn't help either that rules got more restrictive in hopes of cost containment (restrictive in the wrong areas) while promoting OEMs to sink money into go big or go home hybrid tech. That combined with rules that IMO were too restrictive sent teams--both factory and privateer--chasing dead ends, beating dead horses for diminishing returns.
A lot of that stuff makes me appreciate stuff I saw between 2004 and 2013 or so more and more just because it seemed back then possibilities were limitless, and I wanted to see what would happen next.
At least with LMH and LMDH areo rules have been opened up a bit, weight increases place less incentive on pursuing ultra-lightweight tech and opens up powertrain choices.
|
|
__________________
Power to me is having the ability to make a change in a positive way. Don't dream it, be it.
|
13 Jan 2021, 16:52 (Ref:4028765)
|
#7775
|
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 349
|
|
|
|
13 Jan 2021, 17:39 (Ref:4028774)
|
#7776
|
 Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 11,921
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Napolis
|
Coming together nicely! Look forward to seeing the body panels go on!
|
|
|
15 Jan 2021, 05:24 (Ref:4029152)
|
#7777
|
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,588
|
I have been entertaining myself by listening to these Podacsts from the "Engineering the Greats" series (Gordon Murray, John Barnard, Frank Dernie, Patrick Head, Adrian Newey) on Motorsport Magazine. I thoroughly enjoyed them. Most entertaining.
The reason I'm posting this here is due to their takes on regulations. I know what is discussed are F1 regulations, but the principles they talk about apply to Sportscar racing too.
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/a...tegory/podcast
Enjoy!
|
|
|
16 Jan 2021, 16:00 (Ref:4029457)
|
#7778
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,607
|
I referenced this in the Toyota thread, but anyone think that the weight increase and single primary body kit rules for LMH may be the ACO making a mea culpa over criticism over the dorsal fins and the bulbous front fenders/wheel arches that appeared on the LM aero kits in LMP1 especially?
After all, heavier cars are harder to flip over given their increased mass, and one body kit that might have to be dirtied up for the sprint races means that aside from minor changes, you have to make the one kit work to some degree everywhere, not just LM.
|
|
__________________
Power to me is having the ability to make a change in a positive way. Don't dream it, be it.
|
16 Jan 2021, 16:14 (Ref:4029461)
|
#7779
|
14th
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 35,538
|
Mea culpa! I don’t think they consider it an error as their priority was safety not aesthetics.
The additional weight may or may not be in their thoughts, but again I don’t think it is the priority. That is the performance level and how the class came about.
|
|
__________________
Always consider it could be sarcasm.
|
16 Jan 2021, 17:37 (Ref:4029472)
|
#7780
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,607
|
Up until now, the ACO's attempts to get the top class back even close to lapping at 3:30 or slower around Le Mans failed, each one of them.
2009 wing span reduction and air restrictor adjustments, failed. In '09 the cars were faster than in 2007 (first time 3:30 was broken in a race) and '10 gave us the distance record and fastest Le Mans.
2011 engine downsizing, failed. Cars were lapping as fast or faster than 2009. And don't get started on the 2014-20 regs that produced the fastest LMP1 cars ever.
The fact that the fin is still there (the ACO adopted it because of other failed attempts to slow the cars down/keep them from flipping over in high speed spins) shows that the ACO have faith in it. The fact that it's smaller means that either the ACO are hoping that adding 200kg to the top class minimum weight will help keep the cars on the ground by reducing max cornering speeds or just that something heavier will take more force to be lifted, or they're taking advantage of that to address fan criticism (ie, chicken or egg, intent or side-effect).
The one aero kit having to be somewhat universal also IMO for sure--directly or indirectly--addresses the appearance factor even more. At least the GR010 doesn't have the bulbous front fenders that a lot of LM aero kits adopted. nor the Lister Storm LMP type front fenders that the early TS040 had.
But what does this mean for performance? Toyota are claiming that around Le Mans (I read this either from Sportscar 365 or a Road and Track online article) the GR010 should be, on their estimates, be about 10 seconds a lap slower. If we're talking compared to race trim this year, that's close to the ACO's long desired/obsessed over 3:30. If we're talking qualifying--and I also tend to think that the newer cars can lap closer to their qualifying times in race trim due to no lift and coast--we're talking current LMP2 pace, which that's well above 3:30 even, especially with pro drivers in the cars.
|
|
__________________
Power to me is having the ability to make a change in a positive way. Don't dream it, be it.
|
16 Jan 2021, 17:45 (Ref:4029475)
|
#7781
|
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,088
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chernaudi
Up until now, the ACO's attempts to get the top class back even close to lapping at 3:30 or slower around Le Mans failed, each one of them.
2009 wing span reduction and air restrictor adjustments, failed. In '09 the cars were faster than in 2007 (first time 3:30 was broken in a race) and '10 gave us the distance record and fastest Le Mans.
2011 engine downsizing, failed. Cars were lapping as fast or faster than 2009. And don't get started on the 2014-20 regs that produced the fastest LMP1 cars ever.
The fact that the fin is still there (the ACO adopted it because of other failed attempts to slow the cars down/keep them from flipping over in high speed spins) shows that the ACO have faith in it. The fact that it's smaller means that either the ACO are hoping that adding 200kg to the top class minimum weight will help keep the cars on the ground by reducing max cornering speeds or just that something heavier will take more force to be lifted, or they're taking advantage of that to address fan criticism (ie, chicken or egg, intent or side-effect).
The one aero kit having to be somewhat universal also IMO for sure--directly or indirectly--addresses the appearance factor even more. At least the GR010 doesn't have the bulbous front fenders that a lot of LM aero kits adopted. nor the Lister Storm LMP type front fenders that the early TS040 had.
But what does this mean for performance? Toyota are claiming that around Le Mans (I read this either from Sportscar 365 or a Road and Track online article) the GR010 should be, on their estimates, be about 10 seconds a lap slower. If we're talking compared to race trim this year, that's close to the ACO's long desired/obsessed over 3:30. If we're talking qualifying--and I also tend to think that the newer cars can lap closer to their qualifying times in race trim due to no lift and coast--we're talking current LMP2 pace, which that's well above 3:30 even, especially with pro drivers in the cars.
|
According to lmp2 portimao test, the oreca 07 restricted at 560hp was only 1 second slower than an unrestricted one. Just making a simple proportion, at le mans, fastest 2021 lmp2 should be in a range of 3.28-3.30. I think we should expect 3.25-3.27 for lmdh, basically 2020 lmp2 top performances.
I wonder how fast will be lmh in a track like silverstone where lmp2 should have a consistent advantage being lighter and having an overall better aero.
|
|
|
16 Jan 2021, 20:22 (Ref:4029500)
|
#7782
|
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 349
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by canaglia
According to lmp2 portimao test, the oreca 07 restricted at 560hp was only 1 second slower than an unrestricted one. Just making a simple proportion, at le mans, fastest 2021 lmp2 should be in a range of 3.28-3.30. I think we should expect 3.25-3.27 for lmdh, basically 2020 lmp2 top performances.
I wonder how fast will be lmh in a track like silverstone where lmp2 should have a consistent advantage being lighter and having an overall better aero.
|
Note exact weight of new Toyota Hybrid LMH.
|
|
|
16 Jan 2021, 21:02 (Ref:4029508)
|
#7783
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,607
|
Of course, if we knew what laptimes were at Paul Ricard and Algarve between the TS050 vs the GR010, we could probably know what to expect. Not that Toyota are exactly forthcoming with that information...
Also, aren't the LMP2s also carrying ballast compared to 2020 specs? Could the ACO maybe be (maybe not intentionally) engineering ALMS 2007-08 and 2010 where LMP1 and LMP2 cars were both equally capable of winning at most tracks?
|
|
__________________
Power to me is having the ability to make a change in a positive way. Don't dream it, be it.
|
16 Jan 2021, 21:59 (Ref:4029519)
|
#7784
|
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,088
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chernaudi
Of course, if we knew what laptimes were at Paul Ricard and Algarve between the TS050 vs the GR010, we could probably know what to expect. Not that Toyota are exactly forthcoming with that information...
Also, aren't the LMP2s also carrying ballast compared to 2020 specs? Could the ACO maybe be (maybe not intentionally) engineering ALMS 2007-08 and 2010 where LMP1 and LMP2 cars were both equally capable of winning at most tracks?
|
don't know about that, so far I know 2021 lmp2 will have a dunlop/goodyear compound supplied for everyone and the powercut (guess engine limited to 8250rpm like IMSA). At the moment lmh are about 100kg heavier and should have a worse overall aero even if as shown by toyota pics, lmh should have a much more better developed diffuser
|
|
|
17 Jan 2021, 01:08 (Ref:4029544)
|
#7785
|
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,071
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by canaglia
According to lmp2 portimao test, the oreca 07 restricted at 560hp was only 1 second slower than an unrestricted one. Just making a simple proportion, at le mans, fastest 2021 lmp2 should be in a range of 3.28-3.30. I think we should expect 3.25-3.27 for lmdh, basically 2020 lmp2 top performances.
I wonder how fast will be lmh in a track like silverstone where lmp2 should have a consistent advantage being lighter and having an overall better aero.
|
Don't forget the tires lmp2 will run. I have a feeling that will play a big role in slowing the cars down.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|