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

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by GasperG

What about LPM2 will the rules stay as they are?

They won't change LMP2 for at least another couple years. Probably won't change it much, though - when it became clear the manufacturers were leaving LMP1 and opening the door for privateers, most of the anger at the LMP2 rules died out. Might come back if manufacturers return in force to LMP1, but even then we'll probably only get a relaxing of the chassis manufacturer restrictions - the class has proven too popular to do much to it if the chassis builders don't start complaining again.

The will obviously have to be slowed down, or not?

If they stick to aiming for 3:20 laps at Le Mans for P1, the P2s will be almost five seconds slower - P2 pole time is 3:24.816(or rather, WOULD HAVE been had the time not been taken away for missing a scrutineering call). That's enough of a gap in my book.

[GasperG]

Correct me if I'm wrong but 50% thermal is MGU-H included, there is no MGU-H allowed in new rules, and even by current rules MGU-H adds to hybrid energy and is not counted in BSFC.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by tigas

But there the efficiency was free, not regulated: it was the amount of fuel that was regulated, development was in how to get more bang from the fuel, just like in current F1 regulations.
This is the opposite.

This isn't the opposite. An efficiency regulation is still an efficiency regulation. This one is just paired up with some other restrictions. You seem to think that by imposing weight and dimension limitations it restricts engine design possibilities, but that simply isn't true(more on that in a bit).

I hate to break this to you, but the unfortunate truth is that the wide-open methodology wasn't working. They needed to find another way.

Here's the thing... Unless I'm missing something in the announced regulations(which IS possible - I'm reading this after getting home from work and I really, REALLY should be going to bed), we still don't know HOW the efficiency will be regulated. And that's extremely important.

The maximum power output is NOT an efficiency regulation, but it CAN provide an area for a lot of development work in concert with any other efficiency regulations - if the maximum power is high enough that the other efficiency regulations, whatever they may be(and a simple fuel limitation can achieve this), make it difficult to achieve that power without exceeding the efficiency limits, then you open up a lot of need for development.

Unless you regulate spec components for every single part of the engine, there WILL be room to develop. Lots of room.

All of this goes for aerodynamics, as well. Unless they mandate every little piece, there will be plenty of room to allow for a wide arrange of setups and developments to find ways to get ahead within the restrictions.

If the efficiency wasn't regulated in these regs the F1 ICEs would be a shoo-in with their 50% thermal efficiency at wide-open throttle, AFAIK no other racing engines come even close.

...No. The F1 powerplants were never going to be a real option for LMP1. They're simply too expensive. This is something that's always bugged me when it's come up - P1-H was considered too expensive as-is, yet people expected they would bring in powerplants that are known to be even MORE expensive? Not gonna happen.

The LMP1-H cars cost a fraction per year than what an F1 car does, but could still only get three serious manufacturers. There is simply no way F1 powerplants would have worked.

With that all said and done... I REALLY need to get some sleep. We can continue this debate when I awaken if you wish.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Juntos

We have to be prepared for this press conference. Don't let today's disappointments cast a shadow on tomorrow's dreams.

Hopefully the new regulations will be designed to turn people who are miserable off sportscar racing so that those who find it possible to enjoy things can get on with following this sport.

[Akrapovic]

I can see we're already arguing over details, despite the lack of such details.

I think the idea looks fine. It isn't just LMPs with some funny lights like some said it'd be. To be honest, it looks like they're aiming at the P4/5 and SCG003C style. And I'm fine with that. I've also been arguing for a sort of cheap/partially spec customer hybrid system for years. So it's nice to see this mentioned.

Hydrogen may not be the future for road cars, but it will allow race cars to retain the noise. I'm all for that.

Let's call it GTP.

[Akrapovic]

I hope Jim is getting credit for the new 2020 cars

[gustavobamba]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I hope Jim is getting credit for the new 2020 cars

Or MCLAREN SENNA GTR!!!!!

[canaglia]

Didn't figure out yet, 700hp (522kw) will be the overall power output target or just the ICE target?

As I read 200kw will be hybrid max power release, so it remains just about 320kw from ICE?

320kw are just about 430hp! this power could be easily achieved by a street turbo 2L

[blankfile]

Originally Posted by canaglia

Didn't figure out yet, 700hp (522kw) will be the overall power output target or just the ICE target?

As I read 200kw will be hybrid max power release, so it remains just about 320kw from ICE?

320kw are just about 430hp! this power could be easily achieved by a street turbo 2L

its ice only the 700hp from what I understand

[canaglia]

Well.... considering that right now maybe just nismo V6 hits that power, fuel flow will remain >100kg/h for sure.

Would be nice too see a ferrary lmp powered by a detuned 6.2 V12

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I can see we're already arguing over details, despite the lack of such details.

Quite. At the moment we have confirmation of the principle of the regulations. Seems alright to me.

[YZFrider]

Originally Posted by GasperG

Correct me if I'm wrong but 50% thermal is MGU-H included, there is no MGU-H allowed in new rules, and even by current rules MGU-H adds to hybrid energy and is not counted in BSFC.

That’s correct from my understanding. Let’s not forget MGU-K too, as it is recovering energy that would otherwise be wasted as heat from braking, energy that was already giving the car momentum from combusted fuel. ICE combustion + MGU K/H = 50%.

Agreed with some opinions, still vague information about regulations, not complete to give full opinion. Initially it seems alright

[chernaudi]

I think that people are whinging based on a render of what the ACO propose that the cars could look like. I have no doubt that the proposal will change a few times before it's implemented.

I also think that people are upset about certain things being spec or appearing spec. Again, that can and possibly will change.

Fact is that the ACO have to do something to drum up interest among manufacturers and privateers to keep LMP1 fresh, though I'd also hope for more stability with the rules than we've had over the period from 2009-2014 where we went though basically three formulae changes that was a drain on resources for teams.

[MaskedRacer]

I'm a big fan of the new regulations. I think the super GT car look is fantastic and fits the meaning of sportscars. Not the current LMP1 cars which is formula 1 cars with a roof and fenders.

The GTP cars would fit into the Fast and Furious movies quite nicely. I do think that it could mark the end of GTE. But for good reason. Maybe at that point GT3 can be brought into the 24 hour race.

So yeah let the dominoes fall. Lets see what happens to LMP2 and GTE now.

[chernaudi]

One thing that I do find interesting is that the ACO are still targeting approx 3:20 lap times at LM. However, the new cars might be getting a 100-150bhp power boost, but the cars are also proposed to weigh nearly 100kg more than the current Toyota LMP1s.

One does answer the question of how to make up for going from 8MJ to 5MJ max for hybrids, but how much will a 100-150kg weight gain slow the cars along with aero changes?

Regardless, I do see these cars being somewhat slower than the current cars (by how much, I don't know and we can only guess), though I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing with all the offs we've had already this week.

I do think that all classes can lose a few seconds in lap time around LM, and it probably won't effect the racing.

[blankfile]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

One thing that I do find interesting is that the ACO are still targeting approx 3:20 lap times at LM. However, the new cars might be getting a 100-150bhp power boost, but the cars are also proposed to weigh nearly 100kg more than the current Toyota LMP1s.

One does answer the question of how to make up for going from 8MJ to 5MJ max for hybrids, but how much will a 100-150kg weight gain slow the cars along with aero changes?

Regardless, I do see these cars being somewhat slower than the current cars (by how much, I don't know and we can only guess), though I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing with all the offs we've had already this week.

I do think that all classes can lose a few seconds in lap time around LM, and it probably won't effect the racing.

The heigher weight and more drag will probably be offset a bit with the movable aero parts. If this includes air brakes etc they might be really really fast.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I can see we're already arguing over details, despite the lack of such details.

Funnily enough, that was part of the point I was trying to make, but as I once again made the mistake of debating while exhausted I can see when looking over my posts with my now-alert and awake mind that I utterly failed to make that clear.

I think the idea looks fine. It isn't just LMPs with some funny lights like some said it'd be. To be honest, it looks like they're aiming at the P4/5 and SCG003C style.

Which makes me quite happy. I always said that the basic LMP design should look somewhat like the SGC003 - all the aero trends of current cars but with a cockpit that actually looks like a two-seater.

Hydrogen may not be the future for road cars, but it will allow race cars to retain the noise. I'm all for that.

I think hydrogen has a bigger future for roadcars than people think. Did you know you can actually plug a tank of hydrogen into a modern engine and it will run? The cars aren't MEANT to do it, and as a result it's not exactly efficient or, more importantly, SAFE, but it will run.

Seriously, I cannot emphasize enough how UNSAFE the idea is. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT TRY IT AT HOME IF YOU ARE NOT AN EXPERT!!!!!

Producing hydrogen on a wide enough scale to fuel cars on the needed level is the only real hurdle that needs to be overcome. Get over that and it's only a matter of time before enough companies see the benefits to start investing in the infrastructure and cars specifically designed to run on it..

Electric cars have limitations when it come to long-distance travel. There's going to need to be something for that sort of use in addition to pure electric city runabouts.

Let's call it GTP.

No. LMGTP

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

Producing hydrogen on a wide enough scale to fuel cars on the needed level is the only real hurdle that needs to be overcome. Get over that and it's only a matter of time before enough companies see the benefits to start investing in the infrastructure and cars specifically designed to run on it..


Electric cars have limitations when it come to long-distance travel. There's going to need to be something for that sort of use in addition to pure electric city runabouts.

Not going to get into a full-scale debate on this, but a few things.

Unless you manage to have efficiency levels of over 100% (and thus creating free energy) then producing hydrogen will always take significantly more electricity than just running the car on the electricity anyway due to the efficiency losses during conversion, thus producing a net loss. Almost no gains have been made in hydrogen production efficiency for the best part of a decade.

Electric cars do have limitations on long-distance travel (as well as charging time and the ability to do them at home for anyone without a driveway). However, whilst hydrogen has made no efficiency gains, electric cars have gone from being able to do 50 miles on a charge and take 24 hours to recharge to doing 350 miles on a charge and doing a recharge in 1 hour. The gains they have made there are staggering. Whilst hydrogen does have some benefits, by the time it has solved the issues it has, we'll have been driving electric cars for 20 years. Like the old joke about nuclear fusion, hydrogen cars are always a decade away. Meanwhile, charging points are popping up around the world and all major car manufacturers have announced an EV.

As we move towards a renewable-powered grid where the energy is produced closer to the consumers, it makes even more sense to use electricity rather than hydrogen to power the cars, as it'll save transporting it large distances. And on that note, electricity already has a massive distribution network - something hydrogen would have to build from scratch, adapting petrol stations as they go.

I'm not advocating electric racing or saying this is the best for the environment or any of that nonsense, but realistically hydrogen road cars are not going to happen outside of a niche few vehicles.

Hydrogens strengths for motorsport fans is that it allows us to retain the ICE and therefore the sound, gears etc, which is an important part of the show, feel and atmosphere. I'd much rather watch hydrogen-powered prototypes than electric ones.

[tomerswayler]

Did the FIA or ACO ever clarify what Hydrogen car for them means? Is it the use of a fuel cell to produce electricity to drive an electric motor or the combustion of hydrogen in a "normal" engine?

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by tomerswayler

Did the FIA or ACO ever clarify what Hydrogen car for them means? Is it the use of a fuel cell to produce electricity to drive an electric motor or the combustion of hydrogen in a "normal" engine?

They didn't AFAIK. The document just says hydrogen as an alternative. Obviously when I say retains the elements of an ICE, I'm meaning burning the hydrogen as a fuel rather than a fuel cell.

[TF110]

I'm liking some of what is proposed, and disliking some of it at the same time.

Proposals I like are open/more powerful engine, cars that have brand identity, active or movable aero.

Proposals I dislike are spec ecu, spec cog/weight distribution, one set of bodywork (unless you can add or remove diveplanes etc.) lower hybrid power, forced front axle hybrid, HEAVIER cars, wider cockpits.

I think if cars look like GT's, it's going to confuse people on why GTE is in a different class and so much slower. They need to get this right and make it so they remain unique and prototype like but with a brand identity. This is something I feel the 911 GT1 '98 and Mercedes CLR did so well. No badges and no paint job yet you knew what cars they were. I know Toyota showed off the GR Super Sport again around the time of the press conference, so if cars look like that I wouldn't say that's a bad thing. But if they look like the McLaren Senna, that's not much different to current GTE's except a big front splitter. The Ford GTE looks just as radical imo. There has to be some sort of distinguisher between the two, that's my take so far. I'm still looking forward to this though, just hopefully some things are loosened like the spec aspects of cog, weight distribution, ecu and such.

[GasperG]

Hydrogen can be looked at as an electricity storage, inefficient compared to batteries, yes, but more or less good way of storing excess solar from the summer and consuming it in the winter.

I believe that if the hydrogen will get into a race car it will 100% be a fuel cell.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Unless you manage to have efficiency levels of over 100% (and thus creating free energy) then producing hydrogen will always take significantly more electricity than just running the car on the electricity anyway due to the efficiency losses during conversion, thus producing a net loss.

It is, in theory, possible that if hydrogen is produced on a large enough scale from the right source that it can overcome this problem - the more hydrogen you produce at once the less energy it takes per unit(gallon, liter, etc) to produce. The problem is that after a certain point, you can have a thermal cascade/runaway that can have...catastrophic results, to put it mildly, when you're dealing with the amounts of hydrogen needed.


Additionally, if other cleaner forms of reliable power generation -such as nuclear fusion- are perfect then the power requirements to produce it become a non issue. But that's still a ways off, obviously.

Almost no gains have been made in hydrogen production efficiency for the best part of a decade.

Not (quite) true. Over the past couple of years that have been been some developments in managing the process to prevent thermal cascade - nobody's really getting hyped over it because it's still in development and could still turn out to be a dead-end, but early tests have been promising.


Obviously it's not going to be happening anytime soon, but it does mean that hydrogen production levels sufficient to power cars, much like nuclear fusion, are no longer a pipe dream. They may still be further away than we want, but they finally could actually be something that happens in our lifetimes.

Electric cars do have limitations on long-distance travel (as well as charging time and the ability to do them at home for anyone without a driveway). However, whilst hydrogen has made no efficiency gains, electric cars have gone from being able to do 50 miles on a charge and take 24 hours to recharge to doing 350 miles on a charge and doing a recharge in 1 hour.

The problem is that those quick-charge capabilities require equipment that can't be installed just anywhere; the local power grid needs to be especially well-built to handle it, and upgrading it in rural areas is not simple task. And that's still stopping for an hour every 300 or so miles instead of five minutes at a gas station, which causes it's own problem with adapting the infrastructure - a modern gas station like a Flying J can refuel hundreds of cars per hour if needed. Imagine if all those cars have to sit there for an hour each - it'll be an absolute nightmare.



Long range electric cars won't be practical until they can do swappable batteries. Even if the range is shortened a bit, standardized batteries that you can stop and switch out at some refueling location that takes the removed batteries and charges them for the next customers.


Unless they can get charging times for long-range batteries down to five-ten minutes, the current concepts are not practical.

But that's enoguh of an aside. This is about the new LMP1 rules, after all. If you'd like to post one last little retort go ahead, but let's try to move back to the topic at the same time, shall we?

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by TF110

Proposals I dislike are spec ecu, spec cog/weight distribution, one set of bodywork (unless you can add or remove diveplanes etc.)

Diveplanes have never been counted as "bodywork" before this, I see no reason why the ACO would change on this. Particularly since they'll still need to allow the teams adjustability if they want to keep entrants in the field.

wider cockpits.

Don't think I can disagree more with this. While I don't like the idea of just any wider cockpit, sportscars are technically supposed to be two-seaters, so why not make them look the part?

I think if cars look like GT's, it's going to confuse people on why GTE is in a different class and so much slower. They need to get this right and make it so they remain unique and prototype like but with a brand identity. This is something I feel the 911 GT1 '98 and Mercedes CLR did so well. No badges and no paint job yet you knew what cars they were.

This is exactly the sort of thing they seem to be going for with this.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

It is, in theory, possible that if hydrogen is produced on a large enough scale from the right source that it can overcome this problem - the more hydrogen you produce at once the less energy it takes per unit(gallon, liter, etc) to produce.

It isn't in theory possible to do overcome this. There will always be an efficiency loss. You cannot have 100% efficiency. Hydrogen production will always be less efficient than using the electricity to power the vehicle in the first place. For a fuel cell car, it's even worse because you're converting electricity to hydrogen and then converting back to electricity. Double the loss. You won't overcome that, simply because physics.

lol at the idea of nuclear fusion for hydrogen production. Might as well get a perpetual motion machine out and plug it into the ByKolles.

You're right - none of that hydrogen stuff will happen any time soon. Yet all the electric car issues are being overcome much faster than anyone expected. The battle is lost, and the war will be once someone finally takes the fuel cell car out the back of the nuclear fusion reactor to put it out of its misery.

Hydrogen - brilliant idea to keep the character in racing if they use ICE. If it ends up being a fuel cell then it'll be exactly the same as an EV to the fans.