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

[Maelochs]

I agree that BoP is a plague—one we all understand, and have to accept, as the price for getting manufacturers to play, but not “real” racing.

I don’t see why the new “Hypercar” regs would have to be terrible though. I am not going to panic until I actually see them … and maybe not even then.

[TF110]

I don't know where people are reading "bop" in the top class. BOP is continuously adjusting the cars like IMSA does or how it is in GTE. As far as I have read, it looks like there's a solid cap on aero levels and horsepower levels. Then there's success ballast which only goes up to 50kg on a car over 1000kg. And then further there's no ballast at Le Mans.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by TF110

I don't know where people are reading "bop" in the top class. BOP is continuously adjusting the cars like IMSA does or how it is in GTE. As far as I have read, it looks like there's a solid cap on aero levels and horsepower levels. Then there's success ballast which only goes up to 50kg on a car over 1000kg. And then further there's no ballast at Le Mans.

Success ballast is a form of BoP. Aside from Le Mans it will be added and removed as needed to adjust performance levels based on race results, which is the most basic definition of BoP.

It's a much more benign form of BoP than most, but it's still a form of BoP. I've always noted that some engineers actually like BoP because it gives them a challenge to overcome, and success ballast can be said to be intended to encourage such thinking - you know exactly what type of adjustments could be made based on how things go, and can plan ahead for it. But it does still help keep the teams that can outspend everyone from being COMPLETELY insurmountable.

[deggis]

https://racer.com/2018/12/17/ferrari...ercar-program/

Basically the same Ferrari story as on DSC, but this one lists Stephen Kilbey & Goodwin as the authors.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

Success ballast is a form of BoP. Aside from Le Mans it will be added and removed as needed to adjust performance levels based on race results, which is the most basic definition of BoP.

It's a much more benign form of BoP than most, but it's still a form of BoP. I've always noted that some engineers actually like BoP because it gives them a challenge to overcome, and success ballast can be said to be intended to encourage such thinking - you know exactly what type of adjustments could be made based on how things go, and can plan ahead for it. But it does still help keep the teams that can outspend everyone from being COMPLETELY insurmountable.

The rules as they are now is NO ballast at Le Mans. Success ballast imo doesn't really qualify as 'regular' bop because they aren't really balancing. They're giving weight to those who finish higher. Everyone knows what they're going to get if they win. Imo, bop is more like tinkering with individual cars to make them equal. I'd rather it than what GTE goes through.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by TF110

The rules as they are now is NO ballast at Le Mans.

Yes. I know this. That is why I made note of that. Was there a ponit to this comment..?

Success ballast imo doesn't really qualify as 'regular' bop because they aren't really balancing. They're giving weight to those who finish higher.

Yes. That's still a form of balancing the performance of cars. Thus, a form of BoP.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by TF110

I don't know where people are reading "bop" in the top class. BOP is continuously adjusting the cars like IMSA does or how it is in GTE. As far as I have read, it looks like there's a solid cap on aero levels and horsepower levels. Then there's success ballast which only goes up to 50kg on a car over 1000kg. And then further there's no ballast at Le Mans.

This.

Not sure about this "BoP" discussion. I mentioned it in regard to GT cars only ....

The top class has never really been BoP'd lately---except EoT to make sure the hybrids won.

But … I am opposed to performance penalties as well. That’s just BS. Make your better, and get penalized? Win, so then Lose?

Anyway … this new class will bring its own joys and frustrations. After all … the teams are the same, the drivers are the same, the officials are the same … human nature hasn’t changed. The same games will be played, just with minor ruels tweaks.

Between BoP in GT and budget wars in Prototypes, I don’t get all worked up about it any more. If I get a good weekend of watching racing, I just overlook the garbage. Fast cars competing is not all I want, but it is enough as a rule.

Originally Posted by Irie

But surely there is some middle ground between spaceship massive hybrids and spec performance.

Indeed. Go back to something like the GTP rules. Something simple, which encourages teams to build cars, as opposed to companies spending the budgets of third-world nations.

Light cars, 3-liter engines boosted, five liter normally aspirated … with modern aero and tires, the cars would be plenty fast, and hopefully we could see more than a few chassis manufacturers—sort of LMP2 but with design freedom—or LMP3 with much better performance.

Thing is, the big manufacturers bring the big money. They not only pay the fees, they do a lot of their own promotion which makes more money for the FIA. So …. Smaller-scale racing is probably gone from the pro end of the sport.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

Yes. I know this. That is why I made note of that. Was there a ponit to this comment..?





Yes. That's still a form of balancing the performance of cars. Thus, a form of BoP.

No, it's not a balance at all. It's purely punishment, when you want to be pedantic you should have a better than average grasp of the actual meaning of the words you use.

[Napolis]

We think it might be interesting if IMSA let us race our LMP1/GT1 sans Hybrid in their Endurance Challange.
It would be great to have the same car be racing Le Mans, Sebring, and Daytona etc.
BOP’d between an LMP2 and a DPI.
We’ll likely be using an engine similar to DPI engines.

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by deggis

https://racer.com/2018/12/17/ferrari...ercar-program/

Basically the same Ferrari story as on DSC, but this one lists Stephen Kilbey & Goodwin as the authors.

as usual.... during f1 summer break or a couple of days after f1 champ last race, there incoming ferrari rumors about to join wec or what else

to me toyota is the only realistic entry for hypercar; glickenhaus is a huge question mark because isn't sure at all that the firm will be still around in 2021....
mclaren shown interest but not Y1, basically they didn't decide anything yet. Everyone talks about aston martin involvment in new hypercar class, everyone.... but aston

[TF110]

Originally Posted by canaglia

as usual.... during f1 summer break or a couple of days after f1 champ last race, there incoming ferrari rumors about to join wec or what else

to me toyota is the only realistic entry for hypercar; glickenhaus is a huge question mark because isn't sure at all that the firm will be still around in 2021....
mclaren shown interest but not Y1, basically they didn't decide anything yet. Everyone talks about aston martin involvment in new hypercar class, everyone.... but aston

Well it really looks like Glickenhaus is going to be there. ByKolles is now hiring for aero and hybrid guys, Toyota is basically 100%, Aston Martin is the strongest rumor... I think the first season might be 3 teams with the new hypercars but by the second season it might be double that running NEW cars. The private teams will be grandfathered for the first season so no reason to lose them and their current cars.

[Bentley03]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

Unlikely.

The next set of P1 regulations will likely mix what we've had previously with what we're getting with the new rules rather than go back to what is no longer sufficiently attractive.

Actually, we're pretty much on the same page. No way do I expect the ACO to ditch the manufacturers who support 'Hypercar', but I do see them refocusing the next set of regulations to encourage any manufacturer(s) wanting to invest in a big budget new technology programme and fully expect those regulations to favour that new technology for overall wins.

[deggis]

[Antonello] Colleta downplayed any imminent move to confirm the possible WEC project, which would mark Ferrari’s first top-level prototype program since the 333SP from the 1990s.

“As you can imagine, since the rules were only approved on Dec. 5, we are currently analyzing everything in order to understand if there’s room for a project of this kind,” Coletta told Endurance-Info.

“Obviously we are interested since the new rules keep a strong link between production cars and race cars, something that has always been key for a manufacturer like Ferrari.”

https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...rcar-interest/

[Maelochs]

Upon actually taking a look at the new regs … hmmmm.

I don’t have the time or the expertise or intellect to really break things down, but a cursory glance yields a few bits:

4.1 Minimum weight
The weight of the car, without fuel and without driver, must not be less than 1040 kg at all times during the competition.

5.3.2 Origin of the engine of the make
The engine of the make must be based on an original engine. An engine may be used as an original engine on the following conditions:
• At least 25 identical engines identical to the ones destined for the series production car homologated for road use equipped with this engine must have been produced;
• At least 25 identical series production car homologated for road use equipped with this engine are produced by the end of the year of the first season this engine is competing in.
• At least 100 identical series production car homologated for road use equipped with this engine are produced by the end of the year of the second season this engine is competing in.

5.4 Engine
5.4.1 Engine is free except following restrictions:
• Only Petrol 4 stroke engines with reciprocating pistons are permitted.
• Engine cubic capacity is free

5.4.2 The rear power train performance must be declared and homologated according to the procedure detailed in Article 22.1 of these regulations.
The rear power train power must not exceed 508 kW.

5.7 MGU-K
The MGU-K must be solely and permanently mechanically linked to a mechanical differential linked to the front wheels of the car. This mechanical link must be of fixed speed ratio to the front wheels.
The mechanical differential must have a unique and homologated ramp.
The rotational speed of the MGU-K may not exceed 25,000 rpm.
The electrical DC power of the MGU-K may not exceed 200 kW.

Looks like the FIA is going for micro-management. The general concept statement also says that aero will be closely controlled---and that aero won't be particularly important, because the cars will be designed to mimic road-going models.

According to Racer: ACO Sporting Director Vincent Beaumesnil explained,

“Body shape will not be dictated by aerodynamics (which will be strictly regulated), but by the marque’s distinctive design features. Manufacturers may nonetheless extrapolate a street-legal version of their racing car if they wish.

“The prototypes will, therefore, be a lot closer to the hypercars seen out of the road.” (https://racer.com/2018/12/05/fia-app...r-regulations/)

Heavy cars, closely controlled engines and aero .... some cost controls .... one step closer to meeting the dreams of series organizers for a spec series and fans' desires for wide-open engineering. Could please the fans and the manufacturers .... performance levels will certainly be lower than the current cars initially, but i am sure, as always, builders will find ways to go faster and will eventually need to be throttled back

[Sodemo]

Heavier cars with much less aero? They don’t have a hope of achieving the current lap times.

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Heavier cars with much less aero? They don’t have a hope of achieving the current lap times.

Depends on the power they produce . (I know it is not the case)

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by CTD

Depends on the power they produce . (I know it is not the case)

True, but the FIA ACO won't want cars going 250mph.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Heavier cars with much less aero? They don’t have a hope of achieving the current lap times.

Originally Posted by Sodemo

True, but the FIA ACO won't want cars going 250mph.

Happens all the time ... the rules slow the cars and the engineers beat the rules.

But yes, the cars will be slower. The power is limited to what, 500 kw ICU and 200 electric? Less than the current cars. They will be slower.

Frankly no one will care.

One thing though ... the cars will certainly Corner a Lot slower. Modern prototypes (until hypercars) didn't have the top end of the old Matras and Porsches and Renaults and whatever .... but they went through the turns vastly more quickly.

With a lot less aero, these cars will be braking heavily for the corners. With a little less power, they will be accelerating away more slowly.

[canaglia]

Disagree about power, toyota ICE is about 600hp, while >1000hp combined power is available only for a short time period. Hypercar will have 680hp available at anytime + hybrid boost, the car will get about 940hp for awhile. New hypercar have more power for sure.
Of course if regs will tell that X Nm are max mandatory amount of downforce, aero development would be pointless and we won't see any other car run flat out through the whole porsche sector as R13 was able to do this year.

Let's speculate:
2008: 908HDi had 800hp and >930kg but prehistoric aero and no nowadays special tyres; despite this marked 3.18

guess that 3.20 is quite achievable for hypercars

[Maelochs]

We shall see. No idea what the aero rules will be---or how the engineers will work around them. I see cars fast on the straights and slow around the corners.

This might make racing a little safer, as the hypercars should be able to overtake anyone on the straights, and not have to try to force past in the corners. We shall see.

My main hope at this time is that there will be at least three serious, competitive, fully committed teams in the class.

[TF110]

Don't forget that this is the first draft of the rules. I fully expect things to be changed, even if only minor ones. This happens all the time. It happened in the 2014 rules. Also the cars will have movable aero so they can flatten the wings on the straights but keep the high downforce for the corners like the Porsche Curves. Like canaglia said, the cars will have near 700hp on tap at all times and then close to 300hp for the hybrid. They're also longer and wider, that aids cornering and top speed.

[claude2cv]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14...-instead-of-f1

Is this good or bad news? I am in 2 mins at present.

Sean

[TF110]

Originally Posted by claude2cv

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14...-instead-of-f1

Is this good or bad news? I am in 2 mins at present.

Sean

Sounds like a good idea to them if f1 is reduced in price and they can run the Valkyrie as a base. They have too much staff to fire if f1 goes to a max personnel type of rule so they could switch them to endurance racing. Sounds like what Toyota did after it quit f1.

[Tique]

Looks like a Ferrari approach in order to put a bit of pressure on the Formula 1 management.

[S griffin]

Probably, knowing Christian Horner, he’s trying to put pressure on the owners of F1