Le Mans Proposal

[Alonsomania]

My version of how Le Mans should be,fast corners,and i totally redesigned the track,and looks great now IMO

[the_royksopp]

That would never ever happen. The chicanes on the Mulsanne are necessary, due to safety...

[Alonsomania]

but,since it a proposal,who cares :P

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by the_royksopp

That would never ever happen. The chicanes on the Mulsanne are necessary, due to safety...

Really?

That sounds like "Balestre-speak" to me - and is therefore heresy.

[the_royksopp]

Well, reality is, that Mulsanne is way too dangerous without at least one chicane. The speeds going into Mulsanne Corner would be huge! It'd be great, but it'll never happen.

[Purist]

They would not be going much faster than the Indy and Champcars did at the larger ovals for several years, and all they had to actually stop them was a concrete wall.

Max speed would be around 245-260mph for the prototypes, but then again, the competitive cars in the 80s weren't the "speed merchant specials," so it could be at the lower end of that range (like 240-250).

[formula1fan]

Great try though.

[Lynx Raide]

Originally Posted by Purist

They would not be going much faster than the Indy and Champcars did at the larger ovals for several years, and all they had to actually stop them was a concrete wall.

Max speed would be around 245-260mph for the prototypes, but then again, the competitive cars in the 80s weren't the "speed merchant specials," so it could be at the lower end of that range (like 240-250).

there is quite a difference between a 'wide', banked Indy corner and a tight, flat Mulsanne.

[Purist]

Indy is only 50 feet wide, which can't be much, if any, wider than Le Mans is. You have at least three wide lanes worth of room along the Mulsanne, which at a minimum is around 40 feet, plus verges (Indy frontstretch has NO verges at all between the concrete walls).

As it is, they're doing 205-210 at Le Mans between Mulsanne and Indianapolis on just two lanes with minimal verge width.

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Lynx Raide

there is quite a difference between a 'wide', banked Indy corner and a tight, flat Mulsanne.

Indycars are built to resist concrete walls, LMP's aren't.

[Purist]

Then again, Armco/guardrails are hardly forgiving barriers.

And the run down the hill at Spa to Eau Rouge is lined with concrete on either side.

[Lustigson]

Originally Posted by Purist

And the run down the hill at Spa to Eau Rouge is lined with concrete on either side.

But even F1 cars are hardly doing 400 kph (250 mph) there. And at an unchicaned (is that a word?) Mulsanne straight cars would reach those speeds.

[pirenzo]

Concrete is often better used when impact angles are much lower, because the true impact speed is actually very low in comparison to the car's forward speed, and better still they don't deflect cars off like an armco or tyre wall would, which means the accident is well contained and keeps it from spilling back onto the racing line. This is particularly important on ovals. The FIA is actually actively recommending concrete walls rather than armco on long straight sections now.

The Mulsannes is not dangerous specifically because of the speed anyway; more its tendancy to exacerbate mechanical failures that are induced by the rigours of the rest of the track. A seized gearbox or blown tyre can be very, very dangerous for a flat bottomed sportscar, as several have proved over the years
The chicanes on the Mulsannes don't so much reduce the top speed the cars reach as vastly reduce the amount of time spent at those speeds during the race. Reducing the amount of time tyres, for instance, are subjected to centrifugal forces that might rip it apart explosively if it is already damaged.
There is of course also the limited run off at Mulsannes Corner to worry about, and here you are talking about head-on, high speed impacts being possible, which is of course very dangerous, and it is worth saving every 10mph you can.

[safc_fan89]

Would there really be any point in having a chicaneless straight? Even with the chicanes, each stretch is over a kilometre long. And the speeds that would be reached would be far too high...

[Purist]

The Mulsanne was the key feature of Le Mans. It dictated the focus, and therefore the car's setup, for the whole track. Also, the tire loading issue is a moot point, as the cars now are set up such that they make nearly as much downforce at 150mph as the cars used to make at 240mph. And none of the current Le Mans cars have flat bottoms, so the risk of lift-off is MUCH lower than in the past.

What Mulsanne corner would need is a substantial tire barrier in front of the hard wall, which would take care of a lot of the impact force. If what is there is acceptable now, then we're already 70-75 percent of the way to being able to handle the impact forces if the chicanes weren't in place.

Finally, I'd like to note that, with the V10s, F1 cars were hitting around 230mph before the first chicane at Monza. Along the same lines, the higher classes of "touring cars" hit 220-230mph heading into Teirgarten at the Nurburgring (and that's with heavier cars and MUCH less runoff than at Mulsanne at Le Mans).