Peugeot vs Audi (Technical Stuff!)

[ss_collins]

No I'm not convinced the suspension is the real reason yet, but I've only seen the front up close, and the rear only in pictures. I think that the R10 being a bit older and totally dominant saw Audi look away and do a new DTM car whilst Pug was flat out pushing the 908 on. At Sebring the car was indeed faster everywhere. On Sunday morning I'll be out on track with the speed trap learning what we can about the cars on corner entry/apex/exit as well as peak speeds in a couple of spots. Not certain where yet.

You'll find that and loads of other goodies on Speedtv and Racecar (same as Sebring) keep you ears on Radio Le Mans too as we will tell you every now and again what we have found.

[JAG]

Aren't drivers in the 908 (and other coupes) sat much lower than the open R10, plus the coupe shape allows you to control the air better, so less drag/more downforce.

[minimangler]

I reckon it has to be the chassis on the Pug- they've got something special hiding in there, but noone's sure what it is. Active suspension is something I've thought before, but then again i did believe it was banned.

[broadrun96]

I thought the active suspension was ALOT of the talk about the hidden areas on the Pug last LM and was thought to possibly be linked both side to side and frnt to rear. Would make sense that they would use the WRC tech to design the system but how advantageous would it really be on a track vs a rally stage? I'm guessing more important in a coupe than a spyder, but worth the extra weight and complication? Remember, Speedtv.com is going to be doing specials with both the Audi and Pug teams and talking tech details (as much as they will be willing to share) starting this week with the test days. The test does start this weekend correct? We should be able to see the new bodywork for each team soon.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by minimangler

I reckon it has to be the chassis on the Pug- they've got something special hiding in there, but noone's sure what it is. Active suspension is something I've thought before, but then again i did believe it was banned.

What if it is not truly an active (automatic or electronically controlled) system but a multi setting, pre-programed, driver selectable, function on the steering wheel? Which would be covered by Art. 1.10.2 and legal.


L.P.

[chernaudi]

But Art.1.10.1 would seem to make that solution illegal, too, as it bans driver adjustments.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

But Art.1.10.1 would seem to make that solution illegal, too, as it bans driver adjustments.

1.10.1 -
Any automatic or electronic control system or function

is forbidden : chassis control, automatic or semi-automatic
transmissions, clutches, final drive differential system, shock absorbers, suspension or ride height adjustment, four wheel

steering, etc.

1.10.2 -

A simple open-loop non automatic electrical switch

activated by the driver acting on one or more system(s) is not
considered to be an electronic control.

Huh? Driver adjustments are not illegal.
But maybe I did not make myself clear enough. If the driver has say 4 buttons with each button being an open loop circuit that he can manually choose for suspension settings that are pre-set and not tuneable they are not considered an automatic or electronic control system.

L.P.

[chernaudi]

Why not, the FIA banned driver adjustable wings almost 40 years ago. Could one use such an argument against that?

[vorsprung]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Huh? Driver adjustments are not illegal.

But maybe I did not make myself clear enough. If the driver has say 4 buttons with each button being an open loop circuit that he can manually choose for suspension settings that are pre-set and not tuneable they are not considered an automatic or electronic control system.

L.P.

System like that is illegal, see Art. 10 - Suspension

10.1 - Changing the adjustment of the springs, the shock absorbers and the anti-roll bars from inside the cockpit is forbidden.
10.2 - Any system other than the suspension parts, whatever the functioning principle, activated or not by the driver the of which is to modify the ground clearence is forbidden.

[chernaudi]

And that's how active suspension works, by adjusting ground clearance by changing(through driver intervention or not) the shock/spring settings mechanically through electronics.

Here's how it worked on a late '80s Lotus F1 car: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTURKAhFBJA

[minimangler]

hmmmm...
it is banned, but they may have found away around it.

[MulsanneMike]

Like I said before, there is little evidence of hydraulic anything (suspension related) at the rear of the 908. It is clear they have an interesting MECHANICAL solution controlling anti-roll/ride height (I think). What is driving that solution I can't be 100% about it though it has been suggested to me that it could be pure packaging. Though unless someone can get me a shot of the bellhousing removed from the engine (the last place to look--though we know they have hydraulic pumps somewhere at the rear for gearchange), I see no evidence of hydraulic lines or pumps related to the suspension at this time. And they certianly aren't running active suspension as that would very much be illegal.