[WEC] Toyota LMP1 Discussion

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by tyronnezx

Im not discounting anyone. Nissan could pull an ace out the sleeve and have a quick relaible car too. the only variable being that the car is unique. Toyota on the other hand are on an absolute backfoot. even at spa, the Toyota had reliability (electrical) issues. Either way we will see at le mans.

On another note, Toyota has a 1.6 litre turbo engine for the Yaris wrc car. I wander if they have any plans to test a tuned version of this engine on a future Toyota LMP car

I think its not appropriated at all... and wouldn't be a bit surprised if the WRC 1.6 Turbo consumes more than a WEC engine, its tuned for A LOT of torque while a WEC engine will appreciate much more a lot of power (more rpm and less petrol for each power stroke).

I think if Toyota to change engine, it will be a V6 Turbo like they have in the SuperGT (Supra i think), but most probably they will try to enhance the current NA V8 and go for the 8MJ.

[gustavobamba]

Or their Super GT engine

THE "two-litre four-cylinder RI4AG direct-injection petrol turbo"

Probably this engine should weight less then the V8… so the 8 Mj hybrid system should be Ok

[carbon_titanium]

Originally Posted by gustavobamba

Or their Super GT engine

THE "two-litre four-cylinder RI4AG direct-injection petrol turbo"

Probably this engine should weight less then the V8… so the 8 Mj hybrid system should be Ok

the SGT version will be great for 6H races but not reliable enough to endure 24 hours... surely it could be a competitive base to develope a "LM" version of the unit as RV8K -> RV8KLM in both his versions (3.4 and 3.7).

Today I saw F1 monaco Q session and I noticed that both mercedes are still using the same ICE from australia first round!!! basically more than 3000km and it still works great!
judging that the engine revving to 12000-12500rpm developes about 700hp, lowering the redline to 9000rpm it would be a great motor also for WEC

[gustavobamba]

When i talk of that engine... (two-litre four-cylinder RI4AG direct-injection petrol turbo) I know they are good for 6 hours races. what i mean is a variation of this engine prepared for Endurance races

[Damian Baldi]

Toyota won everything with Fangio at IMSA with the 4 in line engine, but they never used it seriouly at Le Mans, they always used the turbo v8.

[cokata]

Originally Posted by gustavobamba

Or their Super GT engine

THE "two-litre four-cylinder RI4AG direct-injection petrol turbo"

Probably this engine should weight less then the V8… so the 8 Mj hybrid system should be Ok

Turbo engines don't weight less then NA engines especially if the NA engines has port instead of direct injection.

I was sure that after a poor car is made by Toyota the blame will go directly on the engine. I don't why is it so hard to understand that in racing conditions turbo engines aren't more efficient, nor are they lighter.

The real problem is that while Audi and Porsche both made a MASSIVE step forward, Toyota have just made a "B" spec version of their 2014 car and expected that they will still win.

[chernaudi]

Turbochargers are torque multipliers. How turbo engines get their efficiency is being able to rev as low as a bigger displacement engine without the added displacement. Higher torque usually means lower revs to achieve peak power.

Toyota have a 3.7 liter V8--I think that they'd be better off with a forced induction engine or something with higher displacement, on the order of perhaps 4.5-5.0 liters or so.

The hybrid system can make up for a lot of the torque and power short fall (the 3.7 V8 I think is rev limited to about 8500 rpm under normal conditions), but when they run out of juice, they're out on about half of the 1000+bhp until they can recharge/use the system again.

[cokata]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Turbochargers are torque multipliers. How turbo engines get their efficiency is being able to rev as low as a bigger displacement engine without the added displacement. Higher torque usually means lower revs to achieve peak power.

Toyota have a 3.7 liter V8--I think that they'd be better off with a forced induction engine or something with higher displacement, on the order of perhaps 4.5-5.0 liters or so.

The hybrid system can make up for a lot of the torque and power short fall (the 3.7 V8 I think is rev limited to about 8500 rpm under normal conditions), but when they run out of juice, they're out on about half of the 1000+bhp until they can recharge/use the system again.

A simple way to recap it is that turbocharged engines have better efficiency on low load/low rpm conditions (cruising on the highway for example), while NA engines have higher peak efficiency, and in racing conditions the engine spends 90% of the time in it's peak efficiency envelope.

[GasperG]

I think that torque argument goes away when you put fuel flow limit in the mix. Imagine a NA engine capable of producing 520 HP at 6,000 rpm and somewhere 700 HP at 8.000 rpm. When you add fuel flow in the mix this same engine will produce constant 520 HP from 6-8,000 rpm, if the gear ratios are so that you can always use this range between gears, then you have constant max HP available at any speed.

I do suspect that Toyota engine still has to low displacement to be there, a little higher fuel flow this year didn't help either.

[cokata]

Originally Posted by GasperG

I think that torque argument goes away when you put fuel flow limit in the mix. Imagine a NA engine capable of producing 520 HP at 6,000 rpm and somewhere 700 HP at 8.000 rpm. When you add fuel flow in the mix this same engine will produce constant 520 HP from 6-8,000 rpm, if the gear ratios are so that you can always use this range between gears, then you have constant max HP available at any speed.

I do suspect that Toyota engine still has to low displacement to be there, a little higher fuel flow this year didn't help either.

One of the big disappointments about this years car was that it's still in the 6MJ class and yet they didn't increase the displacement of the engine.

And also as you said the torque argument has no base because that engine will never go bellow 7000rpm unless the car is traction limited.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

Well, I was basically responding to tyronnezx's initial post. But you are entirely correct. I stand corrected. I was mixing odds and chances in my argument (silly me ) and I should have said that even though the odds are against Toyota, the chances for overall victory are not negligible as you can basically count Nissan, ByKolles and Rebellion Racing out.

In that respect, the odds in favour of a Toyota victory in the LMP1 category at LM are actually 1:6 as you would have to consider ByKolles' and Rebellion Racing's entries (2 Toyotas running against 12 other LMP1 competitors). Correct ?

As far as Toyota's chances are concerned, I do maintain that the only players that can arguably fight for victory are Porsche, Audi and Toyota, meaning that Toyota's chances are 1/4.

Anyway, I do trust that you agree that Toyota's chances for victory are not negligible

Sorry, I wasnt clear. Chance = luck. When I said matter of chance, I meant fortune or luck. Odds are clear, maybe favorites (Porsche) are clear, but chance/luck/fortune is not. So going with the odds doesnt always work. Toyota may have been the favorite last year, even with lower odds. But a matter of chance/luck hit them.

Originally Posted by Acid09

No, they maybe fast again, but the competition will not be as "light" as it was in 2014 in the foreseeable future.

Porsche still wasn't in a position to win last year so Toyota "just" had to beat Audi while having the fastest car around. Now Porsche is up to speed, Nissan may be next year as well and the future may hold even bigger rivals such as BMW.

2014 was the year their stars aligned, unfortunately they couldn't pull it off. Kind of reminds me of Pescarolo in 2005.

In '98 and '99, there were just as many factory teams, they had one of, if not the fastest car, plus three cars. But it didnt change the fact they came up just short. But that could all be reversed? Thats another unique thing about Le Mans.

Originally Posted by cokata

Turbo engines don't weight less then NA engines especially if the NA engines has port instead of direct injection.

I was sure that after a poor car is made by Toyota the blame will go directly on the engine. I don't why is it so hard to understand that in racing conditions turbo engines aren't more efficient, nor are they lighter.

The real problem is that while Audi and Porsche both made a MASSIVE step forward, Toyota have just made a "B" spec version of their 2014 car and expected that they will still win.

I think Vasselon said they feel theyre down on power. About the I4 gt500 engine, iirc- the weight was 85kg(?) AND Toyota say theyre looking at it for use in lmp1. That was from the Super GT thread.

[tyronnezx]

Originally Posted by TF110

Toyota say theyre looking at it for use in lmp1. That was from the Super GT thread.

Links or it didnt happen

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by TF110

I think Vasselon said they feel theyre down on power.

In the latest issue of SportAuto, it was speculated that Toyota's power deficit over Porsche was of the order of 150HP. A part of that power deficit is evidently down to the fact that Porsche moved up to 8MJ and increased the power of their hybrid system as a result, meaning that the power deficit of Toyota is in part a direct consequence of their decision to stay at 6MJ. Now, SportAuto also speculate that there was not much more efficiency (and therefore power) to squeeze from the NA V8 engine Toyota are currently using, meaning that they also lose on this front, and will have to adopt a different engine architecture next year if they want to catch up.

It increasingly looks like this year could be a very frustrating one for Toyota, performance-wise, like last year for Audi.

Luck wasn't really on Toyota's side at LM up to now. This may change, but that would mean a catastrophic race for all other six cars that are in contention for victory, which I don't want to see happening from a racing perspective.

[cokata]

Audi and especially Porsche have made changes to the engine this year, and there is no mention of any changes that Toyota did to the engine. 1 year of development is a huge difference, just look what ferrari did with just 22 tokens used. They were probably 30-40bhp down on the 2014 Merc engine, and now almost as powerful as the 2015 Merc.

I reckon last year Toyota had the best engine of the 3 works teams, but they simply didn't improve it at all. With the massive improvements we see year to year this year the same engine is nothing special (i suspect they have more power the Porsche because of the 6MJ class and the lack of exhaust recovery system)

[TF110]

We know they made improvements. Not huge but still to go 3+ seconds faster while staying at 6mj is a definite improvement. That isnt hybrid and aero alone. The gap at Le Mans probably wont be as exaggerated. Thats my expectation. Based on the low drag car's top end at the prologue, I think they have focused more attention to that spec car.

Like I said before, it looked like Toyota was something like 4 seconds off the ultimate pace at the prologue with the high d/f car. But come Silverstone, ideally they were a little over half a second off (in qualifying). At Spa, the high d/f car was over 3 seconds faster than last year's low drag car. If we go by the relative pace between the two spec cars from the prologue there was about 1 second between the two. If thats the case, I expect the low drag car to be a lot closer. If the high d/f car is about 2-3 seconds off at Spa, the low drag car could close maybe half that gap going to Le Mans, unless its somehow slower. I think theyll be closer, hopefully within 2-4 seconds at Le Mans instead of multiying their 'Spa gap'.

[cokata]

Look at the race pace in Silverstone not the qually. Audi were much quicker then both Porsche and Toyota. If Audi pushed in the qually they would have been probably more than a second quicker than Toyota, and on a short-ish track that's a big gap.

And Spa was just a disaster, the high DF toyota had slower (avarage) S2 times than the Porsche. Loosing more than a 3 laps in 6 hours is massive and no matter how good their low DF package is they would still be very far away.

[Acid09]

I think it's safe to say that unless miraculous things happen, 2015 will be a transitional year for Toyota.

That's nothing catastrophic, every manufacturer has had these. Hopefully they have learned their lesson with regards to that they can't rest on their laurels as much as they did last winter.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

Hopefully they stick around and don't see a reason to cut the program

[TF110]

Originally Posted by cokata

Look at the race pace in Silverstone not the qually. Audi were much quicker then both Porsche and Toyota. If Audi pushed in the qually they would have been probably more than a second quicker than Toyota, and on a short-ish track that's a big gap.

And Spa was just a disaster, the high DF toyota had slower (avarage) S2 times than the Porsche. Loosing more than a 3 laps in 6 hours is massive and no matter how good their low DF package is they would still be very far away.

If they pushed? Well, Audi's ideal lap in qualifying was slower than Toyota's ideal and still nowhere near Porsche's. Audi has that diesel torque and the most engine power, and relying on hybrid is not going to win at Silverstone. During qualifying everyone has their hybrid 'filled up', but not during the race. Those high downforce sections play right for them. And with the least amount of hybrid power, they're the best equipped for that track.

Porsche had a huge amount of hybrid energy at Spa. Being in the 8mj class, the multiplier for wec rounds allowed them 6.3mj. They could use boost much more than Toyota could, even if Toyota could achieve optimum recovery, itd be 4.7mj, but they lack that ability that Porsche has thanks to the generator on the turbo.

You could see them using their extra hybrid boost to gain more speed out of Eau Rouge, same thing for turn 11. Sector 2 isnt just twisty tight turns. Audi would gain on Porsche in the slower sections, but not through turn 11 through pouhon.

But speaking on Le Mans, it has no multiplier. So they wont have near as much energy for the lap relative to its length. ~6.3mj at Spa for 7km vs. 8mj at Le Mans for 13.6km. So every team will do the same thing, boost as much out of turns they can.

Originally Posted by Acid09

I think it's safe to say that unless miraculous things happen, 2015 will be a transitional year for Toyota.

That's nothing catastrophic, every manufacturer has had these. Hopefully they have learned their lesson with regards to that they can't rest on their laurels as much as they did last winter.

I dont think they rested on their laurels. I think they did what they could with what they have. Vasselon expected to be overtaken because of this. Its a shame there are f1-sized budgets for everyone else's sake, but its Toyota's fault for not matching the budgets of the VAG teams. The lmp1 project is secondary to customers of TMG. I think that shows you how much is left out there if the lmp1 was their primary focus, or the money was there to allow this.

Originally Posted by Lagunaseca_4life

Hopefully they stick around and don't see a reason to cut the program

Why does this keep popping up?
http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/t...-through-2017/

[Acid09]

The car might not be the quickest but it sure sounds glorious

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTtm...ature=youtu.be

We should enjoy that while we can, I'm pretty sure their performance deficit will lead them to move away from the V8 for next year.

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by Acid09

The car might not be the quickest but it sure sounds glorious

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTtm...ature=youtu.be

We should enjoy that while we can, I'm pretty sure their performance deficit will lead them to move away from the V8 for next year.

That might not be such a bad thing if the new engine is derived once again from a current Super Formula/Super GT engine; they might be inline-4 turbos, but from what I could hear on the footage I could find, they sound great.

[Chuliandred]

Originally Posted by TF110

Why does this keep popping up?
http://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/t...-through-2017/

Because the vows of yesterday mean nothing in motorsport if unsuccessfulness meets budget cutting requirements... Peugeot in LMP, BMW & Toyota in F1 for example. Additionally, the possibility to leave a series will always be discussed for every works entry independent of their success. Think about all the rumors of Audi stepping up to F1 and dropping LMP .

@Topic: Right now Toyota is clearly the slowest of the three works cars. We can only speculate how big the gap really is and I am looking forward to sunday to get some information about the specific LeMans performance. In the end I think that we will see a race of attrition. We have a high possibility to see no car running untroubled through the 24 hourse and the winner will be the team with the least issues. In such a scenario Toyota has a 25% chance of winning which is quite nice for the little budget they invest.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by Acid09

The car might not be the quickest but it sure sounds glorious

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTtm...ature=youtu.be

We should enjoy that while we can, I'm pretty sure their performance deficit will lead them to move away from the V8 for next year.

Interestingly, the display at 00:30 is blurred. Maybe there is then some truth to manufacturers not liking onboard camera angles that are placed deep in the cockpit because they might show these things, which could partly explain why ACO always uses those boring right-behind-the-windscreen angles.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by Chuliandred

Because the vows of yesterday mean nothing in motorsport if unsuccessfulness meets budget cutting requirements... Peugeot in LMP, BMW & Toyota in F1 for example.

BMW and Toyota pullouts were pretty direct consequences of the economic downturn and panic and Peugeot's pullout was because of their own bad sales. Of course this 2017 commitment is based on the assumption that things stay economically as they are.

Additionally, the possibility to leave a series will always be discussed for every works entry independent of their success. Think about all the rumors of Audi stepping up to F1 and dropping LMP .

So, everytime an unfounded rumor pops up, it means it has been discussed at the board room level? :facepalm:

[Chuliandred]

Originally Posted by deggis

BMW and Toyota pullouts were pretty direct consequences of the economic downturn and panic and Peugeot's pullout was because of their own bad sales. Of course this 2017 commitment is based on the assumption that things stay economically as they are.

And are you sure that the economic will continue to grow? Or more specific what's about the Toyota recalls. Why should they be immune to trouble?

So, everytime an unfounded rumor pops up, it means it has been discussed at the board room level? :facepalm:

Did I mention board room level anywhere? The original statement was about why the topic of Toyota pulling out pops up on this board, at facebook, or somewhere else where fans disucss the WEC so frequently. Try to watch between your fingers while you are palming your face so hard. It seems to prevent you from reading complete and correct.