Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam43
Based on RL17 feedback. Instead of expressing the relative pace as a %, it is expressed as difference in lap time at Le Mans. Assuming a 210s nominal lap time.
| Manufacturer | Relative pace (s) | kg change | New relative pace (s) | | Ferrari | 0 | +24 | 0 | | Toyota | +0.4 | +37 | +0.9 | | Cadillac | +1.6 | +11 | +1.2 | | Porsche | +2.9 | +3 | +2.2 | | Peugeot | +3.6 | 0 | +2.8 | | Glickenhaus | +4.3 | 0 | +3.5 | | Vanwall | +8.4 | 0 | +7.6 |
Still lots of assumptions and ultimately it is a simple model, but it doesn't look completely stupid. Remember this is based on Top 50 lap time performance. My guess on this is that Toyota will do better in Q - if only because they will manage their tyres better. Also I would expect Vanwall to be closer to Glickenhaus - the start point of this is Spa and they didn't have that many laps to get the best Top 50 they could have. So should do better if they get, say 100 laps at Le Mans. |
So, how did this comedy prediction work out?
| Manufacturer | kg change | New relative pace (s) | Race Top 100 |
| Ferrari | 24 | 0 | 0 |
| Toyota | 37 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
| Cadillac | 11 | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Porsche | 3 | 2.2 | 0.9 |
| Peugeot | 0 | 2.8 | 1.8 |
| Glickenhaus | 0 | 3.5 | 2.6 |
| Vanwall | 0 | 7.6 | 5.7 |
Fastest car of manufacturer v. faster time
Vanwall - based on fastest lap due to lack of running.
Three observations:
Ferrari was fastest, and the relative pace of Toyota and Cadillac to Ferrari was spot on
Porsche and Peugeot came good at Le Mans. Relatively. Both led for a bit. I would say that I felt more good vibes about Peugeot - eventually it went all wrong. Porsche - they had the numbers, but the race just did not go their way.
Glick was closer - strong performance.
Vanwall, not good, but their pace looks worse that it is here because it didn't get all the laps in. Which is a problem in itself.