View Single Post
Old 12 Apr 2020, 20:20 (Ref:3970384)   #14
chernaudi
Veteran
 
chernaudi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United States
Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 8,827
chernaudi has a real shot at the championship!chernaudi has a real shot at the championship!chernaudi has a real shot at the championship!chernaudi has a real shot at the championship!chernaudi has a real shot at the championship!chernaudi has a real shot at the championship!
Drivers may be pushing 100% as far as their capabilities, but not so much the machinery. If in LMP1 the cars were making 1000+bhp on engine power alone, we'd be seeing a lot more mechanical DNFs or poor finishes. By 2018, Toyota were the only OEM Factory team left, and by then 1000+bhp between hybrid and engine was passe.

Ironically, the LMP1 Hybrid era did bring about more issues with the cars that made the results of some races less predictable. But I do agree with BOP and such sometimes making results either foregone or a crapshoot. But go back about 15-20 years where we didn't have BOP in IMSA or LM. Audi were virtually guaranteed to win because they had the best package at a win rate (throughout the R8's life) of 80%. Only Panoz or Dyson had a snowball's chance in hell of coming though the other 20% of the time.

Also, we have to understand that reducing engine power and such is in step with trends in the real world automotive industry, and especially for the prototypes, safety. Just because you can give LMP1s 1000bhp on engine power alone, if you combine that with the know-how acquired to get around the power reductions of the past decade, the LMP1s with that much power would easily be at least 10 seconds a lap faster round LM.

Unless the aero and chassis stuff learned over the past decade gets restricted or banned, you can't unlearn what has been learned.
chernaudi is offline  
__________________
Power to me is having the ability to make a change in a positive way. Don't dream it, be it.
Quote