Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JAG
Oh sorry, I was busy listening to Audi have their butts handed to them by Zytek, Creation and Porsche  |
I’ll take that as a yes then.
I was extremely revved up on this issue a couple of nights ago. This is a very toned down version of what I wanted to say.
Firstly, I don’t have a problem with the majority of what you and jhansen have had to say on this thread. It’s just that it’s been mainly irrelevant.
If Audi had applied a similar amount of time, effort, science and money into producing a petrol powered replacement for the R8, it’s not beyond the realms of imagination that it would have been as quick, if not quicker than the R10. Would anybody in their right mind protest against such a vehicle, provided it was built to the letter of the rules? Of course not. Plenty of frustration for those trying to compete with it, but no grounds for complaint.
So, I’ve hopefully addressed any misconceptions you may have about exactly where I stand on that subject, one which has been regularly used on this thread as a reason to support (or give the benefit of the doubt to) the stance of the ACO in the relevant section of the title document. Except it doesn’t, does it........
We have already established that the chassis/aero regs for petrol and diesel LMP1’s are identical. Nobody can call foul on that score, so we can dismiss chassis/aero regs as being totally irrelevant in the context of this thread.
The key to this discussion, and the only point of relevance, is the engine equivalency formulae used by the ACO to balance engine performance. If the ACO have got it right, it should be possible to manufacture a petrol engine under the current regs which has equivalency to the R10’s diesel unit, shouldn’t it.
Hopefully jhansen will consider this to be 'hard evidence', the actual figures have been well documented elsewhere; Cosworth claim to have bettered the output of the old R8 powerplant with their new contender. They have used the best technology available to them, but the figures they present for this rather handy piece of kit still fall way short of the figures being used by Audi and Peugeot in reference to their diesel equivalents. Despite the units inability to compare favourably with the diesels, Cosworth have made it clear that the cost will be prohibitive to most privateers and are targeting works/factory/manufacturer teams in order to sell it.
AER’s LMP1 contender is a clean sheet, purpose built unit. Even with direct injection, the projected output figures for this engine fall way short of the Audi and Peugeot diesels.
Audi are just playing with the opposition. The chassis is compromised, the gearbox is compromised (just five gears), yet they can still just drive away from a Pescarolo ‘built for Le Mans special’.
Just how much further do you think a manufacturer could push the boundaries for petrol engines?
It may well be possible to build a petrol powered R10 beater under the current ACO LMP1 regulations, but that really isn’t the point, is it? It is the imbalance which exists between current petrol and diesel engine regulations. Surely you can see there’s a gulf between them under the current regs which surely the ACO should address.