[WEC] Toyota LMP1 Discussion

[GasperG]

Maybe it's a PR thing, all Toyota hybrids uses NA engine, but in a race car with fuel flow limit the issue is efficiency to weight ratio, power to weight ratio comes second.

[cokata]

torque again...... seriously?

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

I don't know if TMC in Japan supplies the whole powertrain (the gearbox I think is designed by TMG and uses XTrac internals), but they do supply the engine.

The biggest problem with the current V8 is that it's down on torque without the hybrid system. It's also down on top end power due to rev limiting it to keep in mind the fuel consumption regs and above all else to enhance durability.

And though more power would be nice, torque would be a big help too. RCE's article on the Audi R18 say that Audi at most are making (based on press numbers) 820+bhp between engine and hybrid system (such a claim does seem low, but is based on Audi press numbers of 560+/270+ hp claims, emphasis on the +; Audi is probably in reality making about 900bhp combined), but RCE also state that Audi, between the diesel engine and hybrid system, are assuredly making more combined torque than everyone else right now.

But that's the advantage of forced induction. Turbochargers and superchargers are torque multipliers, and allow smaller engines to make the same power and torque as larger engines without having to run insanely high RPM (which doesn't boost torque at all).

We do have to remember that the block started out as a 2.65 liter turbocharged Indy Car engine if what we know about RV8 family is right (if that's not right, then it had it's origins in the 3.0 NA Indy Car engine used in the IRL), then became the 3.4 liter Formula Nippon/Super GT V8. It's now 3.7 liters.

If TMG are stuck with having to develop the V8 for the next car, does anyone have any idea how far they can stretch the bore and stroke and what capacity might they be able to milk out of the existing block?

Relative easy in principle, very hard in practice... they have to make the whole internal moving parts lighter (crackshaft,connecting rods, pistons), maintaining the same structural resistance ... a problem since FIA banned advanced materials... and at the same time find ways to reduce the friction...

A more torquy engine fits the bill, that is, less bore more stroke length with more 'Miller' aspect of it (more expansion time)... since it would rev less for the same levels of power, in one hand friction could be diminished and fuel appetite in check...

But the problem is the balance tuned for higher RPM with already quite light materials due to their experience in F1, if they spoil this balance with heavier parts to withstand the more torque, friction can raise quite higher than now, and a more displacement, more burning efficiency could result in a less powerful engine.

So its a chase to fine details, could take lots of time of testing and lots of money.... it could be improved... but OTOH a turbo engine will have much more low hanging fruit to pick.

[ a trick where they could gain some good level of efficiency is with variable valve timing (VVT)... could address nicely the admission pumping losses that plague above all NA engines... problem being FIA/ACO banned VVT and similar techs in the rules... -> complain hard against the ban ]

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by TF110

That unconfirmed powertrain information was said by Vasselon previously. He didnt give away details on next year's hybrid system or engine. But others in the team have said a new hybrid system arrives next year. I think thats the main issue. Not being able to release energy at will, or store up a significant amount hurts them. Then the weight issue on top of it doesnt help.

The only part i can agree, kind of obvious for a yesterday capacitor tech is 'store up a significant amount' ... it has to be >6MJ to have a good safety margins for different release strategies, but weight of that capacitor tech probably prevents this.

Toyota for sure can harvest even >8MJ if they wanted, only by 'regenerative braking' with those 2 MGUs they have.

Being a capacitor and if the controls are good (else its not a problem of capacitor tech), they can have the most varied release strategies imaginable... better than anyone else (since are the ones only using capacitors).

The main problem IMHO is the monocoque and aeros(lack of a proper front wing) that are showing their age (not that are not good, only others are better)

And the super uber duper engine, even recently stated as the best choice... perhaps is not that super uber duper, and perhaps are better choices for engine (again not that the engine is not good, only others are better)

[TF110]

Porsche dont have some super aero tricks that Toyota lack, they have more hybrid power on demand and in total. That means their car is making more power than Toyota. Even if not on a single boost, they can match it, but boost longer. So if its 600hp from the engine, 600hp from the capacitor/ battery from both teams, Porsche's battery can put that energy out longer. Thats where Toyota need to gain and they probably will have that better solution next year.

[godlameroso]

Originally Posted by hcl123

The only part i can agree, kind of obvious for a yesterday capacitor tech is 'store up a significant amount' ... it has to be >6MJ to have a good safety margins for different release strategies, but weight of that capacitor tech probably prevents this.

Toyota for sure can harvest even >8MJ if they wanted, only by 'regenerative braking' with those 2 MGUs they have.

Being a capacitor and if the controls are good (else its not a problem of capacitor tech), they can have the most varied release strategies imaginable... better than anyone else (since are the ones only using capacitors).

The main problem IMHO is the monocoque and aeros(lack of a proper front wing) that are showing their age (not that are not good, only others are better)

And the super uber duper engine, even recently stated as the best choice... perhaps is not that super uber duper, and perhaps are better choices for engine (again not that the engine is not good, only others are better)

To be honest I think there's potential in capacitor tech, I think they're realistically at 4mj. They can probably harvest 6 but can effectively only use 4. The same thing happened last year, they were harvesting 6 but could not make use of all the energy. It worked out for them because Audi was at 2mj and Porsche had over heating problems with their batteries, so even if Toyota could only use 3mj it was still faster than Audi. This year they improved but they still can't use all 6 mj. The Audi has better aero and given the same effective hybrid power the diesel trumps the NA V8, Porsche has developed a MUCH more powerful hybrid than Toyota and Audi but not necessarily a better engine or chassis for that matter.

Chassis wise I think it's Audi, Toyota close behind, and Porsche a bit further down, but improving little by little.

[GasperG]

I don't agree, they said that they can harvest 8MJ at LeMans but not on the other tracks, they just didn't want to compromise the whole WEC season because of LeMans. My guess would be they are lacking in every department just a little bit and that just adds up.

[carbon_titanium]

Originally Posted by GasperG

I don't agree, they said that they can harvest 8MJ at LeMans but not on the other tracks, they just didn't want to compromise the whole WEC season because of LeMans. My guess would be they are lacking in every department just a little bit and that just adds up.

If am I not wrong, because of batteries, porsche 919 is the only car that can harvest and release at will, while toyota ts040 need first to release completely the energy stored before to harvest again. I guess that porsche can't harvest 8MJ in other tracks, simply because other tracks are too short (compared to le mans).

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by carbon_titanium

If am I not wrong, because of batteries, porsche 919 is the only car that can harvest and release at will, while toyota ts040 need first to release completely the energy stored before to harvest again. I guess that porsche can't harvest 8MJ in other tracks, simply because other tracks are too short (compared to le mans).

That's probably true, and let's not forget that the Porsche's second MGU is constantly charging the battery (since it is powered by the exhaust flow).

[tigas]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

That's probably true, and let's not forget that the Porsche's second MGU is constantly charging the battery (since it is powered by the exhaust flow).

IIRC, the exhaust flow powers the turbine of the turbocharger, and any energy that the turbo does not need is captured by the generator unit (GU-H, because it does not have a motor and can't re-spin the turbo like it's done in F1). Meaning, it's constantly charging the battery as long as the exhaust flow's energy is not needed for the turbo.

When does a turbo not need all the energy of the exhaust? When it reaches top-speed? Part-throttle? Lift-and-coast?

[LC2guy]

Toyota admit they won't be on the pace this year, a big review to take place for all components.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/119388

[kvenom]

So basically this year they are trying to hit a bullet with a smaller bullet whilst inside a moving train.

[Acid09]

In a way, it's good that they're this obviously behind because it means Toyota has to face reality and see that half-measures won't do.

Looks like they plain and simply underestimated the gains Porsche & Audi were able to pull. That sucks but it's excusable, once.

They can't bank on that a again so they have to make sure to make a massive jump in terms of speed next year, and not just be "reasonably competitive".

[flyingshoppingcart]

Originally Posted by Acid09

In a way, it's good that they're this obviously behind because it means Toyota has to face reality and see that half-measures won't do.

Looks like they plain and simply underestimated the gains Porsche & Audi were able to pull. That sucks but it's excusable, once.

They can't bank on that a again so they have to make sure to make a massive jump in terms of speed next year, and not just be "reasonably competitive".

Sad that the season's playing out for Toyota pretty much as I figured months ago.

I agree that it's good in a way, but I also find Toyota's latest statements (still) worrying. Some may call my criticism harsh, but a harsh revamp is what Toyota needs in order to beat endurance racing masters like Audi and Porsche.

Ahead of this weekend's Le Mans 24 Hours, Toyota Motorsport GmbH technical director Pascal Vasselon has revealed that the retrieval systems, energy storage unit and normally-aspirated engine used in the latest TS040 HYBRID were all under review.
"We are examining what we do next year, because we need a plan," he told AUTOSPORT.
"We had an advantage last year and when we put our updated car on the track it was immediately 2.5 seconds faster [than last year's version], but it is not enough.
"The question was not if it would happen but when, because we know we have less resources, but we thought our advantage would last another year."

This to me is HIGHLY worrying. They're only examining what they do for next year now? They're only thinking of making a plan now?

Truth be told, they should have already been evaluating the entire program from top to bottom immediately after Silverstone.

Also them thinking their advantage would last until 2016; that's just pure arrogance. When you're going up against Porsche *and* Audi, you cannot afford such arrogant thinking.

Also their continued admission that they have less resources is probably the most worrying, because it implies they won't get any significant resource increase next year.

It all goes back to and boils down to some key fundamental problems for Toyota's program. They need more resources from Japan HQ, and they absolutely NEED a third car to have a better chance at Le Mans. Others can talk about all the different variables where a third car may not be needed, but you cannot disregard the odds. The odds will forever be against Toyota running two cars, when ALL their other P1 competitors are running 3 cars at Le Mans now.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

Originally Posted by flyingshoppingcart

Sad that the season's playing out for Toyota pretty much as I figured months ago.

I agree that it's good in a way, but I also find Toyota's latest statements (still) worrying. Some may call my criticism harsh, but a harsh revamp is what Toyota needs in order to beat endurance racing masters like Audi and Porsche.



This to me is HIGHLY worrying. They're only examining what they do for next year now? They're only thinking of making a plan now?

Truth be told, they should have already been evaluating the entire program from top to bottom immediately after Silverstone.

Also them thinking their advantage would last until 2016; that's just pure arrogance. When you're going up against Porsche *and* Audi, you cannot afford such arrogant thinking.

Also their continued admission that they have less resources is probably the most worrying, because it implies they won't get any significant resource increase next year.

It all goes back to and boils down to some key fundamental problems for Toyota's program. They need more resources from Japan HQ, and they absolutely NEED a third car to have a better chance at Le Mans. Others can talk about all the different variables where a third car may not be needed, but you cannot disregard the odds. The odds will forever be against Toyota running two cars, when ALL their other P1 competitors are running 3 cars at Le Mans now.

Read the similar article on racer.com. Really disappointing to see toyota makeing those statements,I mean keeping the v8 really? Thinking they would still hold the competetive edge for one more year with last years cars!"updates" they look identical to last year with a slight performance increase but it's not enough.

Really disappointed,I'll keep hope for them this weekend.but they need a radical evolution for next year or not bother showing up.very frustrating.

[TF110]

Why read into the PR so much? Everyone should get it by now. Vasselon is being a good employee. He's not going to blast Toyota for not giving him $200million to build brand new cars every year. It's obvious he's saying "we make due with what we have".

They knew Audi and Porsche were going to spend time and money they don't currently have, and that's why their gains arent as great. All this about evaluating and examining, that's common sense. They're just answering Autosport's (probably simple) questions.

We know it'll stay David vs Goliath(s) until Toyota increases the budget. Expecting more from the team is fine, but knowing why they don't do this or that keeps expectations in check. At least for me. It's not ideal for Toyota fans, but the costs to compete should'nt be near F1-level. But they still need more than they have now, that's for sure! Hopefully with everything were hearing, 2016 forward shows a new increased effort from them.

[cokata]

When it rains it pours for Toyota

[carbon_titanium]

Originally Posted by Lagunaseca_4life

Read the similar article on racer.com. Really disappointing to see toyota makeing those statements,I mean keeping the v8 really? Thinking they would still hold the competetive edge for one more year with last years cars!"updates" they look identical to last year with a slight performance increase but it's not enough.

Really disappointed,I'll keep hope for them this weekend.but they need a radical evolution for next year or not bother showing up.very frustrating.

very likely to me toyota will stick with this platform also next year (3.7 V8 + 6MJ supercapacitors + only 2 cars) and then the "big decisions" will be delaied for 2017, that could be:

Plan A: a ts050 with turbo engine and battery for the highest energy class with a more generous TMC effort and budget.

Plan B: a ts050 with turbo engine and battery for the highest energy class, but as always, with a very low budget program from TMC

Plan C: Goodbye everybody - I've got to go (to WRC). Gotta leave you all behind and face the truth...

anyway I was really impressed by toyota last year, but now I'm just using to see the ts040 as some kind of lola aston... as I'm starting to see porsche as peugeot successor! a team with a more powerfull car but less reliable than audi, and for sure less expert and wise than audi sport/joest guys

[Skemer]

Originally Posted by carbon_titanium

Plan C: Goodbye everybody - I've got to go (to WRC). Gotta leave you all behind and face the truth...

This "Plan C"sounds annoyingly familiar to me i have to say.

[carbon_titanium]

Originally Posted by Skemer

This "Plan C"sounds annoyingly familiar to me i have to say.

it's because I'm going slightly mad...

[hondafan37]

If Toyota has half of the budget of Porsche and Audi maybe they should think about developing some revolutionary concept in the same way that Nissan is doing.

[GasperG]

2017 comes new rules, probably not drastic but enough to stop speculating about what drivetrain will work best.

Would a bigger displacement engine be really such a weight killer? Is 10-20 kg more for 5.0 V8 not possible?

[GasperG]

Originally Posted by cokata

When it rains it pours for Toyota

It may be different this year, the drivers seems to be very happy with the drive-ability, this can suggest lower chances for driver errors.

[chernaudi]

To quote the WWE wrestler the Undertaker:

Sometimes, it's hell tryin' to get to heaven.

Audi and Porsche were there last year, and now evolution has turned the tables.

The TS040's story is much like the Jaguar XJR-14 in Group C in 1991 when similarly sweeping rules changes happened. Jaguar dominated by being in the right place at the right time with the right car. But the competition caught up and by the end of the season, they were hanging on in terms of performance. That's where TMG are now.

And both examples show the indifference that corporate bean counters can have to racing programs. Ford basically killed the Jag program in Group C at the end of '91 and didn't give Jaguar the money to develop the car outside of running it in IMSA GTP in '92 (and even that was marginal--check out the wheel failures at Lime Rock and Road America that year).

And Toyota in Japan have kept TMG on a shoestring budget the whole time they started the LMP1 program. It's clear that Toyota can easily spare some money for the LMP1 project, but TMC's motorsports priorities are elsewhere it seems.

[cokata]

Originally Posted by GasperG

2017 comes new rules, probably not drastic but enough to stop speculating about what drivetrain will work best.

Would a bigger displacement engine be really such a weight killer? Is 10-20 kg more for 5.0 V8 not possible?

Well the engine in itself won't be much heavier, but it will produce more torque so the whole drivetrain will need to be a little beefier (and heavier) to deal with that. Still it won't be a massive difference. If they finally go for carbon case gearbox they should easily manage a bigger engine.