Audi LMP1 Discussion - Page 265

dbagtbag · 5 Jun 2014, 01:01 (Ref:3415514)

Quote:

Originally Posted by chernaudi

According to Sam from RCE, Audi have been working on doing this with Michelin since before LM last year, so it was in the planning for quite a while.

The day we see Le Mans run on one set of tyres and one tank of fuel isn't far away me thinks ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ

chernaudi · 5 Jun 2014, 01:18 (Ref:3415518)

Last time LM was run on one set of tires by any team was 1976. That feat being repeated is a long way away, but potentially doing a stint on tires nearly as along as a NASCAR Sprint Cup race would be impressive.

TF110 · 5 Jun 2014, 01:25 (Ref:3415519)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Articus

They'll lose time anyway because the power deficit in sector 2. So what do they have to lose? I would risk it!

If the Toyota's won't break you expect the Audi's to just drive around single file until they are a lap down, and then keep driving until they are 2 laps down?

-Don't answer that. You would like that wouldn't you!

No, I want a race, not a blowout. I think its risky, too risky to try 6 stints @13 laps each.

chernaudi · 5 Jun 2014, 02:37 (Ref:3415531)

Need I have to repeat myself? Sam Collins got it from none other than Michelin that their aim was to have tires capable of 6 stint runs, and that Michelin was working on it since last year. It seems, per Pitwalk Magazine, that Audi may be the only one's willing to take them up on that.

TF110 · 5 Jun 2014, 03:55 (Ref:3415546)

Repeating yourself doesn't make it not a risk though. If Audi are the only ones contemplating it, perhaps other teams consider it a risk. Dismissing it either way is not the point. We'll see on race day.

Lagunaseca_4life · 5 Jun 2014, 04:28 (Ref:3415559)

It may be a risk they have to take.may be therir only chance if attrition isn't an issue for Porsche and Toyota.should be interesting to watch

Flo aus N · 5 Jun 2014, 10:27 (Ref:3415665)

But how should this work ? 6 stints would be 78 laps or 1066 km. The maximum time, a driver is allowed driving with no pause is 4 hours. So, this 78 laps or 1066 km have to be completed in less than 4 hours. This would require a average speed of nothing less than 266,5 kmh... Fastest lap ever raced at la sarthe had an average speed of 245 kmh in 2008 (3:18.7).

The other possibility would be to change tires every 6 times and doing driver changes after 3 stints. But this would result in an extra times los of about 10 secs, every driver change... Or they are able to perform a driver change while refueling...
But driving 5 hours of one set of tires is also very risky. These tires are able to perform so long at such high speeds, because the window, they are able to work within, is very close. If you have a little rain or driving to hard just a few times, the tires will fall of the window and grain...

JoestForEver · 5 Jun 2014, 10:46 (Ref:3415671)

It is extremely dangerous and risky given the weather condition and tyre degradation in later stints but it's a risk they have to take if Audi ever want to win this year because of the massive pace deficit and mileage deficit.
However, with smaller refueling restrictor (Thank you ACO!), they might manage to complete driver change while pumping fuel and if they made it, that would be one hell of job for all the drivers.

gwyllion · 5 Jun 2014, 11:30 (Ref:3415687)

Quote:

Originally Posted by knighty

regarding the R18 engine, well what can I say, the Audi design team have designed an engine that is 50kg too heavy and its hugely compromised their KERS choice......aww bless........ and thats just hard cheese as far as i'm concerned, I hope they get humiliated at LeMans.....amen.

Why are you calling the Audi engine overweight? Do you think that they could have built a diesel engine with the same fuel consumption, but 50 kg lighter?

Arguably they could have decreased the displacement from 3.7 to 3.0 liter, but that would have save that much weight. So they would have to drop 1 or 2 cilinders? That would mean a completely different configuration: 5 in line, 4 in line or V4.

dbagtbag · 5 Jun 2014, 12:39 (Ref:3415712)

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Why are you calling the Audi engine overweight? Do you think that they could have built a diesel engine with the same fuel consumption, but 50 kg lighter?

Arguably they could have decreased the displacement from 3.7 to 3.0 liter, but that would have save that much weight. So they would have to drop 1 or 2 cilinders? That would mean a completely different configuration: 5 in line, 4 in line or V4.

Its not overweight per-se but its overweight compared to their petrol counterparts.

The Badger · 5 Jun 2014, 12:47 (Ref:3415714)

I dont think its dangerous if they have their math right .

Seems kinda odd .... sounds like a harder compound which is harder to get to working temp ?

If Audi have this , surely Porsche and Toyota will have it also ?

dbagtbag · 5 Jun 2014, 13:45 (Ref:3415734)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Badger

I dont think its dangerous if they have their math right .

Seems kinda odd .... sounds like a harder compound which is harder to get to working temp ?

If Audi have this , surely Porsche and Toyota will have it also ?

Yeah I think so. It can't possibly be that Porsche and Toyota have known about this and haven't looked to go the same route with Michelin. That or they are both confident enough to think they can go through more tyres and still come out ahead.

J Jay · 5 Jun 2014, 15:52 (Ref:3415783)

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Why are you calling the Audi engine overweight? Do you think that they could have built a diesel engine with the same fuel consumption, but 50 kg lighter?

He's not-so-subtly implying that Audi should have gone for a petrol engine in order to adopt a brand new hybrid system to take advantage of the current regulations. Why he didn't just say that is another matter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoestForEver

However, with smaller refueling restrictor (Thank you ACO!), they might manage to complete driver change while pumping fuel and if they made it, that would be one hell of job for all the drivers.

This did cross my mind, it would be quite ironic if the further restriction to refueling hose for diesels played a part in pulling this off! I'm still skeptical though, don't Toyota (at least) also have custom Michelins, unlike 2012-13? Audi could do six stints of 12 laps but even this requires an average speed of 246 km/h, and it's not as if they can "turn up the wick" to achieve faster lap times because of the maximum fuel flow limit.

MyNameIsNigel · 5 Jun 2014, 21:38 (Ref:3415943)

"Welcome Back"... A red tractor... Rings a bell ?

http://youtu.be/spbaIeMtzvg

Simmi · 5 Jun 2014, 22:47 (Ref:3415961)

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbagtbag

Yeah I think so. It can't possibly be that Porsche and Toyota have known about this and haven't looked to go the same route with Michelin. That or they are both confident enough to think they can go through more tyres and still come out ahead.

So it's no longer the case you get a 'free' tyre stop when you change drivers?

chernaudi · 5 Jun 2014, 22:57 (Ref:3415965)

If the driver change takes less time/not much longer than refueling, you'll save about 20-25 seconds a stop if you don't take tires if the driver change can be done in short enough time.

J Jay · 5 Jun 2014, 23:04 (Ref:3415969)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simmi

So it's no longer the case you get a 'free' tyre stop when you change drivers?

The drivers change at the same time as the fuel going in, don't they? So it's more to do with changing the drivers before the tank is filled.

deltawing · 5 Jun 2014, 23:10 (Ref:3415972)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

"Welcome Back"... A red tractor... Rings a bell ?

http://youtu.be/spbaIeMtzvg

This is some hard core rubbing!

FKWD2 · 6 Jun 2014, 17:20 (Ref:3416266)

Quote:

Originally Posted by deltawing

This is some hard core rubbing!

All in a friendly spirit, of course ;-)

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_3u_14CXSDg

Articus · 6 Jun 2014, 21:53 (Ref:3416374)

Oh trust. This is friendly on the outside. Anything but on the inside. I've read that this "friendly battle" has quite important repercussions within VAG. Something along the lines of which manufacturer will get all the money to lead development of the next gen car tech for VAG.

Spyderman · 7 Jun 2014, 05:59 (Ref:3416440)

I don't doubt that you read that somewhere. I do question the total veracity of the premise.

deltawing · 11 Jun 2014, 05:03 (Ref:3418404)

Quick overview on LM aero details:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYR0...zDJsM-0OJ3TpAf

.

MyNameIsNigel · 11 Jun 2014, 05:51 (Ref:3418407)

Quote:

Originally Posted by deltawing

Quick overview on LM aero details:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYR0...zDJsM-0OJ3TpAf

Nice one.

deltawing · 11 Jun 2014, 06:04 (Ref:3418411)

You see that rear wing? These guys are going to fly on the straights. The true numbers of the mighty diesel are coming!

MyNameIsNigel · 11 Jun 2014, 06:15 (Ref:3418412)

How on Earth is this possible ? They got it wrong... AGAIN ???

(source: motorsport.com / Eric Gilbert)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
[WEC] Porsche Prototype Discussion	Simmi	North American Racing	9266	13 Jun 2024 19:23
[WEC] Toyota LMP1 Discussion	Gingers4Justice	ACO Regulated Series	6771	18 Aug 2020 09:37
Nissan LMP1 Discussion	Gingers4Justice	Sportscar & GT Racing	5568	17 Feb 2016 23:22
How about a LMP1 Pro & LMP1 Privateer class	Holt	Sportscar & GT Racing	35	6 Jun 2012 13:44
[LM24 Race] Audi LMP1 Poster all art deco'd.	blackohio	ACO Regulated Series	2	27 Oct 2011 06:30