[LM24 Race] 2015 24 Hours of Le Mans

[cokata]

Nissan should have probably waited for 2016.....

[Ferrari333SP]

Originally Posted by cokata

Nissan should have probably waited for 2016.....

From a PR perspective, probably yes.

From a testing perspective, racing this year with three cars is perfect. Sooooo much data will be gained and insights learned

[Ferrari333SP]

3:21.164 by Dumas

[Martin90]

While cutting the chicane, but still impressive considering conditions.

[kvenom]

Still disappointed with the S103 pace considering Dome's reputation. Would be sad to see the company's final effort begin and end with a whimper.

[Martin90]

Dumas' lap now under investigation

[bentley speed 8]

Just saw the #9 Audi hitting 339 km/h in a slipstream

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by Ferrari333SP

From a PR perspective, probably yes.

From a testing perspective, racing this year with three cars is perfect. Sooooo much data will be gained and insights learned

This. They have a ton of learning to do, lots of data to obtain... Going to take a massive effort to wrap their heads around all of it. No better way to gather that than run in the conditions they face.

[Martin90]

The lap from Dumas was removed from timing and scoring (and rightly so).

[justracing]

Originally Posted by Ferrari333SP

From a PR perspective, probably yes.

From a testing perspective, racing this year with three cars is perfect. Sooooo much data will be gained and insights learned

I disagree, from a marketing perspective surely it would have been better to miss the 24 and do the later WEC rounds. I appreciate that they wouldn't glean the data accumulated over a 24 hour race but nonetheless their lack of pace is significantly below that achieved by Porsche on their return and I can't imagine that they are doing themselves any favours with half of the car not working.

[tux]

No coverage of the Aston session on Radio Le Mans?

[Ferrari333SP]

Originally Posted by justracing

I disagree, from a marketing perspective surely it would have been better to miss the 24 and do the later WEC rounds. I appreciate that they wouldn't glean the data accumulated over a 24 hour race but nonetheless their lack of pace is significantly below that achieved by Porsche on their return and I can't imagine that they are doing themselves any favours with half of the car not working.

That's what I'm saying; from a PR perspective, it would have been better to do more testing instead.

But from a developing/engineering perspective, running three cars at this race is great for development of this car. They'll have sooo much data that will help them develop the car for next year's race.

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by justracing

I disagree, from a marketing perspective surely it would have been better to miss the 24 and do the later WEC rounds. I appreciate that they wouldn't glean the data accumulated over a 24 hour race but nonetheless their lack of pace is significantly below that achieved by Porsche on their return and I can't imagine that they are doing themselves any favours with half of the car not working.

You need to remember that the Porsche had a 4 year head start prior to their debut.... 30,000+km in testing.

Nissan has had 10 months from greenlight to debut, and a massive engineering workflow to get through.

[justracing]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

You need to remember that the Porsche had a 4 year head start prior to their debut.... 30,000+km in testing.

Nissan has had 10 months from greenlight to debut, and a massive engineering workflow to get through.

That's my point, inadequate preparation = egg on face

[Ferrari333SP]

Originally Posted by justracing

That's my point, inadequate preparation = egg on face

An egg on the face for this race, yes, but that's besides the point; although they know the car isn't good enough for this race, it's providing the perfect test bed to learn about and develop the car as much as possible. 2016 is the year they want to mount a serious challenge for the win

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by justracing

That's my point, inadequate preparation = egg on face

So. They should have waited a whole year, built the car up, tested it, debuted in 2016 and started all over in 2017? That makes zero sense.

[Artur]

Originally Posted by bentley speed 8

Just saw the #9 Audi hitting 339 km/h in a slipstream

I thought it had barely any slipstreaming, didn't seen a replay, though.

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

You need to remember that the Porsche had a 4 year head start prior to their debut.... 30,000+km in testing.

That is a myth, and is simply not true. Porsche announced their intention to return in June 2011. They recruited their Technical Director in October 2011. Initially they were a team of 5 people and had to work out of a container whilst offices were being built. The car was first rolled out at the end of 2013.

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by MoMedic9019

You need to remember that the Porsche had a 4 year head start prior to their debut.... 30,000+km in testing.

Nissan has had 10 months from greenlight to debut, and a massive engineering workflow to get through.

Still, do you honestly believe that the 919 was, at any point of it's lifecycle, as slow as the GT-R is now?

I don't...a promising car is quick out of the box, you only need to work hard to find the remaining 5%..and make it reliable.

Nobody would blame Nissan for the car not being reliable, the problem is that it significantly lacks speed as well.

Compare that to Toyota who brought a very rough and untested car to Le Mans in 2012. The car wasn't reliable and dialed in yet, but it showed promise right away. The Nissan still has to show any promise, right now it's massively behind a privateer effort running on a shoestring budget..

[Martin90]

Top speeds from FP (edit: should say speed trap)

#17    Porsche    336.0
#18    Porsche    336.0
#8    Audi    334.9
#21    Nissan    334.9
#2    Toyota    333.9
#12    Rebellion    333.9
#23    Nissan    333.9
#7    Audi    332.9
#22    Nissan    332.9
#1    Toyota    331.8
#9    Audi    331.8
#13    Rebellion    331.8
#19    Porsche    327.8

EDIT
And here's the best times of each car through Porsche curves. Nissan losing a shocking amount of time.

#7	LOTTERER	15,511	
#18	JANI	15,768	+0,257
#8	JARVIS	15,984	+0,473
#9	ALBUQUERQUE	15,996	+0,485
#17	WEBBER	16,001	+0,490
#1	BUEMI	16,243	+0,732
#19	TANDY	16,265	+0,754
#12	BECHE	16,337	+0,826
#2	CONWAY	16,368	+0,857
#23	MARDENBOROUGH	18,682	+3,171
#21	MATSUDA	18,833	+3,322
#22	TINCKNELL	18,869	+3,358

[Bandicoot17]

Originally Posted by Acid09

Still, do you honestly believe that the 919 was, at any point of it's lifecycle, as slow as the GT-R is now?

Maybe when it was on fire??

I do hope we get to see it work as designed with the 8MJ system though.

[Artur]

If the weather conditions allows, Peugeot's record is gonna get smashed in the next 120 minutes , methinks

[GT3.14]

Murphy will be back on the track this session.

[kvenom]

3:17!!!!!

[J Jay]

Well that was quick ...