|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
12 Oct 2011, 01:23 (Ref:2969607) | #1426 | |||||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,228
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by deggis; 12 Oct 2011 at 01:48. |
|||||
|
12 Oct 2011, 02:05 (Ref:2969624) | #1427 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
So you're saying what if a Toyota diesel dominates against Audi and Peugeot diesels? My guess is that there would be calls to choke the Toyota (or whoever is dominating) somehow. I don't know how they would do it. The convenient excuse the petrol runners have would not exist. I would not put it past the ACO to find something though. It seems that is the direction we are heading towards. It would be like GTE.
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
12 Oct 2011, 04:37 (Ref:2969652) | #1428 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,485
|
Diesel Toyota? I doubt that. Make a new technology that's not used in most parts of the world (in Toyota's market)? I see the argument here, but I mostly agree with the fact companies make race cars to sell road cars. There's other things involved like research, technology etc. But comparing a factory Audi or Peugeot to a Lola with some old engine in the back is kinda far out there. Why would they expect someone spending 20million to touch someone spending 100million? That's like saying Virgin can match McLaren and RedBull in F1. It's not going to happen. You need money to buy talent, recruit talent, put that talent to the track. Audi etc. have the budget to do so. Rebellion, Oak etc. don't.
|
|
|
12 Oct 2011, 05:03 (Ref:2969664) | #1429 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 785
|
Quote:
In fact keep saying that and all your arguments fall apart automatically. They turn to crap. Crap engines are engines that are not reliable or are seriously underdeveloped. Crap engines are no longer present in endurance racing (although Zytek's record in 2011 could mean they fit the bill). Crap engines were the GP2 Mecachrome Noel del Bello tried in 2006(?). It was the AER I4 when it couldn't last with the fuel issue - solved. It was the privately-tuned Ford V8s found in the Norma and Lavaggi. It was the Mader V8 also found in the Norma. Apart from that, please show me credible people seriously claiming an engine power benefit is costing them time on track. If you can't, you'll have to stop using that baseless argument. Acura and Porsche traded punches in the LMP2 days but were they ever more than 10hp apart? Can we say the Rebellion "Toyota" engine has a significant advantage over the Judd found in the OAKs? If you say yes to that, that would mean the ancient Pescarolo is superior enough to the recently overhauled Lola to make up a power deficit... not gonna happen. The biggest factor in how fast an LMP is is aero. The diesels will still win even if the ACO goes as far as putting them at a disadvantage because they have superior chassis and resources to figure them out. The races will just be more interesting. Before claiming the HPD engine is worth 7 seconds around LM, you have to look at how well the engine did in the Fernandez Lola. Then think about how much worst the historically-weaker-on-fast-tracks-than-on-street-tracks Lola roadster would have been on a European track like LM. Oh yeah, it's not the HPD engine, it's mostly the HPD chassis! And conviniently, no one else ran an HPD or anything nearly that advanced. Another baseless argument. One can't gain a big power advantage with balanced restrictor rules. The only to achieve that is when the equivalency between different engine types is skewed. (That's how Porsche went from going nowhere in FIA GT to being in contention for pole and winning LM in 1998) |
|||
|
12 Oct 2011, 06:06 (Ref:2969678) | #1430 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,129
|
Re the discussion above regarding engines.
Bear in mind that it is not only the engine that makes a car go fast(er). Peugeot and Audi have the money to develop and test state of the art chassis, while the Lola and Pescarolo stuff is basically five to six years old. You may say that Oak is still racing with a Courage based tub. |
||
__________________
pieter melissen |
12 Oct 2011, 06:21 (Ref:2969682) | #1431 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,485
|
That's the truth. A new car, versus cars modified? How long have those tubs been around? There's nothing that AGD said that was wrong IMO. It's engines, chassis, aero etc. But that's because the big Manufacturers have the money to do this. Privateers don't. Which is why you don't see them winning. The HPD@ Sebring early this year never tested at all, yet placed 2nd to a proven race winning chassis/engine combination in the Oreca 908. How is that so? When time is taken, and when serious skill and technical know-how is put to something, it will perform. I'm betting Toyota will be on the mark. Porsche as well. And they won't be using diesel.
|
|
|
12 Oct 2011, 07:09 (Ref:2969700) | #1432 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
Quote:
The problem with the Judd is that it is an older engine designed to sell to lower budget LMP2 teams. It may be reliable, but it probably does not have nearly the type of development as something Audi and Peugeot would build. The HPD is something that has had factory program development and I think that shows on the track. Forget about the ARX-01 chassis, even the RML Lola-HPD from last year outqualified the fastest 3.4L Judd by 2-2.5 seconds at Le Mans if I remember correctly. Of course, when you add a well-polished chassis like an ARX-01, R18, or 908 to the mix, these ultra-quick lap times start to look more feasible. Add to that better tires and all the other stuff the factory teams have. Look at the drivers even. We have discussions on this forum about Audi and Peugeot drivers who are slower than their teammates by a noticeable margin. These "slow" drivers are some of the biggest names in auto racing like TK, Wurz, Lamy, Gene, and so forth. These Audi and Peugeot guys aren't just rolling something off the truck and sleepwalking their way to laps that are 7 seconds faster. The type of commitment and push they are bringing to the track is tremendous. Everyone on those teams is feeling the pressure to perform while running at 100%. I think one of the issues right now with LMP1 is the lack of quality privateer options. The ARX-03a will run next year. That is a positive step. There is word that the TMG Toyota should be improved for next year. That is another step. OAK made some nice gains since their troubled period around Le Mans. Still, a lot of the privateer stuff just seem like old relics. It would be nice if Wirth or Oreca could come out with a new customer coupe that has something to compete with the factory teams. I guess the interest isn't there for that at the moment though. |
||
|
12 Oct 2011, 07:14 (Ref:2969703) | #1433 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,129
|
|||
__________________
pieter melissen |
12 Oct 2011, 07:18 (Ref:2969704) | #1434 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 508
|
I'm cautiously optimistic about these changes. I can see merit on both sides of the discussion. Clearly an OEM programme should beat a privateer programme in terms of resources alone if the tech regs are equal.
Looking at Judd alone you'd say the regs are unfair, but the HPD and Toyota petrol engines are clearly better - making it easier to argue the OEM vs. Privateer position. Having said that it is clear that (ignore torque) the diesels have enjoyed a theoretical and practical horsepower advantage since they arrived on the scene. This is the marketing reality of getting Audi and Peugeot involved. The ACO made a calculation that these two OEMs going toe-to-toe was better value than keeping the petrol privateers happy. It's now reached the stage that a viable world championship needs more than Audi and Peugeot so other OEMs have come to the table; Toyota, Jaguar, Porsche, etc. I think it's got to the point where ****ing off Audi and Peugeot by reducing the diesel advantage is more than offset by bringing in other OEMs. Ben |
||
|
12 Oct 2011, 07:39 (Ref:2969718) | #1435 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
|
12 Oct 2011, 11:12 (Ref:2969832) | #1436 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,228
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
|
12 Oct 2011, 11:18 (Ref:2969837) | #1437 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,228
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
|
12 Oct 2011, 11:42 (Ref:2969849) | #1438 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 785
|
We're making progress, but there's still a lot of crap about "majorly inferior" privateer teams not having what it takes to lap as fast as Audi and Peugeot in the first place.
I suggest that you take a look at OAK's performance at PLM. With a budget not even in the 8-figures, a "lowly" Judd engine and an ancient chassis that was only given some key updates this year, they were at the forefront of the petrol class and could keep up with - and even gain time on - the diesels everywhere on track but on the front and back long straights. That is based on quotes from Olivier Pla and Alex Prémat - two men of factory driver quality - and it sure seems to echo the results of the timing loop measurements the ACO mentions in their last release. It's also a performance that's on par - at the very least - with Rebellion and their TMG Toyota engine that people seem to agree is clearly superior. To me, one has to be blind to fail to see the speed advantage on straight lines. And if you really want to see something interesting, look at the first lap at this year's PLM. OAK overtook the Oreca Peugeot and was right on P4's tail... until they came to the back straight. Last edited by Félix; 12 Oct 2011 at 11:49. |
||
|
12 Oct 2011, 11:55 (Ref:2969859) | #1439 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
Quote:
Anyway, the "need" to performance balance is always relative. In 2008, the fact that there were even two legitimate factory teams was still a bit shocking compared to the previous years. The fact that someone had bettered Audi in a way was even more shocking. The natives weren't itching to see 3-4 teams at the top because 2 was still more than they were used to. Attitudes have changed in 2011-12. 2 is old news now and fans want more. There is more pressure to close the gap or at least to make sure it does not get any bigger. Also, to a previous point about marketing vs. winning, it's not inconceivable that a company picks marketing over an absolute conquest to win. Look at Porsche and the 911 as an example. I realize GT is a bit of a different story with it having a more obvious (although not obvious enough) system of BoP, but we've also seen that the regulators (IMSA, I'm looking at you) are very fickle about what they think needs to be done. If a factory wanted to win at all costs, they would not rely on BoP especially when the only roadblock is the desire of marketers. So, yes, marketing can trump winning even with competitive companies. |
||
|
12 Oct 2011, 12:09 (Ref:2969869) | #1440 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
Quote:
The diesel cars have coupes, OAK does not. That's only going to lead to a small difference, but there are other things as well. Perhaps OAK went more conservative with the setup in order to finish whereas Audi and Peugeot went for less downforce to keep up with one another. Maybe OAK had to tune down the engines to get reliability. There's a lot of possibilities. The Highcroft ARX-01e was able to race with the factory Peugeots at Sebring. Yes, the Peugeots were still new at the time and maybe they were sandbagging a bit, but Highcroft had not even tested the new bodywork before the race weekend so they weren't at full capability either. |
||
|
12 Oct 2011, 13:40 (Ref:2969918) | #1441 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 508
|
Sebring was maximum BS because you had grandfathered Audis against 2011 Pugs, plus a grandfathered Pug.
Top speeds on the back straight in Q: #10 Oreca Pug - 169.5 #1 Audi - 166.4 #8 pug - 164 #2 Audi - 163.4 #01 HPD - 162.4 #7 Pug - 156 ??? The HPD lost 0.3 sec in just turn 1 to Dumas. This means that they had less downforce. http://www.imsatiming.com/Results/2011/ALMS/01_Sebring/ So basically you have a car that's trimmed out so much that it looses 0.3sec in 1300 feet of turn 1 and is still 4km/h slower on the straight. The HPD did a great race at Sebring in strategy terms but don't pretend the regs were even close to a level playing field. EDIT: Also safety cars mean that the chances of the HPD loosing a lap are much lower than in a European based race Ben Last edited by ubrben; 12 Oct 2011 at 13:49. |
||
|
12 Oct 2011, 14:44 (Ref:2969936) | #1442 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,129
|
|||
__________________
pieter melissen |
12 Oct 2011, 15:56 (Ref:2969980) | #1443 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 508
|
Quote:
Ben |
|||
|
12 Oct 2011, 17:09 (Ref:2970014) | #1444 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Quote:
The intervening period has seen national and regional sportscar racing develop temendously, GT racing didn't exist in Europe from the early 80's until '92. There wasn't any national sportscar racing higher than club level, touring cars and single seaters dominated which resulted in sportscar racing and Le Mans itself almost being wiped out completely when the World Championship and Group C crashed. While I acknowledge the ALMS will face competition from the WEC (though I would say GA is a far greater threat), the LMS, despite hopes, has changed little since the day it formed. There was a period in 2007-8 when it looked like it could emulate the ALMS, but for various reasons the series regressed and we were faced with the prospect of Audi/Peugeot only showing up at Le Mans, with few if any manufactuers looking to enter the sport. All this has been played out to a backdrop of F1, WRC, WTCC, even national series like DTM , Super GT and Aussie V8's, expanding their horizons to new markets like China, India and the US. As for track attendance and media coverage that can only be judged when the WEC is up and running, the occasional Asian LMS races can't be used as a barometer, we need to see what happens when Toyota turn up at their home track, we know what they brought when the Group C series and current Super GT series arrives in town. In '92 the World Championship raced predominantly in Europe, you could watch the odd race highlights and read news and reports once a week in Autosport. Today the fastet growing markets are outside Europe, every second of track time can be followed online, and fans from the four corners of the world can communicate instantly, IMO it's never been more timely to launch the WEC. |
||
|
12 Oct 2011, 17:18 (Ref:2970018) | #1445 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Quote:
What it will do is hopefully push those privateers with quality equipment like Strakka, OAK and Rebellion that bit closer to the ultimate pace, and allow petrol factories to be bang on the pace of the diesels. If the calculations are drastically wrong I doubt for one Audi and Peugeot would show up, and there's no sigh of that. Secondly all it takes is a reajustment the other way to put things right. |
||
|
12 Oct 2011, 17:25 (Ref:2970020) | #1446 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
Now ..... that would be something . The series needs it . I think everybody is cheesed off with the way the diesels are cleaning up . Hope your right Jag .
|
||
|
12 Oct 2011, 18:47 (Ref:2970068) | #1447 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Apparently there was a rumor (reported by AUTOhebdo) that in 2012 the displacement of NA petrol engines would be allowed to be increased from 3.4 to 4.0 liter. This rumor made a lot of sense because this would give the petrol cars a bit more torque and Zytek and HPD already have a 4.0 liter version of their V8. With the recent press release of the ACO, we now know that this rule change has not been approved.
In Petit Le Mans, Laurent Chauveau asked Stephan Gervais of Rebellion Racing about this rumor. Quote:
|
||
|
12 Oct 2011, 19:00 (Ref:2970074) | #1448 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,228
|
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by deggis; 12 Oct 2011 at 19:13. |
|||
|
12 Oct 2011, 19:01 (Ref:2970075) | #1449 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Has anyone done calculations as to what 7% less power would relate to in track time at Le Mans.
On the face of it, it seems quite a chunk of time but in reality it's unlikey to amount to more than a couple of seconds. |
|
|
12 Oct 2011, 19:10 (Ref:2970082) | #1450 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[WEC] Glickenhaus Hypercar | Akrapovic | ACO Regulated Series | 1603 | 12 Apr 2024 21:24 |
[WEC] Aston Martin Hypercar Discussion | deggis | ACO Regulated Series | 175 | 23 Feb 2020 03:37 |
[WEC] SCG 007: Glickenhaus Le Mans LMP1 Hypercar | Bentley03 | ACO Regulated Series | 26 | 16 Nov 2018 02:35 |
ALMS Extends LMP Regulations | tblincoe | North American Racing | 33 | 26 Aug 2005 15:03 |
[LM24] Whats the future of LMP's at Le Mans?? | Garrett | 24 Heures du Mans | 59 | 8 Jul 2004 15:15 |