[WEC Race] WEC 2013 Round 1: Silverstone

[Dario911]

Originally Posted by Starfish Primer

A gallery I´ve found in Flickr with good pics from today:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/towcest...7633225266697/

Great shots! Thank you!

[TF110]

Rebellion still running Lotus Sponsorship-

[Beetle]

I wonder why Lotus is so off the pace. Nice to see the #71 leading the #51 for a change. I'm a little concerned about the #97 car, they don't seem to be running quite up to the pace of the GT leaders. Makowiecki seems to be doing fairly well, though, as usual. Also, it's nice to see the Manthey Porsche's have the pace.

I can't wait for someone to be proved wrong in the Toyota vs. Audi debate on Sunday!

[Koenigsegg]

Originally Posted by TF110

Rebellion still running Lotus Sponsorship.

Not a surprise, is it? I mean, they were still running black, gold and red. Same colours as last year and same colours Lotus use in F1.

[Simmi]

Originally Posted by Beetle

I wonder why Lotus is so off the pace. Nice to see the #71 leading the #51 for a change. I'm a little concerned about the #97 car, they don't seem to be running quite up to the pace of the GT leaders. Makowiecki seems to be doing fairly well, though, as usual. Also, it's nice to see the Manthey Porsche's have the pace.

For a bit of context around these points - the new Lotus cars are BRAND new. The second chassis was turning laps for the first time so they are bound to be off the pace. Really just a weekend of public testing for them to see what breaks. I think they had a bit of fire drama too at one point.

The #97 Aston had a full engine change in the morning and didn't turn a single lap. I'd image that is why they weren't on it in FP2 as they probably had a lot of basic set-up work to get through with the new car.

[TF110]

Audi took pole last time at Silverstone, but Toyota was the faster car during the race (on average) . Audi still won though! What's impressive is the cars are still pretty close even with Audi running their 2013 car. But they are down to "490hp" remember. Both cars in the 1:43's on a not so fully dry/rubbered track is already two seconds better than last year in practice 2. 1:43.2 from Audi compared to 1:45.8 (1:45.7 P1) for the E-Tron. Toyota has gained more as well. Last year in FP1 was a 1:46.0 compared to a 1:43.8 in FP2 this year. So 2.5 second improvement for Audi and a 2.8 second improvement for Toyota.

[gregc]

Persuaded the boss to let me have the day off so I got to Silverstone a day earlier than I expected

First time I've been to see sportscars live and thoroughly enjoyed it, I think I might be hooked by the end of the weekend - great to hear so many different engine notes in the same session, the cars look and sound superb. My little promise to myself to expand my motorsport horizons this year is going well so far

A few pics, there are some more here if anyone's interested.





Can't wait for rest of the weekend

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Dario911

Where did you read this?

I had the wrong Ferrari, sorry.


Giancarlo Fisichella in AF Corse’s #51 car however was eventually black flagged for driving standards, and therefore had the lap times in the session nullified after finishing un-officially 2nd in class.

[MJones94]

Originally Posted by TF110

Audi took pole last time at Silverstone, but Toyota was the faster car during the race (on average) . Audi still won though! What's impressive is the cars are still pretty close even with Audi running their 2013 car. But they are down to "490hp" remember. Both cars in the 1:43's on a not so fully dry/rubbered track is already two seconds better than last year in practice 2. 1:43.2 from Audi compared to 1:45.8 (1:45.7 P1) for the E-Tron. Toyota has gained more as well. Last year in FP1 was a 1:46.0 compared to a 1:43.8 in FP2 this year. So 2.5 second improvement for Audi and a 2.8 second improvement for Toyota.

The times really are stunning at this early stage aren't they?! What do you mean by 'down to 490hp', are they keeping the revs low for the whole event, or is the just a practice engine map thing?

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by MJones94

The times really are stunning at this early stage aren't they?! What do you mean by 'down to 490hp', are they keeping the revs low for the whole event, or is the just a practice engine map thing?

Audi has to run with a 3% smaller air restrictor than last (45.1 mm instead of 45.8 mm). Audi claims that this has cost them 15 kW (20 hp). So "officially" the R18 engine now produces 360 kW (490 hp) instead of 375 kW (510 hp).

Audi and Toyota also have to run with 15 kg extra compared to last year. These rule changes make the improvement in performance even more impressive.

[MJones94]

Thanks for clarifying that . Wow, the pace they are able to lap the circuit at is really remarkable then!

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Because this topic deals with Silverstone, I assumed you meant "last year Silverstone".

Earlier you said that Toyota was "over a second faster than Audi" last year. Now you are saying that they were "a second faster" on some points in the season. Which metric are you using? Which track do you mean?

This is a comparison of the median lap time:
This is a comparison of the average of the 20% fastest lap times:
Note that the comparison of the Bahrain lap time is not so meaningful, since the Toyota did not finish the race.

Perhaps you are considering ultimate pace, instead of consistent race pace?

This is a comparison of the qualifying time:
This is a comparison of the fastest race lap:

Lap times depend of many factors, including chassis balance tires traffic etc...

But "top speeds" are more tell tale, in 2012 Audi had the best top speed in all circuits except LeMans (La Sathre).. meaning torque dictates, while in LeMans shows clearly that Toyota has more "power" (hp) but needs those long straits to show... Yet the Toyota didn't have the best race laps there, meaning Audi has a good chance to win this year to, because the difference of top speed is not negligible, yet happens only for short times at the end of long straits (the same this year depending on how much ACO/FIA schizophrenically decides to penalize the "diesel" engine, which clearly is only an ultra-expensive to try to compensate, part of the equation)

In compensation "NON- DISCRETIONARY" ballast penalty decided race to race (equal to everybody to prevent some team to always win) is incredible cheap, fair and rational... but that would be too much to ask to ACO/FIA i think...

The same with free fuel tank and everybody *forcible stops* no further than 12 laps (more race less stops, and non F1 like win by pit stop dictated by tank capacity), even if they have a 100 liter tank... but i think this is even worst, akin to preach to an empty desert...

[hcl123]

Audi was almost 1" lap faster at Silverstone last year than Toyota (in spite of Toyota having more power( hp))...1:43.6 against 1:44.4... this year *SO FAR* the so much talked Audi faster than 1" per lap has not materialized; 1:43.2... less than half a second faster...

In its turn Toyota with 1:43.8 is more close to that 1"...

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

In order to make up for the time of a late splash and dash, you don't need "considerably faster pace".

source: http://www.dailysportscar.com/viewAr...D2E10C85AFF5A2

BTW the FIA has defined the same four hybrid activation zones as in 2012: http://www.fia.com/sites/default/fil...06-LMP1-HY.pdf

FIA has defined the hybrid activation zones ??

This sounds more like a "religion" than a sport... "the Lord says no sex(carnal) on Fridays lol"... what would be of us without all those priests sticking their noses in sport (heaven!) lol...

Yet they are so concerned about ICE performance equalization... when the factor to balance all propositions would be exactly the electric motor...

[zanfo zanfagni]

Originally Posted by MJones94

The times really are stunning at this early stage aren't they?! What do you mean by 'down to 490hp', are they keeping the revs low for the whole event, or is the just a practice engine map thing?

with restrictors there isn't much "map freedom". On youtube are available clips with a basic telemetry of audi r18 in 2011 and 2012 races. During 2011 season the engine could rev to 4800 close to 5000, last year to 4500. If these clips will be available this year too, maybe we will see the engine revving to 4300 or less. Restrictors keep under control power output making the engine rev less than usual. Higher revs = higher power, lower revs = lower power. Is simple maths. Shorter restrictors afflict poorly diesel engines because the outstanding torque release remains almost untouched (a reduction of turbo pressure afflict torque release. But actually the pressure reduction is balanced by the hybrid boost). The real handicap is a lower top speed given by the lack of final power. During 2011 Le mans peugeot 908 could hit more than 340km/h, r18 TDI almost 335km/h; with shorter mandatory diesel restrictors for 2012 the e-tron could hit 325km/h, ultra some km/h more because lower drag. This year i expect a bit lower but however honest top speed, something like 320km/h, but more because of a better low drag design than mere power. If i've understood something about 2014 regulations, the meaning of top speed as we actually know it for lmp1 will be drastilcy changed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mV1ZdQ1Bn0 2011 R18 le mans
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSza8lljsrU 2012 R18 fuji

Useless to mention that 490hp is an indicative value that doesn't mean anything, nobody but engineers know the real power. In 2011 pre season press peugeot and audi claimed 550hp, but well informed people were speaking about 600hp and more.

[zanfo zanfagni]

Originally Posted by hcl123

FIA has defined the hybrid activation zones ??

This sounds more like a "religion" than a sport... "the Lord says no sex(carnal) on Fridays lol"... what would be of us without all those priests sticking their noses in sport (heaven!) lol...

Yet they are so concerned about ICE performance equalization... when the factor to balance all propositions would be exactly the electric motor...

if FIA/ACO was "religion" audi and toyota were the "heretics". For this season FIA will install more data logger devices on audi and toyota because FIA suspects that r18 and ts030 can easily activate hybrid also in no braking zone.

[Starfish Primer]

Another Flickr gallery with nice photos:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/majorda...th/8643033493/

[TF110]

Originally Posted by hcl123

Audi was almost 1" lap faster at Silverstone last year than Toyota (in spite of Toyota having more power( hp))...1:43.6 against 1:44.4... this year *SO FAR* the so much talked Audi faster than 1" per lap has not materialized; 1:43.2... less than half a second faster...

In its turn Toyota with 1:43.8 is more close to that 1"...

They have a lot more torque plus part time 4wd. This track has lots of high speed turns so the downforce should be prominent. Audi increased their hybrid power this season and not many turns after the hybrid harvest zones are much lower than 120kmh. Toyotas top speed was faster at LeMans because of their lower downforce package. Fujis straight is very long too and they were slower than Audi. Theres no reason to think Toyota has a lot more power.

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

"but Toyota hasn't sat still so I think they'll be faster just like last year."
Yet, the 2012 TS030 which has to run with +15 kg extra ballast, became faster during the winter break, even though it has no seen any track action since Shanghai.

Now that is confusing. Shouldn't every LMP1 car be 900Kg without driver and any fuel ?

If the +15Kg is because the car is lighter than those 900Kg, is not a penalty is a *benefice*, because they can attach weights were makes more sense for a better balance.

If the +15Kg is an *additional* penalty(915kg), i missed it completely... why ? ... another irrational ACO/FIA decision ?

Originally Posted by gwyllion

The fuel tank size of Audi and Toyota remains the same. So Audi will still be able to do longer stints than Toyota.

Now that would be incredible, because the Audi tank is already 25% smaller

Perhaps "hybrid" is even more efficient with diesel than with gas lol .. its going to be a long weird season... with the lords of oil going insane lol

At least Volvo numbers are astonishing to... >100 MPGe or 1.8L/100Km for a close to 2 ton Van (the new V60 Plug-in Hybrid that might be here end year), 215+70 hp 600nm total ... and that should be the *norm* (>100MPG) in future, even for gas powered cars

http://forums.swedespeed.com/showthr...nce-and-appeal

[hcl123]

Originally Posted by zanfo zanfagni

with restrictors there isn't much "map freedom". On youtube are available clips with a basic telemetry of audi r18 in 2011 and 2012 races. During 2011 season the engine could rev to 4800 close to 5000, last year to 4500. If these clips will be available this year too, maybe we will see the engine revving to 4300 or less. Restrictors keep under control power output making the engine rev less than usual. Higher revs = higher power, lower revs = lower power. Is simple maths.

Is a very "borged" math, that doesn't tell anything like it. Where does *TORQUE* enter for acceleration? ... where does aerodynamic enter for top speeds ?( etc etc)

More true simple math is that Higher revs = higher fuel consumption more heat to dissipate, lower revs = lower fuel consumption and better for mechanics endurance.

Originally Posted by zanfo zanfagni

Shorter restrictors afflict poorly diesel engines because the outstanding torque release remains almost untouched (a reduction of turbo pressure afflict torque release. But actually the pressure reduction is balanced by the hybrid boost). The real handicap is a lower top speed given by the lack of final power.

ummm... rules keep reducing the restrictors, and they keep augmenting the "average compression ratio" and the fuel injection pressure ( supercritical and HCCI are at hand). This OTOH has the benefice to augment the average exhaust pressure for Turbo, in spite of the gas volume in average being smaller(less total volume yet faster), faster exhaust pressure which compensates smaller intake (restricted) by forcing the intake turbine in average to suck more air from those smaller intake entrances.

Of course there is a limit for this, but diesel is VERY NATURAL a Turbo engine... and so it might not be this year that a tipping point is reached.

Petrol engines "NOT turbo", OTOH, are much more sensible to intake volumetry, yet they can deal with smaller intakes and smaller engine displacement by compensating with much higher revs. Which is a lose lose situation unless those higher revs are almost instantaneous (they can take quite precious seconds which are always precious in motorsport), and because with much higher revs also much higher fuel consumption is guarantied.

So the Hybrid drive is exactly the only way to balance the disadvantage of Petrol in endurance, not to advantage of diesel. Yet instead of promoting it, ACO/FIA insist in a formula that is stupid to say the least, is contra-natura, counter the trends, counter the logic, counter the market ( GT has BIG engines), counter the good sense...

Originally Posted by zanfo zanfagni

During 2011 Le mans peugeot 908 could hit more than 340km/h, r18 TDI almost 335km/h; with shorter mandatory diesel restrictors for 2012 the e-tron could hit 325km/h, ultra some km/h more because lower drag. This year i expect a bit lower but however honest top speed, something like 320km/h, but more because of a better low drag design than mere power. If i've understood something about 2014 regulations, the meaning of top speed as we actually know it for lmp1 will be drastilcy changed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mV1ZdQ1Bn0 2011 R18 le mans
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSza8lljsrU 2012 R18 fuji

No it wont... of course there are limits. But to travel at 100Kmh in a relative low friction environment you only need 17hp, the same at 120mph = 200Kmh you need 85hp... for 300Kmh you need almost 300hp...

Its exponential... and i think the 490hp "announcement" has to do with this, theoretically it matches the top speeds... not the real possibilities of the engine.

Originally Posted by zanfo zanfagni

Useless to mention that 490hp is an indicative value that doesn't mean anything, nobody but engineers know the real power. In 2011 pre season press peugeot and audi claimed 550hp, but well informed people were speaking about 600hp and more.

Those hp were always relative... more for diesel than for petrol... its indicative of the "effort" the engine makes to achieve the necessary hp output as fast as possible to ensure those top speeds. If you have much more torque you need less revs, less "effort" and so can attain the necessary power much faster -> THIS IS THE ADVANTAGE OF DIESEL ARCHITECTURE... not max hp...

Diesel is not a question of the "liquid fuel" its a question of architecture that makes much more sense for motorsport than petrol... more so because petrol can have similar "compression ignition" principles http://www.greencarcongress.com/2013...-20130412.html

The "traditional" petrol architecture is OBSOLETE, its not the fuel its the architecture. Soon with GDI (gas direct injection) there will be "compression ignition" petrol engines, there will be fuel mixtures that blend diesel with petrol and the "oil lords" will be selling it at every gas station(car makers will follow).

But in the end i still think "kerosene" or "diesel" are better chemical proprieties, to better take advantage of this better architecture -> you don't have to rev very high...

The traditional petrol engine is the "dream of the oil lords"... the image of "roaring sounds and flames coming out of the exhaust pipes", was the best marketing point ever devised to sell more liquid fuel, that the lords don't wont to lose... with the illusive idea of faster and more potent, that captivated younger and not so younger enthusiasts , when in reality is neither... only less efficient...

The same happens with the hp "metric"... illusive, less efficient to tell a picture... want to judge an engine by a figure use "torque" numbers.

Example: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2013...-20130410.html





See those exponential curves ? The diesel is much more faster (fast growing exponential curve) tough being clearly "cut" (by the curves) at its potential for max rated torque and "power" (hp), which is smaller than the petrol variants in the announcement (because of that marketing point, hp, is why they cut the diesel) .. he! someone must pay more by buying more lol (suckers!)

[cmk]

Originally Posted by Koenigsegg

Not a surprise, is it? I mean, they were still running black, gold and red. Same colours as last year and same colours Lotus use in F1.

Guess they're still flogging collaboration watches!

I think the red is co-incidental (Total in F1, Switzerland here) but I have to opine the new livery is an improvement on last year's, and edging closer to the 2011 livery which was a fave of mine. Classy team.

[TF110]

The Lotus logo wasn't on the car at Sebring. That's why I pointed it out.

[FstrthnU]

Family picture lol

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by hcl123

Now that is confusing. Shouldn't every LMP1 car be 900Kg without driver and any fuel ?

If the +15Kg is because the car is lighter than those 900Kg, is not a penalty is a *benefice*, because they can attach weights were makes more sense for a better balance.

If the +15Kg is an *additional* penalty(915kg), i missed it completely... why ? ... another irrational ACO/FIA decision ?

The 15kg weight penalty was decided by the Endurance Committee last December in an attempt to reduce the gap with the petrol-powered non-hybrids, i.e. privateers. Refuelling times will also get longer for the hybrids due to smaller refuelling restrictors compared to those used by the (petrol-powered) privateers (25mm vs. 33mm). This is likely to impact more Toyota than Audi as Toyota might still have to refuel more often than Audi, like last year.

Originally Posted by hcl123

Now that would be incredible, because the Audi tank is already 25% smaller

Perhaps "hybrid" is even more efficient with diesel than with gas lol .. its going to be a long weird season... with the lords of oil going insane lol

As far as fuel tank capacity is concerned, the rules have not changed compared to last year. The petrol-powered non-hybrids however get a 5L additional fuel tank capacity. This year, one can still expect Audi to be able to do longer stints compared to Toyota as indicated by gwyllion

[Martin Bull]

Originally Posted by hcl123

the image of "roaring sounds and flames coming out of the exhaust pipes",

Very interesting post, and I know you're probably right, but.............( sigh ! ) I still rather wish there were a Kremer 935 or two among the entry list on Sunday.......