New ACO rules - bad calls?

[Zytek_Fan]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Not this again?

It's true though. The Audi has a lot more weight to throw around and with the diesel engine the weight is more centralised. If the Creation was ran this year by Creation it would probably get in the mix with the top P2s...

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Zytek_Fan

It's true though. The Audi has a lot more weight to throw around and with the diesel engine the weight is more centralised. If the Creation was ran this year by Creation it would probably get in the mix with the top P2s...

It's true huh? Just saying it is so, doesn't make it true. Please provide some data to back this up.

[Justin Moran]

Originally Posted by PorscheFanNo1

Well if thats not the case, care to explain it? Its the only version I've ever heard anyway.

Im serious! I obviously dont know any more(leave alone as much) than you so Im quite prepared to sit corrected!

I honestly believe the ACO and FIA dont agree on practically anything so why would the ACO want to look at, or adapt, any of the FIA regs?

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by TWK

Diesel is a large part of the automotive fuel market in Europe of course, and that alone makes it a bit of a political (and economic) imperative to encourage diesel race cars. But it has nothing to do with French agriculture.

The diesel market of european auto manufacturing and race rules to favor diesel fuels.

Weather it is acgricultural or not might also depend on where or what the euorpean diesel fuels are made from? Not the Shell race fuels.

So yes, many of us seem to think the rules do favor diesels do to marketing, not compeitition.

[ss_collins]

It's true huh? Just saying it is so, doesn't make it true. Please provide some data to back this up

I thought this was all firmly put to bed ages ago using average speeds...

In Europe, the P2s are damn fast, but they are privateer ran. Attrition is usually what gets a P2 a high overall position in LMS.

you say attrition is what gets P2's up the order... umm what was that blue thing at Silverstone chasing the pugs in the first 30 mins then?

[Mal]

Trouble is if you give the Penske P2's performance breaks to compete with the P1's Diesils at LM they would wipe the floor with them at most other tracks.

Le Mans is unique in that most of the circuit is single bends followed by long straights - Tetre rouge, the two chicanes, mulsanne, arnage and the Ford chicane are all like this. The only section that would favour a fast p2 is the Porsche curves which accounts for about 1 mile of an 8 mile track. I remember several times this year where the Audis have just blasted past the Porsches on the straights including RA, Mosport and Detroit.

The ACO's argument about P2's not competing with P1's at Le Mans is probably therefore right. But this may not stop them competing elsewhere.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

There is noting wrong with encouragement, it's the dissemination of any possible competition that I take exception to.
Also - I'm not sure about the agricultural connection, but the fact that PSA (the Peugeot-Citroen Group) sell huge numbers of diesel cars, may have had some thing to do with the ACO's whole hearted adoption of the diesel policy.

Diesels have had two years of favourable rules, Porsche haven't competed in the top class for almost a decade.

Next in line will be favourable hybrid regs and everyone will be *****ing about favouritism to Honda and Toyota.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

It's true huh? Just saying it is so, doesn't make it true. Please provide some data to back this up.

The average speed stats don't change the fact US circuits are vastly different to the average F1 circuit used in the LMS.

For a start there isn't a single street circuit, and not many 1st or 2nd gear corners were P1's and especially diesels struggle.

Even at Silverstone the P2 Zytek was significantly slower than the 908's, and slower than the best petrol P1's once past the opening half hour.

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by JAG

Diesels have had two years of favourable rules, Porsche haven't competed in the top class for almost a decade.

Next in line will be favourable hybrid regs and everyone will be *****ing about favouritism to Honda and Toyota.

Sure!
I can’t understand the pathological reasoning behind having to develop such overwhelmingly favorable rules for this or that particular agenda, when the ACO prime responsibility is to provide the millions of racing fans some good racing, and a well run race.
Their business should not be, creating new markets, lobbying new fuels, pushing political agendas, etc. (at least not so obviously)
There is a difference between stimulating certain developments and slanting the rules to such an extent that all non-complying competition is simply eliminated.
I hold these truths to be self evident, whether we are discussing diesels or hybrids.

[ss_collins]

At Valencia - a very twisty place indeed the pugs went into the distance

[TWK]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

The diesel market of european auto manufacturing and race rules to favor diesel fuels.

Weather it is acgricultural or not might also depend on where or what the euorpean diesel fuels are made from? Not the Shell race fuels.

So yes, many of us seem to think the rules do favor diesels do to marketing, not compeitition.

Did I question that diesel race cars exist because of the interest in Europe (and the US) in road-going diesel-powered automobiles? No. What I questioned was the assertion that diesel rules have anything to do with agriculture - in Europe or North America. They don't.

The new low sulfur diesels at the pump in the US and Europe - including Shell's V-Power - are Gas-to-Liquid (GTL), not bio-based. In fact, GTL diesel fuels have been produced by Shell and others (and actually imported into the California market) since 1993. The idea that Shell's racing fuel is some kind of exotic alchemist's mixture is poppycock - and always has been.]

Actually, both natural gas and coal (which after gasification is another source of GTL fuels) are far more plentiful and less dependent on a fragile food-chain than ethanol and other bio-mass derived fuels, so are better options if crude oil is, indeed, as limited a resource as many seem to believe.

I also think it's important to understand such seemingly esoteric detail, and not just because one is a race fan, but because so many other questions of policy (politics, if you like - though why that should be some kind of a dirty word is beyond me) depend on understanding underlying information.

[knighty]

while I agree with much of your post above.......quote "The idea that Shell's racing fuel is some kind of exotic alchemist's mixture is poppycock - and always has been"

on what basis do you make this claim above?..........from what I hear, Audis shell based diesel race fuel evaporates when its spilt on the floor, a friend who supports another team at the same races saw it happen and I believe him.

The ACO rules state its around 70 Cetane, probably another rule that Audi wrote for the ACO, along with all the other diesel regs when audi and the ACO sat in a cafe circa 2003, and Audi hinted they wanted to race a diesel.........

consider normal pump diesel is around 45-50 cetane......therefore its quite poky stuff!

[Spyderman]

Whilst I don't think politics is a dirty word, I do think that those that that are not elected to practice it, do so at their own peril. They run a strong danger of trying to be more "Catholic" than the Pope himself.
Again, there are those amongst us that don't have a huge aversion to change, but moderation and common sense are all we request.

[TWK]

Originally Posted by knighty

while I agree with much of your post above.......quote "The idea that Shell's racing fuel is some kind of exotic alchemist's mixture is poppycock - and always has been"

on what basis do you make this claim above?..........from what I hear, Audis shell based diesel race fuel evaporates when its spilt on the floor, a friend who supports another team at the same races saw it happen and I believe him.

The ACO rules state its around 70 Cetane, probably another rule that Audi wrote for the ACO, along with all the other diesel regs when audi and the ACO sat in a cafe circa 2003, and Audi hinted they wanted to race a diesel.........

consider normal pump diesel is around 45-50 cetane......therefore its quite poky stuff!

I didn't say it wasn't somewhat different in formulation from what you call "normal pump diesel." I did say - and stand by - the fact that it is only marginally different from pump-available GTL diesels - which have similar color and other physical characteristics. Most of that conjecture has been because so many don't know what the new diesel fuels are like - in fact have never heard of GTL diesels - which, by the way, I understand is quite clear (since it lacks the significant amount of particulates found in petroleum-derived diesel). The assertions that it is "different" from what is imagined to be "normal pump diesel" is questionable, because with the new low-sulfur and low-particulate requirements, "normal pump diesel" is gone in many places, and soon gone globally.

It wasn't long ago that racing gasolines were 110 octane + and "normal pump gasolines" were 85. That's "pokey stuff" in the same way, isn't it?

Considering the importance of the change in diesel, I find it astounding how little attention has been paid. It's not just a question of switching from gasoline to another product from a barrel of petroleum, but rather to a combination of natural gas and coal. Even if there is no increase in diesels on the road, the implication of eliminating the current consumption of diesel from the petroleum-refining product chain is immense, in my opinion.

[AU N EGL]

Clear? um No. Diesel in the US is GREEN like Mountain Dew soda. Color additive to assure highway tax is paid. OFF ROAD ( non taxed) or farm diesel is RED, color additive to assure it is not home made bio-diesel.

You have clear or red diesel in your diesel powered road vehicles and you get stopped for a fuel check as Jacky Gleason said in Smokey and the Bandit, "Boy, you in a heap of trouble." ( truck stops and wt stations are places that DMV police check trucks and fuel)

Back on topic, I thought the two diesels, Shells race fuel was much different then normal highway diesel.

Considering the importance of the change in diesel, I find it astounding how little attention has been paid. It's not just a question of switching from gasoline to another product from a barrel of petroleum, but rather to a combination of natural gas and coal. Even if there is no increase in diesels on the road, the implication of eliminating the current consumption of diesel from the petroleum-refining product chain is immense, in my opinion.

We have been down that road before, and dont want to go there of where or how much petroleum reserves are available or not available. Nor the amount of coal reserves.

Diesel powered race cars are more of the current political and ecological climet then actual produce more power then petrol.

[TWK]

Ok, I guess I'll just accept that to some it's irrelevant whether you remove automotive distillates from the petroleum product supply stream.

So the difference in diesel fuels is the colorant additive? And if you removed that, it would be what color? That hardly was the point.

It must all be part of the same vast conspiracy. I forgot that.

[Spyderman]

What you say maybe true and relevant, but who anointed the ACO as the radical representative for this agenda?
Last time I checked, they were an Automobile Club and not a political party with a "green" agenda.
I can accept that the ACO gets "turned on" to a particular band wagon, but to then "spit" in the faces of those that have been sustaining them for years (gasoline powered automotive manufacturers) is not exactly "cricket".
Of course there is always the argument that they need to adapt quickly to the environmental concerns of today at the risk of having the sport banned, but it's good to remember that hell is full of souls that had good intentions.

[knighty]

if I wanted to find the answer to this question, I could e-mail a friend, whos broter works for shell motorsport, and supports the Ferrari F1 team with their fuels and lubricants, and I know from what hes already told me, the fuel they supply ferrari F1 aint available at the pumps, and the oils arent available off the shelf either, they have a team of about 20 lab boffins creating new mixes all the time......shell pump hundreds of millions of bucks per year into ferrari F1 and they dont mess around.

but I'm not going to do this, as the answer is obvious about the lemans diesel fuels.........rest assured, the diesel that shell supply to Audi has been seriously tinkered with, cetane value is only a fraction of the story, oxygen content, density, anti-foaming additives all play a crucial part in forming some potent race fuel.

Mobil do the same for McLaren F1......and Elf do the same for Renault F1......I went to an engine tech lecture from John hilton (ex renault F1 engine designer), and he said over 1 season, half of their 40 bhp power improvements came from Elf, just with new fuels and lubricants.......available from the pumps - load of tosh, and the FIA know it.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by knighty

The ACO rules state its around 70 Cetane, probably another rule that Audi wrote for the ACO, along with all the other diesel regs when audi and the ACO sat in a cafe circa 2003, and Audi hinted they wanted to race a diesel.........

Shell V-Power Diesel "24LM" only has a cetane number of 61: http://www.lemans.org/sport/sport/re...iesel_lm24.pdf

Originally Posted by knighty

consider normal pump diesel is around 45-50 cetane......therefore its quite poky stuff!

Not true. Since 2000 diesel has to have a cetane number of at least 51 in Europe. See http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/eu/fuel.html

I don't know the number for Shell V-Power Diesel, but BP Ultimate Diesel promises a cetane number of at least 55. See http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarti...goryId=4005623

So the Le Mans race diesel is not a lot different from commercially available high cetane diesel. The blend just contains a bit more GTL. The Le Mans race petrol has an octane number of 101.3 (see http://www.lemans.org/sport/sport/re...lm24_2007.pdf), that you don't buy at the pump either.

[canam]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Shell V-Power Diesel "24LM" only has a cetane number of 61: http://www.lemans.org/sport/sport/re...iesel_lm24.pdf
Not true. Since 2000 diesel has to have a cetane number of at least 51 in Europe. See http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/eu/fuel.html

I don't know the number for Shell V-Power Diesel, but BP Ultimate Diesel promises a cetane number of at least 55. See http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarti...goryId=4005623

So the Le Mans race diesel is not a lot different from commercially available high cetane diesel. The blend just contains a bit more GTL. The Le Mans race petrol has an octane number of 101.3 (see http://www.lemans.org/sport/sport/re...lm24_2007.pdf), that you don't buy at the pump either.

So a 10-20% uplift for diesel over the stuff you get at the pumps and a 3-4% uplift for petrol over the stuff you buy in the pumps.

Diesel at 10-20% and Petrol and 3-4%.

Hmmm.

Sound truly equal to me....

[gwyllion]

Of course, increasing octane number is as easy as increasing cetane number Pure GTL has a cetane number of 75-80. Biodiesel also has higher number than standard diesel.

[ss_collins]

A lot of bluster and nonsense on here, re the evaporating diesel story - I head the same thing at Le Mans supposedly on the day it happened and it always came from a freind of a freind. Nobody I know has turned round and said I saw that happen.

Of course racing fuels are different to road fuels, the phrase 'pump fuel' denotes a specification - within that there is huge freedom. If you look in the latest RCE we have a big piece on how shell and Ferrari tune fuels to the conditions, the track, the temperature, the pit strategy and even the car weight. They do this at the track with a mobile lab, theres at least one similar lab thats always at Le Mans.

It makes me laugh when on TV they say that Xkg of fuel = Y laps - utter tosh as they don't know how much the fuel weighs - it aint all the same, sometimes very different indeed. They burn at different rates and in different ways too. So what do I know about Audi's fuel - nowt - but it does have a compression ignition engine.

So throwing around fuel specs and talking about what it is and isn't is a little irrelevant - I guess only a very select few really know, Baretsky, the guys at Shell...

[canam]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

So throwing around fuel specs and talking about what it is and isn't is a little irrelevant - I guess only a very select few really know, Baretsky, the guys at Shell...

...and that is the crux of the problem. These folk have no interest in telling the 'truth' (particularly to the ACO). In this regard, I am reminded of that clown/comic at Puegeot who talk of how petrol engined cars have an advantage. Just think what happens behind closed doors???

[knighty]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

A lot of bluster and nonsense on here, re the evaporating diesel story - I head the same thing at Le Mans supposedly on the day it happened and it always came from a freind of a freind. Nobody I know has turned round and said I saw that happen.

Of course racing fuels are different to road fuels, the phrase 'pump fuel' denotes a specification - within that there is huge freedom. If you look in the latest RCE we have a big piece on how shell and Ferrari tune fuels to the conditions, the track, the temperature, the pit strategy and even the car weight. They do this at the track with a mobile lab, theres at least one similar lab thats always at Le Mans.

It makes me laugh when on TV they say that Xkg of fuel = Y laps - utter tosh as they don't know how much the fuel weighs - it aint all the same, sometimes very different indeed. They burn at different rates and in different ways too. So what do I know about Audi's fuel - nowt - but it does have a compression ignition engine.

So throwing around fuel specs and talking about what it is and isn't is a little irrelevant - I guess only a very select few really know, Baretsky, the guys at Shell...

sorry mr collins, I totally disagree........its actually very relevant "bluster and nonsense"......as I design diesel engines for a living, and have been doing so for the past 5 years......the percentage difference highlighted by can-am above sums up the situation........

Gwyllon - thanks for the actual figures, I knew that was the trend, the figures were a bit hazy in my jumbled head......but it got the point across

so shell have labs at the races......sounds like pump fuel to me.......going racing benefits the customer eh......

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by knighty

so shell have labs at the races......sounds like pump fuel to me.......going racing benefits the customer eh......

Why not? The Shell V-Power Diesel "LM24" data sheet states <10 ppm sulphur. This will be mandatory in Europe from 2009 (now it has to be <50 ppm). So I think this research fuel is quite usefull.

Audi and Peugeot want to run on bio fuel in the next year: either biodiesel or BTL diesel. This seems quite relevant as well, with all the fuss about climate change.

Will you complain when ACO opts for bioethanol? E85 has an octane number of 105