'10 LMS Round 2 • Spa-Francorchamps • May 7th-9th

[GTfour]

Funny to read all the tormented comments about Audi's loss at Spa today.

I predicted it and it was just as I said,for most all of what I saw at Spa today were Peugeots being faster and having the upperhand.
Because of some incidents and mistakes,it remained an interesting battle,but in the end Peugeot showed who was strongest by taking second place from Audi in the last few laps.

At Le Mans their might will only show of more clear. It's about time,by the way. We've seen enough races being dominated by the guys from Ingolstadt. Now it's somebody else's time.

Oh,and about the pugs in the rain? Remember Petit Le Mans. There they clearly showed heavy downfalls were no longer a problem for them....

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by GTfour

Oh,and about the pugs in the rain? Remember Petit Le Mans. There they clearly showed heavy downfalls were no longer a problem for them....

After reading all the bickering and refusing to get drawn into the nonsense you have done it. Ill start by asking what race you were watching last year because the Audi had the lead of the race into the first corner of the very first lap even though it did not qualify on pole. Then ill tell you McNish proceeded to lap the puegeots who were only saved by a safety car. The only reason Peugeot won was because allan mcnish spun and came in for a pitstop under the safety car.

[Martin90]

Yeah the only things the pugs managed to do what the Audis couldn't in those few monsoon laps just before the red flag at petit was stay on track. Overall Audi had the quicker car in the rain. (at petit that was)

[ger80]

Nishy says everything is fine - so time to stop this
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/83507

[henk4]

Originally Posted by Martin90

Yeah the only things the pugs managed to do what the Audi's couldn't in those few monsoon laps just before the red flag at petit was stay on track. Overall Audi had the quicker car in the rain.

How can you draw that conclusion? Because the Audi ran on semi rain tyres and the Puigs on slicks? What a surprise then.

[Martin90]

Originally Posted by henk4

How can you draw that conclusion? Because the Audi ran on semi rain tyres and the Puigs on slicks? What a surprise then.

I was talking about petit (le mans)...

[henk4]

Originally Posted by ger80

Nishy says everything is fine - so time to stop this
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/83507

he gets paid to make such statements.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by Martin90

I was talking about petit (le mans)...

and hence also about last year's R15 which was a totally different car than the one they are now using.

[chernaudi]

And we have to remember that Spa isn't a good indicator for LM performance. It's a high downforce track, and Peugeot ran a high downforce setup. Audi ran a LM-spec areo setup, as they have a fixation right now on beating Peugeot at Le Mans, where the old R15 struggled mightily with their high downforce(and high drag) channel bodywork.

Audi has higher downforce bodywork, but oddly they used it in practice for the Paul Ricard LMS race, and chose not to use it at Spa. That may've been the big difference maker today, and Audi, true to their word, used Spa as an LM test, while Peugeot went for the win. It was almost as if Audi wasn't really trying all that hard to win today, as they didn't even run a setup that they knew was optimal for Spa, while Peugeot did.

But to quote the words of Dr. Ullirch, how can Audi "see where they stand" against Peugeot if their cars were in different worlds as far as their areo package? Audi probably would've been quite a bit faster if they ran the high downforce bodywork they normally would've used. Conversely, if the Pugs ran their LM areo package, they would've been quite a bit slower.

If Audi and Peugeot were in similar areo specs, we'd have a clearer picture, but if you ask me, Spa leaves more questions than answers, and even the Paul Ricard round leaves more questions answered, and the factory Pugs weren't there.

[Martin90]

Originally Posted by henk4

and hence also about last year's R15 which was a totally different car than the one they are now using.

That's not the point I was trying to make. At THAT point Audi was faster than Peugeot in the rain (even though some people here seem to think otherwise)

[henk4]

Originally Posted by Martin90

That's not the point I was trying to make. At THAT point Audi was faster than Peugeot in the rain (even though some people here seem to think otherwise)

I thought this thread was about Spa 2010. Sorry for misunderstanding. But other than that, when they were better under one race in the past is history, and actually not worth discussing.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

And we have to remember that Spa isn't a good indicator for LM performance. It's a high downforce track, and Peugeot ran a high downforce setup. Audi ran a LM-spec areo setup, as they have a fixation right now on beating Peugeot at Le Mans, where the old R15 struggled mightily with their high downforce(and high drag) channel bodywork.

Audi has higher downforce bodywork, but oddly they used it in practice for the Paul Ricard LMS race, and chose not to use it at Spa. That may've been the big difference maker today, and Audi, true to their word, used Spa as an LM test, while Peugeot went for the win. It was almost as if Audi wasn't really trying all that hard to win today, as they didn't even run a setup that they knew was optimal for Spa, while Peugeot did.

But to quote the words of Dr. Ullirch, how can Audi "see where they stand" against Peugeot if their cars were in different worlds as far as their areo package? Audi probably would've been quite a bit faster if they ran the high downforce bodywork they normally would've used. Conversely, if the Pugs ran their LM areo package, they would've been quite a bit slower.

If Audi and Peugeot were in similar areo specs, we'd have a clearer picture, but if you ask me, Spa leaves more questions than answers, and even the Paul Ricard round leaves more questions answered, and the factory Pugs weren't there.

So that would explain that I saw right before my eyes McNish being overtaken by a Rebellion Lola after coming from Blanchimont.
The downforce issue was discussed this afternoon and yet, the Pugs could keep up with the R15 on the long straight, and I think it is wishful thinking to say that with a low downforce package the Pugs would have been much slower.
I think the time difference built up before the first safety car came out (ofter the Zytek crash), cannot only be explained by downforce. By that time McNish was probably more than 25 seconds adrift already.

[Stefvh]

In fact, there was no real rain today. just a bit of water.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by Stefvh

In fact, there was no real rain today. just a bit of water.

it was the usual Spa affair, with not much rain around the start-finish area, but a very local burst of rain up in the hills, still heavy enough to make some teams decide to change for rain tyres. Rebellion did, and four laps later they came back in for slicks...

[chernaudi]

Well, Audi had to be giving up on average about .75 of a second a lap somewhere, and the areo probably at a circuit like Spa probably has a lot to answer for. Granted, the car had much different bodywork last year, but the R15 could hardly keep up with the 908s during dry practice at PLM last year because they ran LM spec bodywork. Only during the race-because of the threat of rain-did Audi fit high downforce bodywork to the R15 did it become as fast as(if not faster) than the 908s, wet(for sure) and dry.

It barely rained at all from what I've read, but it was still enough to give Peugeot headaches.

If Audi had a higher downforce package, they probably would've been more competitive, and they've admitted to as much. The ran the LM areo to use Spa as a test for LM. If I were Audi, I would've used LM as a test-for the LMIC, as most of the tracks(namely Silverstone and Road Atlanta) are similar to Spa. All one has to do is look at the 908's LM package and their sprint race package. Losing all those diveplanes and gurneys, and masking the area between the suspension shrouds and the front diffuser takes away a ton of downforce. Not to mention that with a high downforce package you can use the tires better by not sliding them around and keep them in their optimal temperature range.

So what if the 908s were about as fast as the R15's down the striaghts-could it be that the 908s have a bigger air restrictor for their AC system(which that advantage is lost after this year), or more likely, are able to get better runs out of the corners because the aero allows them to carry more speed out of the corners and onto the straights?

Audi stuck to their guns this weekend with LM oriented testing, and it cost them at cold, dweary Spa where deviating from that would've been most helpful, as Peugeot showed.

[Aysedasi]

I'm just glad I support neither but enjoy watching both..... (he said smugly.... )

But it is mighty good to see something other than an Audi winning consistently after so many years of domination....

[GTfour]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

After reading all the bickering and refusing to get drawn into the nonsense you have done it..

My dear man,the point is,the Audi's l-o-s-t bigtime simply because they were not fast enough. Even with their best squad,they couldn't match the Peugeot's.

Losing gracefully is a virtue...

[chernaudi]

In their release, Audi admitted that the R15 struggled in medium speed corners and when the track was greasy--both related to their LM downforce spec. They had a harder time keeping tire temperature and that slowed them when it sprinkled, especally in the moderate speed corners.

Oddly, this is the opposite of Spa in '08 when the 908s were faster in sectors 1 and 3, and the Audis were faster in sector 2 because they had a more agressive downforce package.

If they had more downforce, they would've kept temperature in the tires better, and handled better in the medium speed corners. It seemed that the Audi was fine in the dry and when it was wet, but when it was slick, their LM spec areo did them in, as well as having to pit for intermediate tires because they couldn't keep heat in the slicks when it drizzled.

[Adam43]

Perhaps this will help you guys:
A linky winky.

[villamas]

VÃ*deo oh the Spa
http://youtube.com/watch?v=m6nZ0cBBMJ8&hd=1
http://youtube.com/watch?v=D2Jrwvr5HBw
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QTHyk6Y3ZSE
http://youtube.com/watch?v=j6Mwi5azJQI
http://youtube.com/watch?v=3iO7wPCGMqc

[isynge]

As a fan if I had to plump for one of Audi or Peugeot I'd probably mark myself down on the German side of the fence, but this doesn't blind me to their faults, or to the strengths of what Peugeot bring to the table.

Did Peugeot win today? Yes. Did they do so comprehensively? Again, probably yes. Did they have to work for it? Yes. Were they pushed all the way to the line? Yes, I think so.

Was it an absorbing six hours of racing? This is the clincher for me, and in the main it felt like a really good race. If we can spin this out to four times the duration in June and it's any way as close up front I for one will be very happy.

More fundamental points beyond the front do exist though. What chance an LMP2 win at Algarve or Hungaroring (assuming no works Peugeot/Audi)? Strakka, RML, and Quifel have genuinely very fast and reliable cars, and the Oak Pescarolos don't seem too far behind. Given the track record of the season long LMP1 entries it doesn't seem monumentally beyond the bounds of possibility that something really surprising could happen at one of these two rounds.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by GTfour

My dear man,the point is,the Audi's l-o-s-t bigtime simply because they were not fast enough. Even with their best squad,they couldn't match the Peugeot's.

Losing gracefully is a virtue...

What a load of patooty! After 6 hours of racing Audi was still on the lead lap and on the podium. Beat/lost? Sure! Dominated, as some here seem to imply, NOT!






L.P.

[Holt]

I think its time to accept the 908 is the quickest sports car in the world right now and has been for 3 years. Its beaten the R15 3 straight times in dominating fashion with 3 straight 1-2 finishes.

Thanks to timely and frequent safety car periods that Audi used to great advantage at Spa and the brillance of the #7 drivers in traffic it wasn't quite the blowout it should have been, sort of like Spa '08.

The bad news is Audi won't be able to make gobs of time using pit stop strategy/safety car periods at Le Mans and the #7 drivers won't be able to make up as much time in traffic at Le Mans.

Who says or what data says the 908s would drop off 1-2 seconds and be on Audi pace if they ran a low downforce setup? I'll be very interested in seeing the trap speeds as I dont think the R15s had the 908s covered comfortably.

As for Audi being quicker then the Oreca Peugeot at Paul Ricard and winning, do you think Team Peugeot Total would consider beating a Kolles R15 anything of an accomplishment? Sure, ORECA is a better team the Kolles with better drivers, but the point is nothing compares to the factory team. Even McNish didn't believe beating the ORECA Peugeot meant much of anything.

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Oddly, this is the opposite of Spa in '08 when the 908s were faster in sectors 1 and 3, and the Audis were faster in sector 2 because they had a more agressive downforce package.

The difference is the '08 908 could pull along side the R10 at the end of the camel straight with relative ease. It should be noted the '08 Peugeot downforce setup was appears to be very similiar to the '10 908 Spa setup.

A R15 did manage to pass one 908 at the end of the camel straight but the 908 had to lift at the top of eau rouge because of a GT2 car. The other times the 908 could stay tucked up under the R15s gearbox down the camel straight. It couldn't make the pass because of the drag, but it certainly lost little to no time.

Really though, is this what Audi has been reduced to, moral victories? A gap not being 3 or 4 seconds now appears to be a victory for Audi.

I think the main problem with the R15 was that it was originally designed to be a high downforce ALMS car. Audi has revamped it and created a monstrisity with much less downforce, but what you are at birth kind of tends to stick with you.

Contrast that to the 908, with it's slippery coupe design that was purpose built for Le Mans.

I dont think the gap will be 3-5 seconds again at Le Mans this year, but a second or two will be more then enough for the 908s considering how reliable the cars are and the experienced driver lineup

[Purist]

On a technical note, FIA regulations have a few things to say about safety car procedures, and 7.0km is the technical cut-off for the maximum length a track can be and just use one safety car. Spa is 7,004m to the lap (splitting hairs a bit, I know).

Even in LM trim, the Audi couldn't just blow by the Peugeot on the Kemmel Straight. That doesn't bode well for them at LM, especially if Peugeot goes for their LM aero configuration, which they might not if they suspect significant rain.

It sounds like clever pit work did play a key role in keeping the lead Audi as close as it was at the end. Unfortunately for them, they were beaten, and the car that finished just ahead of them had crashed heavily earlier in the event. Also, the third Audi, even though it had over five hours to make up the gap, couldn't get back past five of the LMP2s.

Audi may have it if it rains at LM, but then again, wee don't know how the two diesels compare when they're both in high-downforce trim, like you would have in the rain. Also, the R15 is a lot more twitchy than the R10 or R8 was, and i seriously doutb that that tendency has been completed eliminated.

Finally, Audi really has the one main bullet. Peugeot lost one of theirs, and at one point, two by the looks of things, but still came out with a 1-2 finish here.

I'm still very concerned about that open front on the R15+ and all that pea gravel they use at LM. Protective screens or not, I'd be concerned about stuff getting clogged. If not the radiators, or at least not as badly, the front brake ducts could still be quite vulnerable. And even if the radiators themselves have protective screens, what happens when those screens trap too much crap?

Finally, someone made a commen earlier about the Astons hitting a brick wall at top-end because of higher drag up there than the diesels. Having watched the opening laps from Paul Ricard, I cannot concur with this view. The R15+ could not pull much of anything on the Aston on Lap 2 when it was six of fewer car lengths behind from the start of the Mistral. The Audi made the pass on Lap 3, but this was when it started out only 2-3 lengths back, and it took the Audi at least the first half of the Mistral, in the tow of the Aston, to finally pull out and make the move. And even then, the Audi didn't blow by, and the Aston was still right on the Audi's tail approaching Signes.

[rich07]

Originally Posted by villamas

VÃ*deo oh the Spa
http://youtube.com/watch?v=m6nZ0cBBMJ8&hd=1
http://youtube.com/watch?v=D2Jrwvr5HBw
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QTHyk6Y3ZSE
http://youtube.com/watch?v=j6Mwi5azJQI
http://youtube.com/watch?v=3iO7wPCGMqc

Many thanks Villamas.