[LM24] Le Mans 2011 Qualifying Times

[BRG]

1. Peugeot 908 3.26
2. HPD ARX-01e 3.27
3. Audi r18 3.29
4. Aston Martin 3.30
5.Lola Toyota 3.31

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by BRG

1. Peugeot 908 3.26
2. HPD ARX-01e 3.27
3. Audi r18 3.29
4. Aston Martin 3.30
5.Lola Toyota 3.31

I would not have put the Acura in front of the Audi. If anything the times will be really close and the rebllion toyota will be a surprise

[Acid09]

Without having seen any of these cars in a race it's way too early to predict.

But I highly doubt that the ACOs wish of staying around 3:30 will be granted for long.. in 2-3 years time we´ll be down to low 3:20s again.

[nasdriv87]

yep, i'm still waiting to see what could do this new babes...

i hope we had a lil bit o parity between diesel and non-diesel prototypes in track, but maybe this is a dream...

[gustavobamba]

Hello guys.

3 seconds between the audi and peugeot are overblown I think.

The new Acura car (HPD ARX-01e) when will you be ready to race?

For me the Lola-Toyota will be faster than Aston Martin.

My prediction of time will be 3m 28s the faster (Peugeot) Audi 1second slower; then Toyota and Acura 3 seconds behind, and finaly Aston Martin 4,5 seconds.

[BRG]

Qoute
Originally Posted by BRG
1. Peugeot 908 3.26
2. HPD ARX-01e 3.27
3. Audi r18 3.29
4. Aston Martin 3.30
5.Lola Toyota 3.31

Mabye audi will be closer although I think Peugeot will have less issues because their car in an evolution.
Last year the Acura was 6 second quicker than the lola/HPD, assuming the HPD and Toyota engines are similar and the HPD is very much upgraded with full LeMans areo and if the lola/toyota is not then mabye 6 seconds again.
The Dark horse for me is the Aston. Why would they bother if they thought they could not build somthing much faster than the Lola.
The inline 6 could be the best petrol engine , smoth , relieable , high torque and the biggest advantage if the ACO try any performance balancing with the engines this could be via turbo boost and not just restictor size

[Graham Goodwin]

Originally Posted by gustavobamba

The new Acura car (HPD ARX-01e) when will you be ready to race?

.

The ARX 01e is an uprated version of the 2010 LMP2 car - It will race at Sebring

[chernaudi]

I agree that it's too early to guess who will be where, but I do agree that the ACO's goals of keeping the LMP1s below a 3:30 lap time will probably be blown out the window. These are factory developed cars and they'll probably lap as fast as 2007/08 LMP2 cars, if not faster, at 90% or so of the circuits of the world--the 100-150bhp short fall will, even at LM, be compensated somewhat by the wider tires (Audi, Peugeot, AMR and perhaps HPD/Acura), better handling, better braking and improved grip.

In 2004, the Audi R8s, in spite of having narrower rear wings and the like got down to 3:32s, as did the Bentley the year before, and that was with the same power that the current LMP1s have, and less advanced areo and tires.

Only the lack of the big engined car's straightline speed may keep the times down.

[vyselegend]

I think you're all over estimating enginers abilities. They're strong to bend rules and design cars to be always faster than what the rules intend, but in case of restriction in air capacity, it's down to the laws of physics, which they cannot bend at will... with reduced air restrictors, only forced induction could have helped make up for the power loss, yet turbo pressure are reduced too!

The performance knock-off is pretty serious, and you're all basing your references on the 908 HDI times, but it was quite an exception, with the Audi somewhere near too. Most of the 2009-2010 LMP1s were in the 3'30 region, I think the average lap for the P1 class wasn't faster than a 3'28 at best...

I do not believe times will get under 3'28 for that year. As for the pole prediction I have a gut feeling Pug will be a bit faster (probably because they monopolised the pole for the last four years), but I can't see the R18 being more than 1 sec down (at most), which will make the pole decided by who gets the cleanest lap, with the traffic. I fail to see an Acura or an Aston beating the big manufacturers fair and square, but again it could be down to drivers luck and skill, with (I'm sure) a MUCH reduced gap between petrol and diesel entries.

My wild guess:

1.Peugeot 908 1'28"8
2.Audi R18 1'29"6
3.HPD Arx01-e 1'30"4
4.AMR one 1'30"9

[Fogelhund]

Last years fastest LMP2 was Leventis/Watts/Kane Strakka Racing HPD ARX-01 3min 33.079secs LMP2.

We added 9% more weight, with "essentially" the same engine rules, and people think that they will be SEVEN seconds faster than last year?

That is a massive performance gain. Even making up for the 9% weight gain, and being equal to last years time is a pretty impressive feat. I'll be surprised if anyone is below 3:30 to be honest.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by vyselegend

My wild guess:

1.Peugeot 908 1'28"8
2.Audi R18 1'29"6
3.HPD Arx01-e 1'30"4
4.AMR one 1'30"9

I think you meant times in the Three minute range, not the one minute range.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

We added 9% more weight, with "essentially" the same engine rules, and people think that they will be SEVEN seconds faster than last year?

More weight than LMP2 in 2010, but also more power because of bigger restrictors (e.g. for 3.4 liter petrol: 43.4 mm vs 40.7 mm -> 13% more area) and more mechanical grip because of bigger tyres (especially with wide front tyres).

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Last years fastest LMP2 was Leventis/Watts/Kane Strakka Racing HPD ARX-01 3min 33.079secs LMP2.

We added 9% more weight, with "essentially" the same engine rules, and people think that they will be SEVEN seconds faster than last year?

That is a massive performance gain. Even making up for the 9% weight gain, and being equal to last years time is a pretty impressive feat. I'll be surprised if anyone is below 3:30 to be honest.

Comparing this years times to last years P2 times will likely give a good idea of times. But, I wonder how much difference a diesel will make, and the new aero the factory cars will have to work with. I am really interested to see how the ARX-01e does in comparison to last years ARX-01c. To me that will be a good benchmark for comparison.

[JAG]

With yearly development factory diesels were gaining a couple of seconds per lap at lap Le Mans even with smaller restrictors/boost, wings and more weight.

In the Acura's case a 50-80bhp power increase will have a big effect on Le Mans' straights while updated aero and large P1 tyres should improve cornering and braking ability.

With regards to running under 3.30 last year diesels gained so much time on the straights compared to their petrol rivals, in race conditions it must have been easier to put in quick laps than will be the case for 2011 cars who will be looking to gain time in the twisty bits and under braking.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

More weight than LMP2 in 2010, but also more power because of bigger restrictors (e.g. for 3.4 liter petrol: 43.4 mm vs 40.7 mm -> 13% more area) and more mechanical grip because of bigger tyres (especially with wide front tyres).

Ok, I'd overlooked the restrictor changes. How much additional power will that give the cars? Still, seven seconds faster?

[chernaudi]

The power cut will keep the LMP1s at best hovering around or just above the 200mph mark, and that might be optimistic. However, they have more power than the LMP2s last year (think '07/'08 LMP2 power levels in the ALMS) and more grip because of wider tires, and having a bit more power can possibly allow them to run a bit more downforce than the previous year's LMP2 cars, and there'll be more coupes than in LMP2.

I think if not this year, then next year possibly, that we'll see the 3:30 mark shattered. Remember, in '08, the Pugs lapped nearly 10 seconds a lap faster than in '07 in qualifying (on the order of about 8 seconds to be more precise). If the LMP1s can gain about a second or so lap a year at your average ALMS/LMS/ILMC circuit, that has to be multiplied by about 2-3 times that for LM.

[JAG]

I'm not sure how these things work in detail but isn't the theory the car will be designed to create less drag to negate some of the power loss and keep top speeds high while increased mechanical grip from tyres will negate downforce losses.

Apply 2011 regs to a 2010 car and the performance difference will obviously be greater than a clean sheet design.

[AGD]

I wonder if the lack of testing by the petrol cars could end up benefiting them a little going into Le Mans. Certainly the AMR car will be quite a bit more raw than the 908 HDi and R18 going into Spa and, as far as I know, the ARX-01e has not tested yet. Granted, I don't know if the differences between the 01c/01d and 01e warrant a significant testing program. I believe Rebellion has tested the Toyota engines in their Lolas, but surely the testing cannot rival what the diesel teams are doing.

Meanwhile, all the testing Peugeot and Audi are doing should mean that there cars should be fairly well sorted at least in terms of pace. Perhaps the lack of pace caused by a lack of testing will inadvertently be addressed through performance balancing. Of course, all this assumes the diesels do not sandbag. I know the ACO is supposedly cracking down on this, but do you really see the ACO withdrawing the Peugeots and/or Audis? Ha, it is impossible to even imagine that.

I'm not anticipating some sort of 10-11 car shootout for the pole. Although the ARX-01e may be a dandy (relatively speaking of course), I'd expect Highcroft to take a conservative approach since there will only be one HPD in P1. It will be interesting to see how the petrol cars stack up against the grandfathered Oreca Peugeot 908 H F. In theory, the petrol cars should top the grandfathered car as they are all compliant with the new regs, but what do you guys think will happen in that regard?

[vyselegend]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

I think you meant times in the Three minute range, not the one minute range.

Oups! Indeed I meant those:

1.Peugeot 908 3'28"8
2.Audi R18 3'29"6
3.HPD Arx01-e 3'30"4
4.AMR one 3'30"9

Originally Posted by JAG

I'm not sure how these things work in detail but isn't the theory the car will be designed to create less drag to negate some of the power loss and keep top speeds high while increased mechanical grip from tyres will negate downforce losses.

You can say that "Increased mechanical grip from tyres will negate downforce losses", if for instance you go from grooved tyres to slick, or from very hard compound to a soft one, but it's a bit exagerated in the case of the "rear to the front" concept. IIRC Nick Wirth talked about a (theorical) 14% front grip improvement for the ARX 02-a because of the wider tyres.

Event if dedicated compound now makes the concept more efficient, it's hard to believe it will be a lot more than those 14%, especially since that was a theorical value that they couldn't reach in real world precisely because they hadn't the dedicated compound.

That said I don't know the proportion of the downforce loss either. I'm assuming it must be quite a lot since they expect similar top speed despite a 150HP drop...

[BRG]

Does anybody know how or when the ACO can do performance balancing.
Have they said if it's engine , aero or weight related

[BRG]

I was thinking of this story from last year.

"BMW's two Schnitzer-run M3s will race at the Le Mans 24 Hours with fractionally smaller inlet restrictors after race organiser the Automobile Club de l'Ouest (ACO) moved to peg back the car's performance "
How Late did this decsion happen?

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by BRG

I was thinking of this story from last year.

"BMW's two Schnitzer-run M3s will race at the Le Mans 24 Hours with fractionally smaller inlet restrictors after race organiser the Automobile Club de l'Ouest (ACO) moved to peg back the car's performance "
How Late did this decsion happen?

Very late, might even have been the day after scrutineering.

This year, the first major round of "performance balancing" is done between Spa and Le Mans.

[Graham Goodwin]

It was after Spa - when suddenly they went from being the slowest through the speed traps to the fastest!

[JAG]

Originally Posted by vyselegend

You can say that "Increased mechanical grip from tyres will negate downforce losses", if for instance you go from grooved tyres to slick, or from very hard compound to a soft one, but it's a bit exagerated in the case of the "rear to the front" concept. IIRC Nick Wirth talked about a (theorical) 14% front grip improvement for the ARX 02-a because of the wider tyres.

Event if dedicated compound now makes the concept more efficient, it's hard to believe it will be a lot more than those 14%, especially since that was a theorical value that they couldn't reach in real world precisely because they hadn't the dedicated compound.

That said I don't know the proportion of the downforce loss either. I'm assuming it must be quite a lot since they expect similar top speed despite a 150HP drop...

I assume that 14% improvement is over another P1, the Acura P2 that set 3.33 would have had even smaller tyres so you could be looking at a 20%+ grip improvement.

[Lola T70]

Originally Posted by vyselegend

You can say that "Increased mechanical grip from tyres will negate downforce losses", if for instance you go from grooved tyres to slick, or from very hard compound to a soft one, but it's a bit exagerated in the case of the "rear to the front" concept. IIRC Nick Wirth talked about a (theorical) 14% front grip improvement for the ARX 02-a because of the wider tyres.

Event if dedicated compound now makes the concept more efficient, it's hard to believe it will be a lot more than those 14%, especially since that was a theorical value that they couldn't reach in real world precisely because they hadn't the dedicated compound.

.

Sorry it is off topic but I have noticed that several posters say the wider front tyres now have a dedicated compound this year. Surely it is the construction that would have changed?